Flood Map Modernization
Program Strategy Shows Promise, but Challenges Remain Gao ID: GAO-04-417 March 31, 2004Flood maps identify areas at greatest risk of flooding and provide the foundation for the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) managed by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The maps are used by (1) communities to establish minimum building standards designed to reduce the impact of flooding, (2) FEMA to set insurance rates, and (3) lenders to identify property owners who are required to purchase flood insurance. Nearly 70 percent of all flood maps are more than 10 years old, according to FEMA. In an effort to update its flood maps, FEMA is implementing a $1 billion, 5-year map modernization program. GAO was asked to review the progress of FEMA's map modernization program.
Through its map modernization program, FEMA intends to use advanced technologies to produce more accurate and accessible digital flood maps available on the Internet. These maps are expected to improve community efforts to reduce the impact of floods, increase property owners' use of flood insurance, and improve community, state and federal efforts to reduce the risks of other natural and man-made hazards. In developing digital flood maps, FEMA plans to incorporate data that are of a level of specificity and accuracy commensurate with communities' relative flood risk. According to FEMA, there is a direct relationship between the types, quantity, and detail of the data and analysis used to develop maps and the costs of obtaining and analyzing those data. Although FEMA ranked the nation's 3,146 counties from highest to lowest risk, it has not yet established data standards that describe the appropriate level of detail, accuracy, and analysis required to develop digital maps based on risk level. Without such standards, FEMA cannot ensure that it uses the same level of data collection and analysis for all communities in the same risk category. Such standards can also help FEMA to target its map modernization resources more efficiently by matching the level of data collection and analysis with the level of flood risk. FEMA has developed partnerships with states and local entities that have begun mapping activities and has a strategy on how to best work with these entities. However, the overall effectiveness of FEMA's future partnering efforts is uncertain because FEMA has not yet developed a clear strategy for partnering with communities with less resources and little or no experience in flood mapping. By developing such a strategy, FEMA will be better able to identify and use the most effective approaches to engage all of its partners in map modernization.
RecommendationsOur recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director: Team: Phone:GAO-04-417, Flood Map Modernization: Program Strategy Shows Promise, but Challenges Remain
This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-04-417
entitled 'Flood Map Modernization: Program Strategy Shows Promise, but
Challenges Remain' which was released on March 31, 2004.
This text file was formatted by the U.S. General Accounting Office
(GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as part of a
longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility. Every
attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data integrity of
the original printed product. Accessibility features, such as text
descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes placed at the
end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, are provided
but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format of the printed
version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an exact electronic
replica of the printed version. We welcome your feedback. Please E-mail
your comments regarding the contents or accessibility features of this
document to Webmaster@gao.gov.
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed
in its entirety without further permission from GAO. Because this work
may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this
material separately.
Report to the Chairman, Subcommittee on Housing and Community
Opportunity, Committee on Financial Services, House of Representatives:
United States General Accounting Office:
GAO:
March 2004:
FLOOD MAP MODERNIZATION:
Program Strategy Shows Promise, but Challenges Remain:
GAO-04-417:
GAO Highlights:
Highlights of GAO-04-417, a report to the Chairman, Subcommittee on
Housing and Community Opportunity, Committee on Financial Services,
House of Representatives
Why GAO Did This Study:
Flood maps identify areas at greatest risk of flooding and provide the
foundation for the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) managed by
the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The maps are used by
(1) communities to establish minimum building standards designed to
reduce the impact of flooding, (2) FEMA to set insurance rates, and
(3) lenders to identify property owners who are required to purchase
flood insurance. Nearly 70 percent of all flood maps are more than 10
years old, according to FEMA. In an effort to update its flood maps,
FEMA is implementing a $1 billion, 5-year map modernization program.
GAO was asked to review the progress of FEMA‘s map modernization
program.
What GAO Found:
Through its map modernization program, FEMA intends to use advanced
technologies to produce more accurate and accessible digital flood maps
available on the Internet. These maps are expected to improve community
efforts to reduce the impact of floods, increase property owners‘ use
of flood insurance, and improve community, state and federal efforts to
reduce the risks of other natural and man-made hazards.
In developing digital flood maps, FEMA plans to incorporate data that
are of a level of specificity and accuracy commensurate with
communities‘ relative flood risk. According to FEMA, there is a direct
relationship between the types, quantity, and detail of the data and
analysis used to develop maps and the costs of obtaining and analyzing
those data. Although FEMA ranked the nation‘s 3,146 counties from
highest to lowest risk, it has not yet established data standards that
describe the appropriate level of detail, accuracy, and analysis
required to develop digital maps based on risk level. Without such
standards, FEMA cannot ensure that it uses the same level of data
collection and analysis for all communities in the same risk category.
Such standards can also help FEMA to target its map modernization
resources more efficiently by matching the level of data collection and
analysis with the level of flood risk.
FEMA has developed partnerships with states and local entities that
have begun mapping activities and has a strategy on how to best work
with these entities. However, the overall effectiveness of FEMA‘s
future partnering efforts is uncertain because FEMA has not yet
developed a clear strategy for partnering with communities with less
resources and little or no experience in flood mapping. By developing
such a strategy, FEMA will be better able to identify and use the most
effective approaches to engage all of its partners in map
modernization.
What GAO Recommends:
To help ensure that FEMA‘s map modernization program achieves its
intended benefits, GAO is making several recommendations. FEMA should
address differences among the communities for which flood maps are
being developed”whether those differences arise from different levels
of flood risk or different levels of capacity and resources to assist
with flood mapping.
www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-04-417.
To view the full product, including the scope and methodology, click on
the link above. For more information, contact William O. Jenkins,
202-512-8777, jenkinswo@gao.gov.
[End of section]
Contents:
Letter:
Results in Brief:
Background:
Map Modernization Intends to Use Advanced Technologies to Produce More
Accurate and Accessible Digital Flood Maps:
FEMA Expects Map Modernization to Increase the Likelihood Maps Will Be
Used for Risk Management:
FEMA's Strategy for Map Modernization Shows Promise, but Challenges
Remain:
Conclusions:
Recommendations:
Agency Comments:
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology:
Appendix II: Users of Flood Maps:
Appendix III: GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments:
GAO Contacts:
Staff Acknowledgments:
Table:
Table 1: FEMA's Objectives for Map Modernization and Our Observations
on the Objectives and Challenges:
Figures:
Figure 1: Age of the Nation's Current Flood Map Inventory:
Figure 2: Key GIS Layers or Themes for Digital Flood Maps:
Figure 3: Comparison of Original and Updated Floodplain for Plum Creek
in Douglas County, Colorado:
Figure 4: Use of LIDAR Technology:
Figure 5: Comparison of Old Paper and New Digital Map Sections in North
Carolina:
Figure 6: Expected Benefits of Map Modernization:
Figure 7: Comparison of FEMA and Sarasota County Floodplain after
Remapping:
Figure 8: Impact of Capital Improvement Project on Floodplain in
Sarasota County:
Figure 9: Expanded Floodplain Boundary for Regulating New Construction
in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina:
Figure 10: Flooding in Greenville, North Carolina, during Hurricane
Floyd:
Figure 11: Example of Spill Response Model in Harris County, Texas:
Figure 12: Comparison of Cumulative FEMA Funding for Mapping Data with
the Total Cumulative Dollar Value of Mapping Data Produced through CTP
Program:
Figure 13: Status of Remapping in North Carolina:
Abbreviations:
CTP: Cooperating Technical Partner:
DHS: Department of Homeland Security:
FEMA: Federal Emergency Management Agency:
GIS: Geographic Information Systems:
LIDAR: Light Detection and Ranging:
NFIP: National Flood Insurance Program:
United States General Accounting Office:
Washington, DC 20548:
March 31, 2004:
The Honorable Robert W. Ney:
Chairman:
Subcommittee on Housing and Community Opportunity:
Committee on Financial Services:
House of Representatives:
Dear Mr. Chairman:
Floods inflict more damage and economic losses upon the United States
than any other natural disaster. During the 10 years from fiscal year
1992 through fiscal year 2001, flooding caused over 900 deaths and
resulted in approximately $55 billion in damages.[Footnote 1] Since its
inception 36 years ago, the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) has
combined the development of flood maps to identify the areas at
greatest risk of flooding with mitigation[Footnote 2] efforts to reduce
or eliminate flood risks to people and property and the availability of
insurance that property owners can purchase to protect themselves from
flood losses. To date, the flood insurance program has paid about $12
billion in insurance claims, primarily from policyholder premiums, that
otherwise would have been paid, at least in part, from taxpayer-funded
disaster relief.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is responsible for
managing the NFIP, including the development of flood maps.[Footnote 3]
Accurate flood maps that identify the areas at greatest risk of
flooding are the foundation of the NFIP. The maps are principally used
by (1) the approximately 20,000 communities participating in the NFIP
to adopt and enforce the program's minimum building standards for new
construction within the maps' identified floodplains, (2) FEMA to
develop accurate flood insurance policy rates based on flood risk, and
(3) federally regulated mortgage lenders to identify those property
owners who are statutorily required to purchase federal flood
insurance. Under the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, as
amended,[Footnote 4] property owners whose properties are within the
designated floodplain and have a mortgage from a federally regulated
financial institution are required to purchase federal flood insurance.
Flood maps can become outdated for a variety of reasons, such as
erosion or community growth and development that can affect the
drainage patterns of rainwater. Thus, flood maps must be periodically
updated to assess and map changes in the boundaries of floodplains that
result from community growth, development, erosion, and other factors
that affect the boundaries of areas at risk for flooding. According to
FEMA, limited funding for flood mapping has resulted in a backlog of
outdated maps. FEMA estimates that as of March 2004 nearly 70 percent
of the nation's flood maps were more than 10 years old and reflected
outdated data that could affect the ability to accurately identify
current flood hazard areas.
With congressional support and funding, FEMA has embarked on a $1
billion, 5-year effort to update the nation's flood maps. Recognizing
that FEMA is currently in the early stages of its map modernization
effort, our objectives for this review were to answer the following
questions: (1) How is map modernization intended to improve the
accuracy and accessibility of the nation's flood maps? (2) What are the
expected benefits of more accurate and accessible flood maps? (3) To
what extent does FEMA's strategy for managing the map modernization
program support the achievement of these benefits and what, if any,
limitations could affect the implementation of the strategy?
To answer these questions, we analyzed available information from FEMA
on the program's purpose, objectives, and status and met with agency
officials in headquarters and in the regional offices to discuss the
program's progress. We also conducted site visits to states and
communities that have already begun to modernize their flood maps and
interviewed industry organizations such as the Association of State
Flood Plain Managers, the National Association of Flood and Stormwater
Management Agencies, and the National Emergency Management Association.
We conducted our work from April 2003 to March 2004 in accordance with
generally accepted government auditing standards. See appendix I for
more details on our scope and methodology.
Results in Brief:
Through map modernization, FEMA intends to produce more accurate and
accessible flood maps by using advanced technology to gather accurate
data and make the flood maps, and the digital information on which they
are based, available on the Internet. For example, displaying map data
in digital Geographic Information Systems format permits consistent,
accurate display and ready electronic retrieval of a variety of map
features, including elevation data and the location of key
infrastructure, such as utilities. According to FEMA, nearly 70 percent
of the nation's approximately 92,222 flood maps are more than 10 years
old, and many of these maps no longer reflect current flood hazard
risks because of such changes as erosion and development that can alter
drainage patterns and thus the areas at highest risk of flooding.
Moreover, since many flood maps were created or last updated, there
have been improvements in the techniques for assessing and displaying
flood risks.
FEMA expects that by producing more accurate and accessible digital
flood maps through map modernization, the nation will benefit in three
ways. First, communities can use more accurate digital maps to reduce
flood risk within floodplains by more effectively regulating
development through zoning and building standards. Second, accurate
digital maps available on the Internet will facilitate the
identification of property owners who are statutorily required to
obtain or who would be best served by obtaining flood insurance. Third,
accurate and precise data will help national, state, and local
officials to accurately locate infrastructure and transportation
systems (e.g., power plants, sewage treatment plants, railroads,
bridges, and ports) to help mitigate and manage risk for multiple
hazards, both natural and man-made.
FEMA's strategy for managing map modernization is designed to support
the expected program benefits, but FEMA's approach to implementing the
strategy raises several concerns that could hamper the agency's
efforts. FEMA's implementation approach is based on four objectives:
(1) establish and maintain a premier data system, (2) expand outreach
and better inform the user community, (3) establish and maintain
effective partnerships, and (4) achieve effective program management.
* Establish and maintain a premier data system: Although FEMA's efforts
to establish a new data system could result in more accurate flood maps
and make it easier to access and use the revised flood maps, FEMA has
not yet established clear standards for the types, quantity, and
specificity of data collection and analysis associated with different
levels of flood risk. FEMA has ranked the nation's 3,146 counties from
highest to lowest flood risk. According to FEMA, communities at the
highest risk of flooding require the most extensive, detailed data and
analysis, but the same level of data collection and analysis may not be
necessary to create accurate, useful maps for communities with lower
flood risks. Defining the level of data collection and analysis for
different levels of risk is important because obtaining and analyzing
flood map data is time-consuming and expensive, and the more detailed
and specific the data, generally the greater the effort and costs
required to obtain it. By identifying the types, quantity, and
specificity of the data and analysis needed for communities based on
their risk, FEMA can better ensure that data collection and analysis is
consistent for all communities with similar risk and that it is using
its resources efficiently while producing maps that are accurate and
useful for communities at different levels of flood risk. FEMA
acknowledges the need to develop such standards, but has not yet
developed draft standards or included this task into its map
modernization implementation plan.
* Expand outreach and better inform the user community: FEMA's planned
expanded outreach efforts are intended to increase public awareness and
obtain community acceptance of the updated flood maps because the
updated information could potentially identify changes in floodplain
boundaries and, therefore, affect property owners, including whether or
not their property's location may require them to purchase federal
flood insurance. FEMA's intended outcome for these outreach efforts is
to reduce community vulnerability to natural and man-made hazards and
increase participation in the flood insurance program. Because FEMA
does not have the authority to require that affected property owners
take steps to mitigate their properties against flood risks or to
ensure that owners whose properties are in the floodplain purchase
flood insurance, effective outreach is essential to ultimately achieve
these benefits.
* Establish and maintain effective partnerships: FEMA's objective for
building and maintaining mutually beneficial partnerships is designed
to facilitate and support the efficient production and effective use of
maps. FEMA recognizes that local, state, and federal agencies, that
have been working on mapping activities for years, have the resources
and potential to positively affect the quality and quantity of the data
collected and improve the way these data are used. In addition, these
partnerships can enable FEMA to leverage its resources and reduce the
federal costs of map modernization. FEMA has developed a strategy for
partnering with these agencies to encourage greater involvement in map
modernization, including the contribution of resources. However, the
overall effectiveness of the agency's future partnering efforts is
uncertain because FEMA has not yet developed a clear strategy for
partnering with communities that have few resources, limited mapping
capability, and little history of flood mapping activities.
* Achieve effective program management: In March 2004, FEMA awarded a
performance-based contract to a single contractor to oversee map
modernization that includes performance measures to gauge the success
of its efforts. Through a staffing analysis, FEMA has determined that
it needs 75 staff with specific, identified skills to effectively
monitor and manage the contract and overall map modernization program.
As of March 2004, FEMA had hired 1 of the 75 staff, had developed plans
to hire or transfer 43 others, but had not yet determine how it would
acquire the remaining 31 positions. FEMA has not clearly defined
performance measures related to whether (1) the revised maps meet any
established standards for accuracy and (2) outreach efforts have been
successful in increasing the community and individual awareness and use
of flood maps.
To help ensure that FEMA's map modernization program achieves its
intended benefits, we make recommendations to the Secretary of Homeland
Security to direct the Undersecretary of Emergency Preparedness and
Response to address data and analysis standards, partnering with state
and local governments, and program management. We provided a copy of
our draft report to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for
comment. In its oral comments, DHS generally concurred with the
report's findings and recommendations and provided technical comments
that we incorporated where appropriate.
Background:
FEMA is the primary federal agency responsible for assisting state and
local governments, private entities, and individuals to prepare for,
mitigate, respond to, and recover from natural disasters, including
floods. FEMA's NFIP has served as a key component of the agency's
efforts to minimize or mitigate the damage and financial impact of
floods on the public, as well as to limit federal expenditures needed
after floods occur.
In 1968, to address the increasing amount of flood damage, the lack of
readily available insurance for property owners, and the cost to the
taxpayer for flood-related disaster relief, the National Flood
Insurance Act of 1968,[Footnote 5] created the NFIP. Since its
inception, the program has sought to minimize flood-related property
losses by making flood insurance available on reasonable terms and
encouraging its purchase by people who need flood insurance protection-
-particularly those living in the areas at highest risk of flooding
known as special flood hazard areas. The program identifies and maps
flood-prone areas in the country, makes flood insurance available to
property owners in the nearly 20,000 communities that currently
participate in the program,[Footnote 6] and requires floodplain
management efforts to mitigate flood hazards on the part of
participating communities.
FEMA's flood maps are one of the basic, essential tools for flood
hazard mitigation in the United States. FEMA estimates that the maps
are used an estimated 30 million times annually in the private and
public sectors. FEMA uses the maps to identify the floodplain
boundaries in which flood insurance is required and to set flood
insurance rates. Mortgage lending institutions use the maps to
determine who is required to purchase flood insurance and ensure that
flood insurance is purchased and maintained for these properties.
Community planning officials, land developers, and engineers use the
maps for designing new buildings and infrastructure to be safe from
flooding. See appendix II for more information on the various
stakeholders that use and rely upon flood maps.
Flood maps provide the basis for establishing floodplain building
standards that participating communities must adopt and enforce as part
of the program. For a community to participate in the program, any
structures built within special flood hazard areas--also known as 100-
year floodplains[Footnote 7]--that have a 1 percent or greater chance
of experiencing flooding in any given year must be built according to
the program's building standards whose purpose is to minimize flood
losses. A key component of the program's building standards that must
be followed by participating communities is a requirement that the
lowest floor of the structure be elevated to or above the base flood
level--the elevation at which there is a 1 percent chance of flooding
in a given year. The administration has estimated that local
governments' compliance with the program's standards for new
construction is saving over $1 billion annually in flood damage
avoided.
Flood maps also provide the basis for setting insurance rates and
identifying properties whose owners are required to purchase flood
insurance. When the NFIP was created, the purchase of flood insurance
was voluntary. To increase the impact of the program, however, Congress
amended the original law in 1973 to require the purchase of flood
insurance in certain circumstances. Flood insurance is required for
structures in special flood hazard areas of communities participating
in the program if (1) any federal loans or grants were used to acquire
or build the structures or (2) the structures have outstanding mortgage
loans made by lending institutions that are regulated by the federal
government. Owners of properties without mortgages or properties with
mortgages held by unregulated lenders were not, and still are not,
required to purchase flood insurance, even if the properties are in
special flood hazard areas.
Federal regulations require that FEMA communicate potential changes in
flood risk to the public when it decides to initiate a flood mapping
study and when it is ready to release preliminary maps. At the
beginning of the mapping process, FEMA is required to notify community
stakeholders.[Footnote 8] When FEMA is ready to release preliminary
maps, the agency must publish the proposed base flood elevations in the
Federal Register for public comment and notify the community of the
results of the study.[Footnote 9] When the final map is approved and
implemented, FEMA publishes another Federal Register notice.[Footnote
10]
In the early 1990s, some of the data and information FEMA collected to
develop flood maps were becoming available in digital format. In 1994,
the President issued Executive Order 12906, which mandated that
standards for digital geographic data be applied uniformly across the
federal government. Anticipating that electronic data would soon become
the standard vehicle for information delivery and in an attempt to make
flood map production more cost-effective and efficient, FEMA developed
a prototype for a digital flood map.
In 1997, FEMA developed its initial flood map modernization plan that
outlined the steps necessary to update the nation's flood maps to
digital format and streamline FEMA's operations in raising public
awareness of the importance of the maps and responding to requests to
revise them. This initial plan and subsequent updates to the plan
reflected the recommendations of the Technical Mapping Advisory Council
created by Congress and active from 1995-2000. The council provided a
number of recommendations which were aimed at making the digital flood
map the future method for assessing flood hazard risk and setting
federal insurance rates. Recognizing the importance of updating the
nation's flood maps, Congress appropriated additional funds in fiscal
years 2000-2002. FEMA used these funds to launch its map modernization
program through such activities as developing new flood mapping
standards and procedures, expanding the Cooperating Technical Partner
(CTP) program that recognizes and encourages state and local
participation in flood hazard data development and maintenance and
developing some digital flood maps. In fiscal year 2003, Congress
appropriated $150 million, allowing FEMA to initiate a full-scale
update of the nation's flood maps called the Multi-Hazard Flood Map
Modernization Program,[Footnote 11] an effort FEMA expects to take
about 5 years and cost about $1 billion. In fiscal year 2004, Congress
appropriated an additional $200 million for map modernization, and the
administration has requested an additional $200 million for fiscal year
2005 to continue the program. FEMA has established four primary
objectives for implementing map modernization: (1) establish and
maintain a premier data collection and delivery system, (2) expand
outreach and better inform the user community, (3) build and maintain
mutually beneficial partnerships, and (4) achieve effective program
management. In March 2004, FEMA awarded a performance-based contract
for overseeing map modernization that includes contractor performance
measures for each of these objectives.
Map Modernization Intends to Use Advanced Technologies to Produce More
Accurate and Accessible Digital Flood Maps:
Through map modernization, FEMA intends to produce more accurate and
accessible flood maps by using advanced technology to gather accurate
data and make the resulting information available on the Internet.
Currently, many of the flood maps in FEMA's inventory do not accurately
reflect the true flood hazard risks because over time, new development
and other factors altered watersheds and floodplains faster than the
maps could be updated. For the most part, the $35 million to $50
million in annual flood insurance policy fees has been the only source
of funding for updating flood maps, and according to FEMA, the agency
has not been able to keep the maps updated with the funds available. As
a result, nearly 70 percent of the nation's approximately 92,222 flood
maps[Footnote 12] are more than 10 years old and many of these maps
reflect inaccurate data, according to FEMA. Figure 1 shows the age
distribution of the current map inventory.
Figure 1: Age of the Nation's Current Flood Map Inventory:
[See PDF for image]
[End of figure]
Over time, physical conditions in watersheds and floodplains can
change, and improvements in the techniques for assessing and displaying
flood risks are made. FEMA plans to use the latest technology, such as
Geographic Information Systems (GIS), to create accurate digital flood
maps. GIS technology provides the foundation for achieving FEMA's goals
of melding different types and sources of data to create the new
digital flood maps and making the new digital flood maps available to a
variety of users over the Internet.
The primary function of GIS is to link multiple digital databases and
graphically display that information as maps with potentially many
different types of "layers" of information. When layers of information
are formatted using the same standards, users can potentially overlay
various layers of information about any number of specific topics to
examine how the layers interrelate. Each layer of a GIS map represents
a particular "theme" or feature, and one layer could be derived from a
data source completely different from the other layers. For example,
one theme could represent all the streets in a specified area. Another
theme could correspond to the topography or elevation data of an area,
and others could show aerial photography and streams in the same area.
These themes are all key elements needed to create flood maps that
accurately depict floodplains and can be used to identify properties in
these areas. In preparing for full-scale implementation of map
modernization, FEMA has established standards and graphic
specifications for digital flood maps created with GIS. Figure 2 shows
the concept of data themes in GIS for flood maps.
Figure 2: Key GIS Layers or Themes for Digital Flood Maps:
[See PDF for image]
[End of figure]
GIS technology also enables the creation of more accurate and
accessible maps than would be possible with older mapping methods and
technology. The majority of FEMA's flood map inventory was produced
using manual techniques that have inherent accuracy and accessibility
limitations. For example, in creating traditional paper flood maps,
field measurements taken by surveyors would have been transferred by
hand to paper base maps. If the paper base map contained any
inaccuracies, then the field-survey data could be shown in the wrong
place on the final flood map. This would then result in floodplain
boundaries being shown in the wrong place.
Douglas County, Colorado:
Recent remapping efforts in Douglas County, Colorado, show the accuracy
of digital maps using GIS technology compared with paper maps created
using manual techniques. As seen in figure 3, some areas (around cross
section J) shown outside the floodplain on the original map will be
shown in the floodplain based on the updated flood hazard information
from a new mapping study using GIS technology. More critically, some
areas shown outside the floodplain on the original map will now be
shown in the floodway, the most dangerous area of the floodplain
(greatest depth, highest flood water velocity). According to FEMA and
community officials, the limitations of the manual techniques used to
create the original map contributed to the resulting inaccuracy.
Figure 3: Comparison of Original and Updated Floodplain for Plum Creek
in Douglas County, Colorado:
[See PDF for image]
[End of figure]
Using GIS technology to create digital flood maps minimizes mapping
errors and improves accuracy because each data component (e.g.,
streams, streets, etc.) would have a common geographic reference
system.
By their nature, paper flood maps have limited accessibility as
compared with a digital map that can be made available on the Internet.
The expansion of Internet connectivity in recent years has
substantially enhanced the potential value of digital maps created with
GIS because now it is possible to locate and connect data from many
distinct GIS databases to develop analytical information on almost any
topic that is associated with physical locations. Digital flood maps
created according to FEMA's standards are intended to provide users not
only with the ability to determine the flood zone and base flood
elevations for a particular location, but also with the ability to
access other information like road, stream, and public land survey
data. Communities could use this information for a variety of purposes,
including decisions on future development and evacuation routes.
As part of map modernization, FEMA has promoted the use of a variety of
advanced technologies to improve the accuracy of flood maps. In recent
years, for example, where it deems it appropriate, FEMA has promoted
the use of Light Detection and Ranging (LIDAR) remote sensing
technologies to generate highly detailed, digital elevation data.
Elevation data are a key component needed to determine flood risk and
identify floodplain boundaries. According to FEMA, for very flat areas
where small changes in elevation can have a large impact on where flood
plain boundaries are drawn, LIDAR can provide the level of detail
needed to accurately delineate these boundaries. Communities can also
use detailed, digital elevation data for planning and land development
purposes. Figure 4 shows an airplane equipped with laser-pulsing
sensors using LIDAR to gather digital elevation data to measure the
contours and crevices that determine where floodwaters collect.
Figure 4: Use of LIDAR Technology:
[See PDF for image]
[End of figure]
North Carolina's Use of GIS and LIDAR to Develop and Deliver Revised
Flood Maps:
The state of North Carolina has been utilizing GIS and LIDAR technology
to develop new flood maps. As of February 2004, 8 counties had received
new effective flood maps, and 28 counties received new preliminary
maps, which are now under community review. The state has gathered
elevation data through LIDAR for 80 percent of the state. The maps and
LIDAR and other data can be freely accessed and downloaded by anyone
who has access to the Internet (http://www.ncfloodmaps.com). The state,
dependent on continued FEMA funding, expects to have the entire state
remapped by 2008. Figure 5 compares a digital flood map section
produced by North Carolina with the same area on the original paper
map.
Figure 5: Comparison of Old Paper and New Digital Map Sections in North
Carolina:
[See PDF for image]
[End of figure]
FEMA Expects Map Modernization to Increase the Likelihood Maps Will Be
Used for Risk Management:
FEMA expects map modernization to increase the likelihood that the more
accurate and accessible maps will be used for risk management purposes.
Specifically, FEMA expects the new maps to be used to (1) improve flood
mitigation, (2) increase flood insurance participation, and (3) improve
"multi-hazard" mitigation and risk management capabilities. First, FEMA
expects communities to be able to use these new and revised maps to
better manage and mitigate flood risk by regulating floodplain
development through building codes, ordinances, and regulations.
Second, the new maps also have the potential to help increase flood
insurance participation because they will more accurately identify
those properties that are in the floodplain and whose owners would be
required to purchase flood insurance. Compared with the existing paper
maps, accessing the new maps through the Internet will make it much
easier for lenders to identify property owners who should have flood
insurance. In addition, the newly revised flood maps should more
accurately identify all properties in the floodplain, including those
whose owners do not have a mortgage or whose mortgage is held by a
lender that is not federally regulated. Accurately identifying these
property owners should assist FEMA and communities in targeting their
outreach about the importance of flood insurance. Third, the data and
infrastructure developed by map modernization is also expected to help
national, state, and local officials mitigate and manage risk from
multiple hazards, both natural and man-made. Accurate digital maps can
provide more precise data on such things as the location of hazardous
material facilities, power plants, railroads, and airports to state and
national officials for planning development as well as to assess
internal weaknesses and evacuation routes. (Fig. 6 highlights these
expected benefits.):
Figure 6: Expected Benefits of Map Modernization:
[See PDF for image]
[End of figure]
Map Modernization Is Expected to Improve Flood Mitigation:
The more accurate and updated flood hazard information produced through
map modernization is expected to help improve flood mitigation in
participating communities. The NFIP requires participating communities
to adopt and enforce building standards based on the floodplain
boundaries and base flood elevations when maps are updated. For
example, the lowest floor of structures in new construction must be
elevated to at least the base flood elevations identified on the maps.
FEMA's policy is to monitor communities to ensure that they have
adopted building standards that meet the minimum NFIP criteria and to
ensure that they are effectively enforcing these standards. If
communities fail to establish and enforce minimum NFIP flood plain
building standards, FEMA can suspend availability of federal flood
insurance.
Communities also may use updated flood hazard data to take actions to
mitigate flooding that go beyond adopting the building standards
required by the NFIP. For example, communities may use the data from
the maps to identify where to conduct capital improvement projects
designed to mitigate flooding of structures in the floodplain. In
addition, FEMA has established a Community Rating System that provides
discounts on flood insurance premiums for those communities that take
mitigation actions beyond those required by the NFIP.
Sarasota County's Use of Flood Map Data for Storm Water Capital
Improvement Projects:
Sarasota County, Florida, is in the process of modernizing its flood
maps and has been using the maps and the models behind them to
implement stormwater capital improvement projects whose purpose is to
mitigate the flood risk for structures now located in the floodplain.
These efforts have also resulted in lower insurance premiums for
property owners.
In the late 1990s, because Sarasota County officials believed that
current maps did not accurately reflect changes to the floodplain that
had occurred due to development and other factors, they began an effort
to aggressively remap the county's watersheds using GIS and new flood
modeling technologies. At the time, the county had experienced several
significant flooding events where hundreds of properties not depicted
in the floodplain on its 11-year old maps were damaged. Figure 7 shows
both the increase and decrease in the floodplain based on the county's
remapping efforts.
Figure 7: Comparison of FEMA and Sarasota County Floodplain after
Remapping:
[See PDF for image]
[End of figure]
The county has been using the maps to implement storm water improvement
projects such as retention ponds and levees that are designed to
improve drainage and, therefore, alter the floodplain. Ultimately,
these projects would result in structures no longer being in the
floodplain. County officials estimate that they have reduced the number
of structures in the floodplain by 75 percent (from 800 to under 200)
through these projects. According to these officials, the reduction in
their Community Rating System rating from an 8 to a 6 was due in large
part to their remapping efforts. They estimate that this reduction is
saving the community over $1 million a year in flood insurance
premiums. Figure 8 shows an example of the impact one such capital
improvement project had on the floodplain in Sarasota County.
Figure 8: Impact of Capital Improvement Project on Floodplain in
Sarasota County:
[See PDF for image]
[End of figure]
Mecklenburg County, North Carolina:
Mecklenburg County, North Carolina, provides another example of how
communities may use revised maps as a basis for adopting and enforcing
building standards that exceed the standards required by the NFIP.
In February 2004, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina, issued final
digital maps that not only show the floodplain boundaries and base
flood elevations used by FEMA to set insurance rates, but also include
local land use maps designed to guide future development. (See fig. 9.)
These maps are more restrictive than the FEMA maps, which are used for
setting insurance rates. The county uses these maps to require that the
lowest floor of all new construction is built an additional foot above
the future minimum base flood elevation identified by the map.
Engineering and economic studies estimate that this higher standard
will save over $300 million in structure and content losses due to
future flooding. As in the case of Sarasota County, adopting these
higher standards should result in a better Community Rating System
rating for the county and reduce insurance rates for property owners.
Figure 9: Expanded Floodplain Boundary for Regulating New Construction
in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina:
[See PDF for image]
[End of figure]
Map Modernization Is Expected to Help Increase Flood Insurance
Participation:
Map modernization has the potential to help increase flood insurance
participation. The accuracy of the new maps should better identify at-
risk property owners who would be best served by obtaining flood
insurance whether or not the owners would be required to purchase
insurance under the NFIP's mandatory purchase requirement. Moreover,
the digital, GIS-based maps should make flood risk information more
accessible to a variety of users such as lenders and community
officials who could conduct targeted outreach at these property owners.
Outreach Efforts in Wilson and Johnston Counties, North Carolina:
Recent outreach activities conducted during remapping in Wilson and
Johnston counties in North Carolina provide an example of the types of
information that can be provided to communities and property owners
through outreach efforts during map modernization.
As part of its map modernization program, the state of North Carolina
holds two meetings. The first meeting is held with the county and
community officials and floodplain administrators, and the second
meeting is open to the general public. The purpose of the meetings is
to provide an overview of the state's program; an outline of flood
hazard data changes between the current maps and preliminary revised
maps; and guidance on the use of the maps, including how to view and
download data from the state's Web site. After the state had completed
preliminary studies and maps for Wilson and Johnston counties,
community officials used the digital, GIS-based maps to identify
structures that are located in the newly identified floodplain. The
counties then sent out letters to these property owners that:
* notified them that their property was in a floodplain,
* provided a telephone number to call for more information,
* announced upcoming public meetings where the preliminary maps would
be discussed, and:
* identified the state's Internet site where the flood maps could be
viewed (Wilson County).
By providing this information in advance, property owners could know
before the meeting whether their property was in the newly designated
floodplain. According to community officials, their outreach activities
provided the information necessary for the public to become aware of
their risk and know what actions could be taken to mitigate these
risks.
It is important to note, however, that FEMA, states, and communities do
not have the authority to ensure that property owners who are subject
to the mandatory purchase of flood insurance requirement actually
purchase flood insurance. It is the federally regulated lenders'
responsibility to ensure that borrowers purchase flood insurance and
that the insurance policy is maintained throughout the loan's life as
each new lender servicing the loan becomes aware that the affected
property is at risk for flooding. Furthermore, owners of properties
without mortgages or properties with mortgages held by unregulated
lenders are not required to purchase flood insurance, even if the
properties are in floodplains.
Map Modernization Is Expected to Improve Multi-Hazard Mitigation and
Risk Management Capabilities:
FEMA expects that the data developed, collected, and distributed
through map modernization will help national, state, and local
emergency managers mitigate and manage risk posed by other natural and
man-made hazards. Accurate digital base maps provide more precise data
to state and national officials for planning, such as the location of
hazardous material facilities, power plants, utility distribution
facilities, and other infrastructure (bridges, sewage treatment plants,
buildings, and structures). According to FEMA, map modernization will
also support DHS's overall goal to reduce the nation's vulnerability to
terrorism by providing GIS data and capabilities to other departmental
functions. For example, more accurate information on transportation
systems such as railroads, airports, harbors, ports, and waterways
should be helpful in assessing internal weaknesses and evacuation
routes.
Flood-Inundation Application Developed by North Carolina:
North Carolina's use of information collected during flood mapping to
develop a flood-inundation application exemplifies how the data
collected through map modernization can be used for other risk
management purposes.
Leveraging the work done through the floodplain mapping program, North
Carolina is in the process of establishing a real-time flood-inundation
and flood forecast mapping Web application that will provide the public
with valuable safety information during weather events. During a storm,
the application will provide maps and information over the Internet
that display which land area, roads, and bridges are inundated by
floodwaters. Furthermore, to help ensure that the public is aware of
high flood risk areas, the state plans to develop an automated alert
network that will utilize different media to notify and warn emergency
managers, law enforcement, and the general public. North Carolina is
currently working with television broadcasters in the region to
broadcast warnings and up-to-date safety information based upon
information provided through the Web application. The majority of
deaths during Hurricane Floyd, which hit North Carolina in 1999,
occurred to individuals driving over flood-inundated roads and bridges.
North Carolina hopes that their real-time and forecasted inundation
mapping application will help to prevent such deaths during future
storm events.
The flood forecasting component of North Carolinaís flood-inundation
and forecasting application was recently tested during Hurricane
Isabel, which struck in September of 2003. Using data collected by
North Carolina, the National Weather Service released an experimental
Peak Forecast Inundation Web site for predicting the flooding effects
of the hurricane. This was a new level of capability for the National
Weather Service by forecasting flood-inundation throughout a major
portion of the river basin rather than focusing solely on fixed
forecasting locations. The implementation of this new flood forecasting
technology will greatly enhance North Carolinaís flood warning Web
application.
Figure 10 shows an example of how the flood-inundation application is
intended to work. As floodwaters rise and spread out over the
landscape, the flood-inundation application will produce maps to show
the extent of flooding and when roads, critical facilities, and other
structures will become flooded. The following maps show flooding in
Greenville, North Carolina, and are based on flood levels caused by
Hurricane Floyd.
Figure 10: Flooding in Greenville, North Carolina, during Hurricane
Floyd:
[See PDF for image]
[End of figure]
Harris County, Houston, Texas:
Harris County, Texas, offers another example of how the digital data
developed through map modernization could be used to plan for and
respond to man-made disasters.
To demonstrate the multi-hazard use of the digital data, community
officials showed how a spill response model could be developed to
determine the path of a petroleum spill at a Houston area refinery. The
model, developed with digital data by a private consultant, uses both
elevation data and aerial imagery collected through map modernization
to provide officials and emergency response personnel critical
information to determine the path of a chemical spill and potentially
impacted waterways. This information should provide local officials
with valuable information to aid in their mitigation and evacuation
efforts and to protect natural habitats. The figure shows how petroleum
at a Houston area refinery would probably flow from specific tanks if
ruptured.
Figure 11: Example of Spill Response Model in Harris County, Texas:
[See PDF for image]
[End of figure]
LIDAR data also provide a basis for three-dimensional modeling of the
location of buildings, tanks, and equipment that could be used to
determine the optimal location for fire-fighting equipment at the same
refinery. The reach of a water jet can be placed against the 3-D model
to determine the extent of coverage and identify obscured structures in
the "shadow" of other structures that would limit or block the reach of
the water jet. This same 3-D model could also be used in a
vulnerability analysis to locate potential targets within a given area
that are at risk from gunfire or hand-held rockets.
FEMA's Strategy for Map Modernization Shows Promise, but Challenges
Remain:
FEMA's strategy for managing map modernization is intended to support
the achievement of the expected program benefits of improved flood
mitigation, increased NFIP insurance participation, and improved multi-
hazard mitigation and risk management capabilities. However, FEMA's
approach to implementing the strategy poses several challenges that
could hamper the agency's efforts. FEMA's approach is based on four
objectives. Two objectives FEMA hopes to achieve through map
modernization--building and maintaining a premier data collection and
delivery system and expanding outreach and better informing the user
community--have the potential to improve the use of flood maps for
improved flood mitigation and increased NFIP participation, as well as
multi-hazard risk management. The other two objectives--building and
maintaining mutually beneficial partnerships and achieving effective
program management--are intended to facilitate the achievement of the
first two objectives and their intended benefits efficiently and
effectively. Table 1 provides a brief description of FEMA's four
objectives for map modernization and the challenges facing
implementation.
Table 1: FEMA's Objectives for Map Modernization and Our Observations
on the Objectives and Challenges:
Objective: Establish and maintain a premier data collection and
delivery system
Description: Create a GIS-and Internet-based system that provides easy
access to reliable flood hazard data and other data collected during
the mapping process. The system will be available to states and
communities to input and use data, therefore, enabling easier and less
time-consuming data maintenance and the use of the information for
multi-hazard risk management purposes
GAO Observations: FEMA has ranked the nation's counties based on risk.
However, FEMA has not yet established data collection and analysis
standards for communities with similar risk. Without such standards,
FEMA cannot ensure that the level of data collection and analysis is
consistent across all communities with similar risk.
Objective: Expand outreach and better inform the user community
Description: Raise the awareness of flood map users of their risk of
flooding through increased outreach efforts and educate the public on
how they can use flood maps and other hazard data to mitigate natural
and man-made disasters
GAO Observations: FEMA's outreach strategy is based on a recognition
that it has no direct authority to ensure that many map modernization
benefits are achieved, but must rely on others- -e.g., mitigation
efforts by individual property owners and lender enforcement of
mandatory flood insurance purchase.
Objective: Build and maintain mutually beneficial partnerships
Description: Develop strategies for forming and enhancing relationships
with all states and communities resulting in their active participation
in the production of flood hazard data. This is intended to help
improve the long-term quality of flood data, ensure that the maps meet
local needs, and capitalize on local and regional knowledge and
resources to achieve the effective production and efficient use of
flood maps at a reduced cost to the federal government
GAO Observations: States and communities with limited resources and
technical capabilities are likely to pose a challenge to FEMA's ability
to fund and implement mapping activities. FEMA has not yet developed a
strategy for how to partner with communities that do not have the
resources, capabilities, or motivation to initiate and sustain mapping
activities.
Objective: Achieve effective program management
Description: Develop a flexible program management structure that
clearly evaluates the program's performance and identifies continuous
improvement strategies to most effectively and efficiently conduct
mapping activities that result in high-quality flood maps
GAO Observations: Using current staffing levels, FEMA may be challenged
to effectively oversee the contract and the map modernization program.
In addition, although FEMA has established measures to assess
achievement of its program objectives, its measures for its objectives
to develop a premier data system and to expand outreach and better
inform the user community are not clearly defined or fully developed.
Source: GAO analysis.
[End of table]
In Its Efforts to Establish a New Data System, FEMA Has Not Yet
Established Data Standards for Different Levels of Risk:
The goal of FEMA's objective to develop a new data system using the
latest technology is more efficient production, delivery and, thereby,
the use of flood maps. As discussed previously, FEMA hopes to
accomplish this by using geographic information systems technology that
provides the foundation for the production and delivery of more
accurate digital flood maps and multi-hazard data that is more
accessible over the Internet.
In developing the new data system to update flood maps across the
nation, FEMA's intent is to develop and incorporate flood risk data
that are of a level of specificity and accuracy commensurate with
communities' relative flood risks. According to FEMA, there is a direct
relationship between the types, quantity, and detail of the data and
analysis used for map development and the costs associated with
obtaining and analyzing those data. FEMA believes it needs to strike a
balance between the relative flood risk faced by individual communities
and the level of analysis and effort needed to develop reliable flood
hazard data if it is to update the nation's maps efficiently and
effectively.
FEMA has ranked all 3,146 counties from highest to lowest based on a
number of factors, including, among other things, population, growth
trends, housing units, flood insurance policies and claims, repetitive
loss properties, and flood disasters. On the basis of this ranking,
FEMA established mapping priorities. However, FEMA has not yet
established standards on the appropriate data and level of analysis
required to develop maps based on risk level. FEMA has historically
applied the same minimum standards for all flood maps and supporting
data.[Footnote 13] FEMA's Guidelines and Specifications for Flood
Hazard Mapping Partners provides guidance for selecting the level of
analysis and effort to produce flood hazard data and have generally
been used on a case-by-case basis.[Footnote 14] The guidelines do not
specify standards to be used for all mapping projects within a given
risk category. Without establishing standards for different categories
of risk, FEMA cannot ensure that it uses the same level of data
collection and analysis across all communities within the same risk
category. These standards could also provide a consistent basis for
estimating the costs of developing maps in each risk category.
According to FEMA, the agency plans to develop standards that can be
applied to different levels of flood risk as part of a 5-year map
modernization implementation plan. FEMA expects this plan to be
completed by the end of fiscal year 2004; however, at the time of our
review, FEMA had not yet developed draft standards or incorporated this
task into its implementation plan.
FEMA's Objective to Expand Outreach Efforts Recognizes the Agency Must
Rely on Others to Achieve Map Modernization Benefits:
FEMA's objective to expand the scope and frequency of its outreach
efforts is intended to increase community and public acceptance of
revised maps and use of those maps. Historically, FEMA has only
contacted communities when initiating remapping and again when
preliminary maps are completed. These expanded outreach efforts reflect
FEMA's understanding that it is dependent on others to achieve the
benefits of map modernization. For example, under the structure of the
NFIP, FEMA is dependent on communities to adopt and enforce FEMA's
minimum building standards and on mortgage lenders to ensure compliance
with mandatory flood insurance purchase requirements. To expand the
scope of its outreach efforts, FEMA plans to involve a wide variety of
community participants--e.g., mayors, emergency managers, lenders,
property owners, insurance agents, and developers--in the mapping
process. To expand the frequency of outreach, FEMA intends to increase
community involvement, awareness, and participation throughout the
entire flood mapping process. Through a continual education process,
FEMA's goal is to inform property owners and others potentially
affected by remapping efforts of steps they can take to mitigate the
risk of flooding, the types of damage and costs caused by flooding, and
the benefits of flood insurance.
According to FEMA, if a community is involved in and understands the
map modernization process, the community is more likely to accept and
trust the accuracy of the final, revised maps and is more likely to use
the maps' hazard data to mitigate natural and man-made disasters.
Conversely, if affected property owners do not understand why their
communities are being mapped (or remapped) or why their property is now
in a flood zone, the unexpected additional expense of new or increased
flood insurance premiums can form the basis of significant community
opposition to map modernization activities and lead to formal appeals,
litigation, and delays in implementing map changes.
We visited several communities that have nearly completed or are
engaged in revising flood maps and talked with relevant officials about
recent mapping projects and the importance of outreach efforts. The
experience of Pinellas County, Florida, shows the potential
consequences of a limited outreach effort while the experiences of the
Harris County Flood Control District in Houston, Texas, and
Hillsborough County, Florida, show the potential benefits of a more
expanded outreach strategy.
Pinellas County, Florida:
Officials in Pinellas County, Florida, rejected revised flood hazard
maps developed by FEMA that raised base flood level elevations and
placed areas in newly established flood zones. According to community
and FEMA officials, FEMA did little to communicate with the community
and the public during the mapping process. According to FEMA, the
agency was only required to inform the community when the remapping
project was initiated in 1993 and again after the proposed maps were
completed and provided to the community for comment in December 1997.
County officials subsequently appealed the preliminary maps. According
to local officials, expanded outreach efforts by FEMA throughout this
process could have helped the community understand why the county was
being mapped and how the new maps reflected the true flood risks of the
properties shown in revised flood zones. After working closely with
FEMA and mapping contractor officials, the community finally accepted
and implemented the maps by establishing new building standards in
September 2003.
Harris County, Houston, Texas:
The Harris County Flood Control District in Houston, Texas, took steps
to expand stakeholder and community outreach by releasing up to date
flood hazard map information on its Web site (http://www.tsarp.org).
County officials have also worked closely with the local newspaper to
release information on the updated flood hazard information to the
public. In addition, the county has held individual meetings with the
county's 35 flood plain managers to ensure that they understood the new
flood maps and were able to convey that information to citizens; hired
a public relations consultant to provide guidance on how to better
utilize the media to disseminate flood map information; and conducted a
poll survey to ascertain public opinion about flood hazard risk and to
develop strategies to better convey flood hazard information. County
officials also developed several committee groups to relay flood maps
information that is audience-specific, such as a technical discussion
group that reviews technical issues related to revising the flood maps
and verifies methodological assumptions.
Hillsborough County, Florida:
Hillsborough County officials have conducted extensive outreach while
continuing to work with FEMA throughout the remapping process. To help
ensure that insurance companies, real estate agents, county workers,
and citizens utilize flood maps in a more efficient and effective
manner, a stakeholders outreach coalition was formed in March of 2003.
The purpose of this coalition is to create an information campaign for
individual property owners and businesses that will be directly
impacted by the new maps. The coalition includes representatives from
the county's Citizen Advisory Committee, the insurance industry, real
estate brokers, builders, lenders, engineers, surveyors, and various
county departments. Hillsborough County is working in cooperation with
FEMA to have final maps in late 2004 and create a successful outreach
program that could be duplicated throughout the nation.
FEMA's expanded outreach efforts are intended to educate the public of
the potential flood risk in communities and to encourage them to take
action. Communities that participate in the NFIP are required to
establish floodplain management ordinances that require new and
substantially improved structures in newly designated floodplains to
meet NFIP building standards. However, if a property was not located in
the floodplain in the old map, but is in the floodplain in the new
revised map, NFIP floodplain management regulations do not require
those owners to implement mitigation measures unless they make
substantial improvements to the structure.[Footnote 15] FEMA cannot
compel affected property owners to take steps to mitigate their
properties against flood risks or to purchase flood insurance. Under
current notification requirements, federally regulated lenders, not
FEMA, serve as the primary channel for notifying property owners whose
mortgaged properties are subject to flood insurance requirements. When
property owners seek new financing--through purchase or refinancing--
federally regulated mortgage lenders are required to determine if the
property is in the floodplain, and, if so, require the purchase of
flood insurance. Lenders are not required to monitor map changes or to
notify property owners with existing mortgages whose properties are
identified in a floodplain by remapping if they are not aware of the
change in status.[Footnote 16]
Nonetheless, if federally regulated lenders become aware of flood map
changes that affect properties for which they hold mortgages through
FEMA notifications or flood zone determination companies,[Footnote 17]
then they must notify the property owner and require the purchase of
flood insurance. The information that must be provided to property
owners is limited to notifying property owners that their structure is
in a floodplain, providing a definition of a flood plain, and requiring
the purchase of flood insurance if they live in a participating NFIP
community. As a result, FEMA's outreach efforts are important for
supplementing the formal requirements for notifying communities and
property owners of map changes.
FEMA's Strategy for Partnering with States and Local Communities Does
Not Include Communities with Few Resources to Assist in Flood Mapping:
FEMA's objective for building and maintaining mutually beneficial
partnerships is intended to facilitate and support the efficient
production and effective use of flood maps. According to FEMA, local,
state, and federal partners that have invested resources and assisted
in managing mapping activities have the potential to positively affect
the detail, accuracy, and quantity of the data collected and improve
how these data are used. As part of their strategy for partnering, FEMA
provides guidance to the states on how to develop "business plans" that
document planned efforts to develop states' and communities' capability
and capacity to oversee the collection, analysis, and implementation of
flood data in their state and community and to justify funding for
these efforts. According to FEMA, 38 states have begun drafting such
plans. FEMA intends to use these state business plans to help
prioritize its continuing efforts to develop map modernization
partners.
Through its Cooperating Technical Partners (CTP) program, FEMA has
developed partnerships with a variety of states and communities that
have developed their own data and provided their own funds to help
update local flood maps. Since 2000, FEMA has leveraged millions of
dollars in funding from 171 partners (states and local communities) for
producing maps through its CTP program. For example, from fiscal years
2000 to 2002, FEMA used $70 million of its federal map modernization
funding along with state and local funds to develop what FEMA has
estimated to be more than $155 million worth of new mapping data.
Figure 12 compares FEMA's cumulative funding for new mapping data
through the CTP program with the total cumulative dollar value of data
produced with partner contributions since the program was established
in 2000.
Figure 12: Comparison of Cumulative FEMA Funding for Mapping Data with
the Total Cumulative Dollar Value of Mapping Data Produced through CTP
Program:
[See PDF for image]
[End of figure]
According to FEMA, partnering has other benefits as well. For example,
in the long-term, those states and communities with whom FEMA has
established partnerships may be more likely to accept final map
changes, expand their capabilities, and assume greater responsibility
for periodically developing and incorporating updated flood data,
resulting in cost savings to FEMA.
FEMA's Cooperating Technical Partnership with the State of North
Carolina:
FEMA's partnership with the state of North Carolina provides an example
of a state assuming greater responsibility for producing and
maintaining flood maps.
According to North Carolina officials, the devastating flooding and
subsequent damage that occurred from Hurricane Floyd in 1999 led the
state of North Carolina to take action to address the limitations of
the existing FEMA flood maps. Approximately 80 percent of the homes
damaged or destroyed during Hurricane Floyd were not depicted in the
floodplain on the state's flood maps. In 2000, North Carolina became
the first Cooperating Technical State under FEMA's CTP program,
agreeing to assume primary ownership and responsibility of flood maps
for all North Carolina communities. Since then, according to state
floodplain mapping officials, the state has contributed approximately
$41 million towards the overall floodplain mapping program. On the
basis of this amount, North Carolina has covered approximately 65
percent of the total cost to date for the remapping effort. To date, 8
counties had received new effective flood maps and 28 counties received
new preliminary maps, which are now under community review. (See fig.
13.):
Figure 13: Status of Remapping in North Carolina:
[See PDF for image]
[End of figure]
Some states and communities with few resources and technical capacities
or little history of flood mapping activities are likely to pose a
challenge to FEMA's ability to fund and implement mapping activities.
For example, we talked with flood management officials in several
smaller communities in Montgomery County, Texas; Santa Cruz County,
Arizona; and Larkspur, Colorado. These officials said that their
communities lacked either the funding needed to develop flood data, the
technological capability to develop digital flood data and use
geospatial information systems, or, in some cases, the community
support needed to conduct mapping activities. One approach for
obtaining additional resources, capabilities, and community support
would be for FEMA to facilitate coordination with other agencies within
the state that have a stake in, or could benefit from, mapping
activities. For example, state departments of transportation can
benefit from information in FEMA's geospatial information system, such
as elevation data, in developing and implementing state roads and
bridges. North Carolina was able to get its state transportation
department to help fund the development of elevation data used for
flood maps. FEMA has not yet developed a strategy for how to partner
with communities that do not have the resources, capabilities, or
motivation to initiate and sustain mapping activities. Such a strategy
could focus on how to assist these potential partners in garnering
community resources and developing technological capabilities, how to
coordinate with other agencies in their state, and how to integrate
these efforts with FEMA's community outreach efforts to gain community
support for mapping activities.
New Program Management Contract Is Performance-Based, but FEMA May Have
Difficulty Overseeing the Contract and Measuring Achievement of Program
Objectives:
In March 2004, FEMA awarded a performance-based contract to obtain
assistance from a nationwide mapping contractor to manage tasks
associated with the significant expansion of the map modernization
program. Unlike many traditional government service contracts, which
emphasize inputs rather than outcomes, a performance-based contracting
approach gives the contractor the flexibility to determine how best to
achieve the outcomes and links payment to the contractor's ability to
achieve these outcomes--an approach supported by our past work in
federal contracting. Overseeing these types of contracts requires
agency staff with the knowledge, skills, and abilities to monitor the
contractor's efforts using performance measures that accurately measure
agreed-upon outcomes.
FEMA may be limited in its ability to effectively manage the contract,
as well as the significant expansion of tasks associated with a five
fold increase in funding and related mapping activities that will
continue to be performed by agency staff. These tasks include managing
grants for many new mapping partners and administering contracts with
independent firms to develop and process a significantly larger
quantity of flood data to support local efforts. A staffing needs
assessment completed by FEMA in December 2003 identifies a need for an
additional 75 staff with additional skills, including contracting and
program management capabilities. In appropriating fiscal year 2004 map
modernization funds, Congress included a provision that would allow
FEMA to use up to 3 percent, or $6 million, for administrative
purposes. As of March 2004, FEMA had filled 1 of the 75 positions by
reallocating existing resources. According to FEMA, it plans to fill
another 33 positions using the administrative funding identified in the
fiscal year 2004 budget. In addition, FEMA also plans to fill an
additional 10 positions by moving staff from other FEMA departments or
filling vacancies. However, at the time of our review, FEMA had not yet
established a plan for filling the remaining 31 headquarters and
regional positions.
One element of effective program management is establishing performance
measures to determine how well FEMA is achieving its map modernization
program objectives. FEMA has established performance measures for all
four of its program objectives. However, FEMA's measures for two of
those objectives that directly support the use of flood maps for risk
management--to develop a premier data system and to expand and better
inform the user community are not clearly defined or fully developed.
FEMA's principal measure for developing and maintaining a premier data
collection and delivery system is the percent of the national
population with community-adopted, GIS data-based flood maps. However,
this measure does not indicate whether the maps themselves meet any
FEMA-established standards for accuracy. As noted earlier, FEMA has not
yet defined the minimum level of data collection and analysis for
communities with similar risk.
To measure the progress and success of expanding and better informing
the user community, FEMA established performance measures related to
the percent increase in communities' awareness and use of new maps.
FEMA plans to use surveys as the primary means of measuring increased
community awareness and use of the new maps. However, FEMA has not yet
fully developed an operational definition of how it plans to measure
"awareness" or "use," for example, that reflect mitigation steps taken
or the purchase of flood insurance. Because the link between revising
maps and the use of maps in terms of increased NFIP participation is
not direct, we recognize that it may be a challenge to develop a
performance measure that accurately reflects the impact on NFIP
participation rates of efforts to expand and improve outreach.
Nonetheless, without developing such a measure (or measures), FEMA will
be less able to ensure that its map modernization program will have
resulted in one of FEMA's primary intended benefits.
Conclusions:
FEMA's map modernization strategy recognizes the limits of the agency's
authority to directly achieve such key intended map modernization
benefits as increased, effective flood mitigation efforts and increased
flood insurance participation rates by property owners whose properties
are within the most hazardous flood areas--those in which there is at
least a 1 percent chance of flooding in any given year. At the same
time, FEMA recognizes that it has finite resources for completing map
modernization and needs to leverage its resources with assistance from
state and local communities. Both the credibility of the maps as
accurate and useful and stakeholders' understanding of how the maps can
be used to reduce flood risk and flood damage will be instrumental in
enhancing the probability that the maps will be used to achieve their
intended benefits.
FEMA's outreach strategy for involving stakeholders in map
modernization appears to be reasonable. Even with these outreach
efforts, the credibility and likely use of the maps can be compromised
if there is a perception that similar communities are not treated
similarly during map modernization. Establishing and implementing data
collection and analysis standards for communities with similar risk can
help to assure communities that map development for all communities
within the same risk category will be consistent and comparable. Such
standards can also help FEMA to target its map modernization resources
more efficiently by matching the level of data collection and analysis
with the level of flood risk. Similarly, by developing strategies for
partnering with state, and local flood management stakeholders with
lower levels of capabilities and resources, FEMA will be better able to
leverage available resources and identify the most effective approaches
to engaging its partners in the remapping process.
To the extent that FEMA does not have appropriate numbers of staff with
the requisite skills, it may have limited ability to provide effective
monitoring and oversight of its new performance-based contract, whose
contractor has been charged with much of the day-to-day work of map
modernization that formerly FEMA performed. Finally, in some cases, the
performance measures established for the program and the contractor may
not be sufficient to permit FEMA to measure whether map modernization
is achieving its intended benefits. Without useful operational
definitions for its planned surveys to measure map acceptance and use,
FEMA cannot reasonably measure and demonstrate whether map
modernization has achieved its intended benefits in such areas as
community and individual flood mitigation efforts or increased flood
insurance purchase rates.
Recommendations:
To help ensure that FEMA's map modernization achieves the intended
benefits of improved flood mitigation, increased flood insurance
participation, and improved multi-hazard mitigation and risk management
capabilities through the production of more accurate and accessible
flood maps, we recommend that the Secretary of Homeland Security direct
the Undersecretary of Emergency Preparedness and Response to take the
following four actions:
* Develop and implement data standards that will enable FEMA, its
contractor, and its state and local partners to identify and use
consistent data collection and analysis methods for communities with
similar risk.
* Develop and implement strategies for partnering with state and local
entities with varying levels of capabilities and resources.
* Ensure that it has the staff capacity to effectively implement the
nationwide mapping contract and the overall map modernization program.
* Develop and implement useful performance measures that define FEMA' s
progress in increasing stakeholders' awareness and use of the new maps,
including improved mitigation efforts and increased participation rates
in purchasing flood insurance.
Agency Comments:
We provided a draft of this report to DHS for its review and comment.
We met with DHS and FEMA officials, including FEMA's Mitigation
Division Acting Deputy Director, to discuss the report. In providing
oral comments, DHS and FEMA generally agreed with the report's contents
and provided us with minor technical comments, which we have
incorporated where appropriate. In addition, DHS and FEMA generally
agreed with our recommendations and provided the following comments:
* To address the data standard recommendation, FEMA said that it plans
to refine existing standards, in coordination with stakeholders, to
ensure consistent data collection and analysis for all communities
commensurate with their flood risk.
* To address the recommendation concerning partnering strategies to
address varying levels of capabilities and resources, FEMA said that it
would continue to collaborate with stakeholder groups to develop an
effective strategy to include states and communities with varying
levels of capabilities and resources.
* To address the recommendation to ensure that the agency has the staff
capacity to effectively implement map modernization and oversee the
contract, FEMA said that it has begun to take steps not only to fill 44
positions for fiscal year 2004, as noted in the report, but is also
developing a plan to ensure that additional staffing needs are met in
fiscal year 2005 and beyond.
* To address the recommendation to develop and implement performance
measures for increasing stakeholders' awareness and use of flood maps,
FEMA said that it plans to refine performance measures for this map
modernization objective to make them more useful and quantifiable.
We will send copies of this report to the Secretary of Homeland
Security. We will also make copies available to others upon request. In
addition, this report will be available at no charge on GAO's Web site
at http://www.gao.gov. If you or your staff have any questions about
this report, please contact me at (202) 512-8777 or at
jenkinswo@gao.gov. Major contributors to this report are listed in
appendix III.
Sincerely yours,
Signed by:
William O. Jenkins, Jr.
Director, Homeland Security and Justice Issues:
[End of section]
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology:
To describe how map modernization is intended to improve the accuracy
and accessibility of the nation's flood maps, we interviewed Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) headquarters officials and agency
officials in three of the regional offices: Region IV in Atlanta,
Georgia; Region VIII in Denver, Colorado; and Region VI in Denton,
Texas. To assess the reliability of FEMA's data regarding the number
and age of the nation's flood maps, we interviewed officials
knowledgeable about the data and the systems that produced them and
determined that the data were sufficiently reliable for the purposes of
this report. We also reviewed key FEMA documents that describe how map
modernization is intended to use advanced technology to improve the
accuracy and accessibility of flood maps.
Realizing that map modernization is in the early stages of
implementation and information on its impact is limited, we conducted
site visits in states and communities that have already begun to
modernize their flood maps. To identify potential locations for site
visits, we spoke with FEMA Mitigation Division officials and
representatives from the following professional organizations:
Association of State Flood Plain Managers, National Association of
Flood and Stormwater Management Agencies, National Emergency Management
Association, and the Mapping Coalition. The selected site visits
represent areas that have recently experienced considerable population
growth, a high National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) base, or a high
number of repetitive flood loss claims. Over 64 percent of all NFIP
policies are located in the states selected for site visits, and over
40 percent of all repetitive loss properties are located in the states
in which we conducted site visits.
Our site visits involved reviewing key documents, graphics, and other
information related to our reporting objectives. Site visits included
the following locations:
* Hillsborough, Sarasota, and Pinellas counties of Southwest Florida:
* Maricopa County, Arizona:
* State of North Carolina:
* Mecklenburg County, North Carolina:
* Harris County, Texas:
* State of Colorado:
To describe the expected benefits of map modernization, we interviewed
FEMA officials in their Mitigation Division in Washington, D.C., and
obtained documents and graphics from FEMA officials describing the
benefits the agency expects to result from map modernization
activities. We also interviewed state and local officials on the
potential multi-hazard benefits of map modernization and obtained
documents and graphics illustrating the expected benefits.
To determine the extent to which FEMA's strategy for managing the map
modernization program supports the achievement of the expected benefits
of more accurate and accessible maps, we first reviewed previous
documents published by FEMA and others on map modernization. Throughout
our review, we remained in constant contact with FEMA officials in
their Mitigation Division to monitor the development of FEMA's
prioritization of fiscal year 2003 funded mapping projects and the
implementation of the overall map modernization approach.
To identify areas where FEMA's implementation of map modernization is
limited, we gathered and synthesized the experiences and challenges
identified through documentation and interviews provided from various
sources, including:
* FEMA headquarters and regional officials;
* site visits and selective review participants;
* professionals in the Association of State Floodplain Managers,
National Association of Stormwater Management Agencies, the National
Emergency Management Agency, and Arizona Association of Floodplain
Managers; and:
* private industry representatives in the fields of flood zone
determinations, engineering, technology and program consulting, real
estate sales and development, and home mortgage lending.
We also conducted additional research to determine whether limitations
existed in FEMA's implementation of its outreach approach for its map
modernization program. We obtained information on the roles and
responsibilities of FEMA and lenders to communicate changes in flood
hazard status. We also reviewed and synthesized applicable laws,
regulations, and guidance regarding notification of flood hazard risk
to identify all parties designated to inform property owners of changes
in the flood hazard maps. We interviewed FEMA mapping and insurance
officials, state, community, and National Flood Determination
Association officials as well as conducted site visits to ascertain
information on current processes for communicating changes in flood
hazard status. Additionally, we interviewed FEMA's general counsel to
obtain the agency's position on statutory requirements for notification
of property owners after remapping.
To further analyze the strengths and limitations of FEMA's
implementation approach, we also reviewed FEMA's Inspector General's
reports related to flood mapping and reviewed our previous work and
guidance in the areas of performance-based contracting and performance
measurement that relate to the objectives of map modernization.
[End of section]
The information regarding deaths and damages due to floods was
considered background information and was not verified. We conducted
our review from April 2003 through March 2004 in accordance with
generally accepted government auditing standards.
[End of section]
Appendix II: Users of Flood Maps:
The principal stakeholders that use FEMA flood maps and the nature of
their use are described in this appendix.
State and local floodplain managers/community planners: use flood maps
to make floodplain management decisions for each of the nearly 2
million development permits issued for new structures nearly 20,000
NFIP participating communities that have maps. They are responsible for
establishing and enforcing land-use and construction ordinances that
comply with minimum NFIP standards.
Insurance companies and agents: use flood maps to determine actuarial
rates for flood insurance policies. Private insurance companies that
sell NFIP-backed flood insurance use the flood maps to determine the
proper premium rate for a flood insurance policy. There are
approximately 250,000 new policies rated and sold each year.
Lenders: use flood maps to determine the flood risk status of mortgaged
properties at loan origination and through the entire life of the
mortgage. Each of the 10 to 15 million federally related mortgage
transactions each year requires that the flood maps be consulted to
determine whether the structure secured by the loan is located in the
floodplain on the current flood map.
Flood zone determination companies: use flood maps to determine
property locations relative to flood hazard areas on behalf of mortgage
lenders that typically contract this service to companies with
expertise in making flood zone determinations and the capability to
make many determinations quickly.
Individual property owners: use flood maps to better understand their
flood risk status.
Land developers: use flood maps to assist in designing developments
that are safe from flood hazards.
Surveyors: use flood maps to prepare elevation certificates for
structures. These help owners determine their flood risk by comparing
the mapped flood elevations to the building's lowest floor elevation.
Engineers: use flood maps when designing flood mitigation projects and
to site and design new buildings and infrastructure.
Real estate professionals: use flood maps to determine the flood risk
status of properties in the community.
State and local disaster and emergency response officials: use flood
maps to prepare for all disasters, issue hazard warnings, and implement
emergency response activities and aid in the rebuilding and
reconstruction phases.
Other federal agencies: use flood maps in implementing Executive Order
11988, Floodplain Management, for federal actions proposed in or
affecting floodplains.
[End of section]
Appendix III: GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments:
GAO Contacts:
William O. Jenkins, Jr. (202) 512-8777:
Christopher Keisling (404) 679-1917:
Staff Acknowledgments:
In addition to those named above, Mark Abraham, Leo Barbour, Mark
Braza, Grace Coleman, Christine Davis, Michelle Fejfar, Brian James,
Kirk Kiester, and Meg Ullengren made key contributions to the report.
FOOTNOTES
[1] Data are from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in cooperation with
the National Weather Service.
[2] Mitigation is defined by the Federal Emergency Management Agency as
sustained action that reduces or eliminates long-term risk to people
and property from hazards and their effects.
[3] Prior to March 2003, FEMA was an independent agency whose Federal
Insurance and Mitigation Administration was responsible for managing
the flood insurance program. The Homeland Security Act of 2002, P.L.
107-296 (Nov. 25, 2002), transferred FEMA and all its responsibilities
to the Emergency Preparedness and Response Directorate within the new
Department of Homeland Security. This transfer was effective March 1,
2003. Currently, the Mitigation Division within FEMA is responsible for
the flood insurance program, including flood map modernization.
[4] See 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.
[5] P.L. 90-448, (Aug. 1, 1968).
[6] Also included are Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands.
[7] For clarity and ease of discussion throughout the report, we use
the term "floodplain" in all discussions where we address the special
flood hazard area or 100-year floodplain.
[8] FEMA is required to contact community stakeholders, such as the
state coordinating agency and other appropriate community officials, to
discuss the scope and methodology for the proposed flood map study. 44
C.F.R. sec. 66.5.
[9] FEMA is required to publish the proposed flood elevations in a
prominent local newspaper at least twice during the 10-day period
following the notification of the community chief executive officer.
Property owners have 90 days from the second newspaper publication to
appeal the proposed flood elevations. 44 C.F.R. secs. 67.4, 67.5.
[10] Final flood elevations must be published in the Federal Register
and copies sent to the community chief executive officer, all
individual appellants, and the state-coordinating agency. 44 C.F.R.
67.11.
[11] For clarity and ease of discussion throughout the report, we use
the term "map modernization" in all discussions where we address the
Multi-Hazard Flood Map Modernization Program.
[12] The 92,222 flood maps represent nearly 20,000 communities.
[13] For example, FEMA implemented digital base map standards in 1998
and LIDAR standards in 2000.
[14] These guidelines describe detailed methods of analysis used for
high-risk areas and less detailed methods used in low-risk areas.
[15] If a community determines that the cost of improvements to a home
or business equals or exceeds 50 percent of the market value of the
building, the building is considered a "substantial improvement" and
must meet the NFIP's minimum requirements.
[16] In making loans, federally regulated lenders are required to
ensure that property owners purchase flood insurance if their mortgages
are secured by a structure located in a floodplain. Lenders are also
required to check the flood hazard status of a property when triggered
by statutory tripwires, such as loan renewal or extension.
[17] Many lenders use flood zone determination companies to determine
whether properties require flood insurance as a result of loan
origination, loan assumption, or map changes. These companies use FEMA
flood maps and other data to ascertain if properties are situated in
flood zones.
GAO's Mission:
The General Accounting Office, the investigative arm of Congress,
exists to support Congress in meeting its constitutional
responsibilities and to help improve the performance and accountability
of the federal government for the American people. GAO examines the use
of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; and provides
analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help Congress make
informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO's commitment to
good government is reflected in its core values of accountability,
integrity, and reliability.
Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony:
The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no
cost is through the Internet. GAO's Web site ( www.gao.gov ) contains
abstracts and full-text files of current reports and testimony and an
expanding archive of older products. The Web site features a search
engine to help you locate documents using key words and phrases. You
can print these documents in their entirety, including charts and other
graphics.
Each day, GAO issues a list of newly released reports, testimony, and
correspondence. GAO posts this list, known as "Today's Reports," on its
Web site daily. The list contains links to the full-text document
files. To have GAO e-mail this list to you every afternoon, go to
www.gao.gov and select "Subscribe to e-mail alerts" under the "Order
GAO Products" heading.
Order by Mail or Phone:
The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2
each. A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent
of Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or
more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent.
Orders should be sent to:
U.S. General Accounting Office
441 G Street NW,
Room LM Washington,
D.C. 20548:
To order by Phone:
Voice: (202) 512-6000:
TDD: (202) 512-2537:
Fax: (202) 512-6061:
To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs:
Contact:
Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov
Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470:
Public Affairs:
Jeff Nelligan, managing director, NelliganJ@gao.gov (202) 512-4800 U.S.
General Accounting Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 Washington, D.C.
20548:
