Actions Taken to Implement the Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act of 2006
Gao ID: GAO-09-59R November 21, 2008On August 29, 2005, and in the ensuing days, Hurricanes Katrina, Rita, and Wilma devastated the Gulf Coast region of the United States. Hurricane Katrina alone affected more than a half million people located within approximately 90,000 square miles spanning Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama, ultimately resulted in over 1,600 deaths, and has spawned one of the largest natural disaster relief and recovery operations in U.S. history. Almost 3 years prior to the hurricanes, the Homeland Security Act of 2002 created the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) largely in response to the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. The Homeland Security Act merged 22 disparate agencies and organizations into the new department, including the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The Homeland Security Act generally charged DHS with securing the homeland against terrorist attacks and carrying out the functions of all transferred entities, including acting as a focal point regarding natural and man-made crises and emergency planning. Hurricane Katrina severely tested disaster management at the federal, state, and local levels and revealed weaknesses in the basic elements of preparing for, responding to, and recovering from any catastrophic disaster. Beginning in February 2006, reports by the House Select Bipartisan Committee to Investigate the Preparation for and Response to Hurricane Katrina, the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, the White House Homeland Security Council, the DHS Inspector General, DHS, and FEMA all identified a variety of failures and some strengths in the preparations for, response to, and initial recovery from Hurricane Katrina. The Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act of 2006 (Post-Katrina Act) was enacted to address various shortcomings identified in the preparation for and response to Hurricane Katrina. The act enhances FEMA's responsibilities and its autonomy within DHS. FEMA is to lead and support the nation in a risk-based, comprehensive emergency management system of preparedness, protection, response, recovery, and mitigation. The Post-Katrina Act extends beyond changes to FEMA's organizational and management structure and includes legislative reforms in other emergency management areas that were considered shortcomings during Hurricane Katrina. A September 11, 2007, hearing before the House Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management raised some concerns about the way in which DHS and FEMA were implementing several key directives of the Post-Katrina Act. Given the importance of proper implementation of the act and the need for a unified, coordinated national incident-management system capable of preparing for and responding to natural and man-made disasters, including catastrophic disasters, your committees requested that we perform a review of the implementation of the act's requirements. This letter describes the actions FEMA and DHS have taken in response to the act's provisions, areas where FEMA and DHS must still take action, and any challenges to implementation that FEMA and DHS officials identified during our discussions with them.
FEMA and DHS have made some progress in their efforts to implement the act since it was enacted in October 2006. For most of the provisions we examined, FEMA and DHS had at least preliminary efforts underway to address them. However, we have identified a number of areas that still require action, and it is clear that FEMA and DHS have work remaining to implement the provisions of the act. To structure our findings, we analyzed the provisions appearing under each section heading of the Post-Katrina Act and grouped the various sections, as follows: (1) Roles and Responsibilities, (2) Emergency Communications, (3) Disaster Assistance Activities, (4) Disaster Planning and Preparation, (5) Regional Preparedness, (6) Logistics, (7) Contracting, (8) Information Technology, (9) Human Capital, (10) Subject Matter Expertise, (11) Waste, Fraud, and Abuse, and (12) Gulf Coast Recovery. In some cases, a section of the law may be relevant to more than one category--for example, the National Emergency Communications Plan required by the law could have appeared in the Emergency Communications category or in the Disaster Planning and Preparedness category discussed. In some instances, a section of the Post-Katrina Act amends another statute, principally the Homeland Security Act or the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (Stafford Act). In such instances, we include both the Post-Katrina Act section and, parenthetically, the section of the amended statute, for example the Homeland Security Act or the Stafford Act. The information in this letter describes the status, as of August 1, 2008, of actions that FEMA and DHS have reported as completed or underway to implement the several hundred discrete provisions of the Post-Katrina Act that we identified. It was beyond the scope of this report to determine whether FEMA and DHS had fully complied with all the provisions of the act or to evaluate the effectiveness--individually or collectively--of the actions that FEMA and DHS have taken to implement the Post-Katrina Act. Thus, the description of an "action taken" for any given provision does not necessarily mean that FEMA or DHS has done all that is necessary to implement that particular provision or that either entity has done so effectively. Similarly, the lack of an "area to be addressed" in a particular section does not signify that DHS and FEMA have completely satisfied the law in that area; rather, they have generally taken some action in that area. Further, where actions to be taken are identified, it is not intended to suggest that once that action is completed, the relevant statutory provision will be fully implemented.
GAO-09-59R, Actions Taken to Implement the Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act of 2006
This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-09-59R
entitled 'Actions Taken to Implement the Post-Katrina Emergency
Management Reform Act of 2006' which was released on December 8, 2008.
This text file was formatted by the U.S. Government Accountability
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.
GAO-09-59R:
United States Government Accountability Office:
Washington, DC 20548:
November 21, 2008:
Congressional Requesters:
Subject: Actions Taken to Implement the Post-Katrina Emergency
Management Reform Act of 2006.
On August 29, 2005, and in the ensuing days, Hurricanes Katrina, Rita,
and Wilma devastated the Gulf Coast region of the United States.
Hurricane Katrina alone affected more than a half million people
located within approximately 90,000 square miles spanning Louisiana,
Mississippi, and Alabama, ultimately resulted in over 1,600 deaths, and
has spawned one of the largest natural disaster relief and recovery
operations in U.S. history.
Almost 3 years prior to the hurricanes, the Homeland Security Act of
2002[Footnote 1] created the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
largely in response to the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. The
Homeland Security Act merged 22 disparate agencies and organizations
into the new department, including the Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA). The Homeland Security Act generally charged DHS with
securing the homeland against terrorist attacks and carrying out the
functions of all transferred entities, including acting as a focal
point regarding natural and man-made crises and emergency planning.
Among its responsibilities, DHS was to build a comprehensive national
incident management system comprising all levels of government and
consolidate existing federal government emergency response plans into a
single, coordinated national response plan.
Hurricane Katrina severely tested disaster management at the federal,
state, and local levels and revealed weaknesses in the basic elements
of preparing for, responding to, and recovering from any catastrophic
disaster. Beginning in February 2006, reports by the House Select
Bipartisan Committee to Investigate the Preparation for and Response to
Hurricane Katrina, the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs Committee, the White House Homeland Security Council, the DHS
Inspector General, DHS, and FEMA all identified a variety of failures
and some strengths in the preparations for, response to, and initial
recovery from Hurricane Katrina. We also have an extensive body of work
on emergency management and catastrophic disasters, including Hurricane
Katrina, which is listed at the end of this document.
The Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act of 2006 (Post-Katrina
Act) was enacted to address various shortcomings identified in the
preparation for and response to Hurricane Katrina.[Footnote 2] The act
enhances FEMA‘s responsibilities and its autonomy within DHS. FEMA is
to lead and support the nation in a risk-based, comprehensive emergency
management system of preparedness, protection, response, recovery, and
mitigation. Under the act, the FEMA Administrator reports directly to
the Secretary of Homeland Security; FEMA is now a distinct entity
within DHS; and the Secretary of Homeland Security can no longer
substantially or significantly reduce the authorities,
responsibilities, or functions of FEMA or the capability to perform
them unless authorized by subsequent legislation. The act further
directs the transfer to FEMA of many functions of DHS‘s former
Preparedness Directorate. The statute codified the existing regional
structure, which includes 10 regional offices within FEMA and specifies
their responsibilities. It also contains a provision establishing in
FEMA a National Integration Center, which is responsible for the
ongoing management and maintenance of the National Incident Management
System and the National Response Plan”now known as the National
Response Framework (NRF). In addition, the act includes several
provisions to strengthen the management and capability of FEMA‘s
workforce. For example, the statute calls for a strategic human capital
plan to shape and improve FEMA‘s workforce, authorizes recruitment and
retention bonuses, and establishes requirements for a Surge Capacity
Force.
The Post-Katrina Act extends beyond changes to FEMA‘s organizational
and management structure and includes legislative reforms in other
emergency management areas that were considered shortcomings during
Hurricane Katrina. For example, the Post-Katrina Act includes an
emergency communications title that requires, among other things, the
development of a National Emergency Communications Plan, as well as the
establishment of working groups within each FEMA region dedicated to
emergency communications coordination. The act also addresses
catastrophic planning and preparedness; for example, it charges FEMA‘s
National Integration Center with revising the NRF‘s catastrophic
incident annex, and it makes state catastrophic planning a component of
one grant program. In addition, the act addresses evacuation plans and
exercises and the needs of individuals with disabilities.
A September 11, 2007, hearing before the House Subcommittee on Economic
Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management raised some
concerns about the way in which DHS and FEMA were implementing several
key directives of the Post-Katrina Act. Given the importance of proper
implementation of the act and the need for a unified, coordinated
national incident-management system capable of preparing for and
responding to natural and man-made disasters, including catastrophic
disasters, your committees requested that we perform a review of the
implementation of the act‘s requirements.
This letter describes the actions FEMA and DHS have taken in response
to the act‘s provisions, areas where FEMA and DHS must still take
action, and any challenges to implementation that FEMA and DHS
officials identified during our discussions with them. In general, we
found that FEMA and DHS have made some progress in their efforts to
implement the act since it was enacted in October 2006. For most of the
provisions we examined, FEMA and DHS had at least preliminary efforts
underway to address them. However, we have identified a number of areas
that still require action, and it is clear that FEMA and DHS have work
remaining to implement the provisions of the act. This letter provides
information, at a high level, on the status of implementation efforts
for the entire act. We have not made an assessment of the quality or
likely outcomes of any of the actions that have been taken. Additional
focused evaluation in selected areas, and, in some cases more time for
efforts to mature, will be required in order to evaluate the
effectiveness of the actions taken to implement the law on enhancing
the nation‘s ability to prepare for, respond to, and recover from
disasters.
Scope, Methodology, and Limitations:
To conduct this work, we analyzed the text of the Post-Katrina Act and
identified well over 300 discrete provisions within the legislation
that call for DHS or FEMA action to implement requirements or exercise
authorities”or to be prepared to do so under the appropriate
conditions. We reviewed agency documents and discussed the act‘s
implementation with numerous senior-level program officials at FEMA and
DHS to identify actions FEMA and DHS have taken in response to the
act‘s provisions. To determine the status of the Post-Katrina Act‘s
implementation, we compared the actions described in agency documents
and reported by knowledgeable officials with the discrete provisions we
had identified as requiring agency action to implement. We also
identified areas to be addressed, where no or little action had been
taken. In addition, when agency officials reported challenges to us in
implementing a particular section, we included that information as
well.
To structure our findings, we analyzed the provisions appearing under
each section heading of the Post-Katrina Act and grouped the various
sections, as follows:
* Roles and Responsibilities”Enclosure II: Implementing Organizational
Structures, Roles, and Authorities to Prepare for, Respond to, and
Recover from Disasters;
* Emergency Communications”Enclosure III: Supporting and Enhancing
Emergency Communications;
* Disaster Assistance Activities”Enclosure IV: Providing Assistance to
Disaster-Affected Areas and Populations;
* Disaster Planning and Preparation”Enclosure V: Implementing the
Components of the National Preparedness System and Other Preparedness
Activities;
* Regional Preparedness”Enclosure VI: Supporting Regional Preparedness
and Cooperation;
* Logistics”Enclosure VII: Improving Timely Delivery of Goods and
Services in Disaster Events;
* Contracting”Enclosure VIII: Changing Contracting Practices to Enhance
Preparedness and Strengthen Accountability;
* Information Technology”Enclosure IX: Improving Information Technology
Systems to Support Compatibility, Accessibility, and Tracking;
* Human Capital”Enclosure X: Ensuring a Well-Trained, Professional
Workforce to Prepare for, Respond to, and Recover from Disasters;
* Subject Matter Expertise”Enclosure XI: Applying Specific
Expertise”Disability Coordinator, Small State Advocate, and Modeling
and Analysis”to Disaster Planning, Response, and Recovery Activities;
* Waste, Fraud, and Abuse”Enclosure XII: Implementing Controls to
Prevent Waste, Fraud, and Abuse;
* Gulf Coast Recovery”Enclosure XIII: Managing Recovery from Hurricanes
Katrina and Rita in the Gulf Coast Region.
In some cases, a section of the law may be relevant to more than one
category”for example, the National Emergency Communications Plan
required by the law could have appeared in the Emergency Communications
category or in the Disaster Planning and Preparedness category.
However, in the enclosures to this letter, each provision appears only
once”in the section for which we determined it was most relevant. (For
help finding a particular section of the Post-Katrina Act in the
enclosures to this letter, please see enclosure XIV.)
The enclosures to this letter include summaries of and citations to the
relevant Post-Katrina Act sections being discussed. In some instances,
a section of the Post-Katrina Act amends another statute, principally
the Homeland Security Act[Footnote 3] or the Robert T. Stafford
Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (Stafford Act).[Footnote
4] In such instances, we include both the Post-Katrina Act section and,
parenthetically, the section of the amended statute, for example the
Homeland Security Act or the Stafford Act. When we report status
information under a particular section, we cite to the section of the
Post-Katrina Act (or the amended statute) to which the status
information relates.
The information in this letter describes the status, as of August 1,
2008,[Footnote 5] of actions that FEMA and DHS have reported as
completed or underway to implement the several hundred discrete
provisions of the Post-Katrina Act that we identified. The status of
actions to implement the act appears in the enclosures, as follows:
Actions Taken is a description of the actions that FEMA and DHS
officials have identified as having been taken to implement one or more
provisions of the Post-Katrina Act, including any documentation that
describes those actions.
Areas to Be Addressed are areas where FEMA and DHS either did not
provide information or indicated they had not yet initiated action to
implement a requirement or be prepared to exercise an authority
established by the Post-Katrina Act.
Challenges, if any, are those FEMA and DHS officials identified as
associated with implementation of the act‘s provisions.
It was beyond the scope of this report to determine whether FEMA and
DHS had fully complied with all the provisions of the act or to
evaluate the effectiveness”individually or collectively”of the actions
that FEMA and DHS have taken to implement the Post-Katrina Act. Thus,
the description of an ’action taken“ for any given provision does not
necessarily mean that FEMA or DHS has done all that is necessary to
implement that particular provision or that either entity has done so
effectively. Similarly, the lack of an ’area to be addressed“ in a
particular section does not signify that DHS and FEMA have completely
satisfied the law in that area; rather, they have generally taken some
action in that area. Further, where actions to be taken are identified,
it is not intended to suggest that once that action is completed, the
relevant statutory provision will be fully implemented.
We conducted this performance audit from April 2008 to November 2008,
in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.
Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our
findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that
the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and
conclusions based on our audit objectives.
Agency Comments and Our Evaluation:
We provided a draft of this report to DHS and FEMA for review and
comment on September 19, 2008. In part because of the demands of
responding to Hurricanes Gustav and Ike, FEMA requested several
extensions for providing comments. During this time, FEMA continued to
provide information on the Post-Katrina Act‘s implementation. On
November 14, 2008, FEMA provided written comments on the draft report,
which DHS had also reviewed and approved. These comments are reproduced
in full in appendix XV.
In its response, FEMA noted that DHS and GAO collaborated in assembling
a substantial amount of information that briefly describes substantive
improvements in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, but that time was not
available for a more thorough review and substantive report. FEMA noted
that the Post-Katrina Act contains more than 250 distinct requirements.
By our analysis, that number is closer to 300 and increases to more
than 350 if actions required to be taken in each of the regions are
counted separately. We appreciate DHS‘s and FEMA‘s collaboration in
compiling and reviewing the enormous amount of information on the Post-
Katrina Act‘s implementation. In this time of Presidential transition,
our report provides a baseline snapshot of actions taken to implement
the Post-Katrina Act as August 1, 2008 (later in limited instances). In
its comments FEMA also stated that it had completed or made substantial
progress on virtually all provisions and used examples from its
response to recent disasters, including Hurricanes Gustav and Ike, to
identify some positive effects of changes it has made since the
enactment of the Post-Katrina Act. It was not in the scope of this
project to assess the potential effectiveness or actual outcomes of the
actions FEMA has taken in response to the Post-Katrina Act and during
disaster events like Hurricanes Gustav and Ike. However, we have noted
that DHS and FEMA have at least preliminary action under way to address
most of the act‘s provisions. We also noted that FEMA and DHS have much
work remaining to fully implement the act‘s provisions. As previously
noted, to assess the effectiveness of FEMA‘s actions to implement the
Post-Katrina Act, additional, focused evaluation in selected areas
would be required, and, in some cases, more time is needed for efforts
to mature. We look forward to the opportunity to continue our
collaboration with DHS and FEMA in affirming positive outcomes, as well
as examining opportunities to further strengthen emergency management
and national preparedness and response.
We are providing copies of this report to interested congressional
committees, the FEMA Administrator, and the Secretary of Homeland
Security. This report will also be available at no charge on the GAO
Web site at [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov].
If you or your staffs have any questions about this report, please
contact me at (202) 512-8757 or jenkinswo@gao.gov. Contact points for
our Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found
on the last page of this report. GAO staff who made major contributions
to this report are listed in Enclosure XVI.
Signed by:
William O. Jenkins, Jr.
Director, Homeland Security and Justice Issues:
List of Requesters:
The Honorable Joseph Lieberman:
Chairman:
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs:
United States Senate:
The Honorable Bennie Thompson:
Chairman:
Committee on Homeland Security:
House of Representatives:
The Honorable James Oberstar:
Chairman:
The Honorable John Mica:
Ranking Member:
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure:
House of Representatives:
The Honorable Eleanor Holmes Norton:
Chair:
The Honorable Sam Graves:
Ranking Member:
Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency
Management:
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure:
House of Representatives:
[End of section]
Enclosure I: List of Abbreviations Used:
ACF: Administration for Children and Families:
CCR: Central Contractor Registration:
CAP: Corrective Action Program:
CIO: Chief Information Officer:
CPG: Comprehensive Preparedness Guide:
DCMPP: Disaster Case Management Pilot Program:
DHS: Department of Homeland Security:
DOD: Department of Defense:
DOJ: Department of Justice:
EMAC Emergency Management Assistance Compact:
EMI: Emergency Management Institute:
EMPG: Emergency Management Performance Grant:
ESF: Emergency Support Functions:
FAR: Federal Acquisition Regulation:
FBI: Federal Bureau of Investigation:
FEMA: Federal Emergency Management Agency:
FCO: Federal Coordinating Officer:
FTE: Full Time Equivalent:
GPD: Grant Programs Directorate:
GSA: General Services Administration:
HHS: Health and Human Services:
HSA: Homeland Security Act:
HSC: Homeland Security Council:
HSPD-7: Homeland Security Presidential Directive-7:
HSPD-8: Homeland Security Presidential Directive-8:
HUBZone: Historically Underutilized Business Zone:
IASD: Infrastructure Analysis and Strategy Division:
ICC: Inter-Agency Coordinating Council:
ICTAP: Interoperable Communications Technical Assistance Program:
IG: Inspector General:
IHP: Individuals and Households Program:
IMAT: Incident Management Assistance Team:
IRPTA: Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act:
IT: Information Technology:
LEP: Limited English Proficiency:
LMD: Logistics Management Directorate:
MOA: Memorandum of Agreement:
MOU: Memorandum of Understanding:
NAC: National Advisory Council:
NCD: National Council on Disability:
NCR: National Capital Region:
NECP: National Emergency Communications Plan:
NEMA: National Emergency Management Association:
NEMIS: National Emergency Management Information System:
NESC: National Exercise Simulation Center:
NDRS: National Disaster Recovery Strategy:
NDHS: National Disaster Housing Strategy:
NIC: National Integration Center:
NIMSCAST: National Incident Management System Compliance Assessment
Support Tool:
NIMS: National Incident Management System:
NISAC: National Infrastructure Simulation and Analysis Center:
NLC: National Logistics Coordinator:
NOC: National Operations Center:
NPSC: National Processing Service Center:
NRF: National Response Framework:
NRP: National Response Plan:
OEC: Office of Emergency Communications:
OIC: Office for Interoperability and Compatibility:
P25: Project 25:
PA: Public Assistance:
PFO: Principal Federal Official:
PFT: Permanent Full Time:
PSMA: Prescripted Mission Assignment:
RAMP: Remedial Action Management Program:
RDTE: Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation:
RECC: Regional Emergency Communications Coordination:
RFP: Request for Proposals:
SCIP: Statewide Communication Interoperability Plan:
SES: Senior Executive Service:
SDB: Small Disadvantaged Business:
SHCP: Strategic Human Capital Plan:
SHSP: State Homeland Security Program:
TAV: Total Asset Visibility:
TCL: Target Capabilities List:
TRO: Transitional Recovery Office:
UASI: Urban Area Security Initiative:
[End of section]
Enclosure II: Implementing Organizational Structures, Roles, and
Authorities to Prepare for, Respond to, and Recover from Disasters:
Post-Katrina Act § 611 (Homeland Security Act § 503, Federal Emergency
Management Agency, and § 504, Authorities and Responsibilities):
Establishes the mission of the Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and sets forth
the role and responsibilities of the FEMA Administrator, who shall be
appointed by the President, with the advice and consent of the Senate.
Requires, among other things, that the FEMA Administrator provide
advice on request to the President, the Homeland Security Council, or
the Secretary of Homeland Security; and that the FEMA Administrator
report directly to the Secretary of Homeland Security without having to
report through another official.
Actions Taken:
* Appointment of FEMA Administrator: On May 26, 2006, the Senate
confirmed the appointment of R. David Paulison to serve as the FEMA
Administrator. § 503(c)(1).
* FEMA Administrator Reporting Relationship: As reflected in the
National Response Framework (NRF) and confirmed by FEMA's Office of
Policy and Program Analysis and FEMA General Counsel, a direct
reporting relationship exists between the FEMA Administrator and the
Secretary of Homeland Security. Although DHS's organizational chart
shows that the FEMA Administrator's Office reports to the DHS Office of
the Secretary/Deputy Secretary, FEMA's Office of Policy and Program
Analysis confirmed that the FEMA Administrator is not required to first
report to the deputy secretary before reporting to the secretary. §
503(c)(3).
* Role of the FEMA Administrator in the NRF: According to the NRF, the
FEMA Administrator:
- reports to the Secretary of Homeland Security;
- is the principal advisor to the President, the Secretary of Homeland
Security, and the Homeland Security Council regarding emergency
management; and:
- acting through the Secretary of Homeland Security, may recommend a
course of action to the President with regard to requests for
Presidential emergency and major disaster declarations. §§ 503(c)(3)-
(4), 504(a)(8).
* FEMA Administrator Advice to Executive Branch: According to officials
from FEMA's Office of Policy and Program Analysis, the FEMA
Administrator gives advice to the executive branch as a matter of
course at various meetings, including Homeland Security Council (HSC)
Principals Committee meetings, HSC Deputies Committee Meetings, and HSC
Policy Coordination Committee meetings. These officials said that the
FEMA Administrator also gives advice during direct meetings with the
President and meetings with the Secretary of Homeland Security. §
503(c)(4).
* FEMA Administrator Advice to Congress: According to officials from
FEMA's Office of Policy and Program Analysis, the FEMA Administrator
gives this advice as a matter of course, through meetings, briefings,
testimony, and submittal of written reports, questions for the record,
and other correspondence with members of Congress and their respective
staffs. § 503(c)(4).
* FEMA Administrator Potential for Cabinet Designation: According to
FEMA's Office of Policy and Program Analysis, although cabinet
designation has not yet happened and is the prerogative of the
President, the FEMA Administrator does, as previously mentioned, give
advice during direct meetings with the President. § 503(c)(5).
* Role of FEMA in the NRF: As stated in the NRF, the Secretary of
Homeland Security coordinates with other appropriate departments and
agencies to activate plans and applicable coordination structures of
the NRF, as required. The FEMA Administrator assists the secretary in
meeting these responsibilities. FEMA, as the lead agency for NRF
Emergency Support Function #5 - Emergency Management, is responsible
for supporting the overall activities of the federal government for
domestic incident management. Emergency Support Function #5 serves as
the coordination Emergency Support Function for all federal departments
and agencies across the spectrum of domestic incident management from
hazard mitigation and preparedness to response and recovery. §§ 503(b),
504(a).
* NRF Responsibilities: The Post-Katrina Act charges the FEMA
Administrator with administering and ensuring the implementation of the
National Response Plan (NRP), with FEMA's National Integration Center
specifically responsible for periodically reviewing and revising the
document, as appropriate. In August 2005, Hurricane Katrina and,
shortly after, Hurricanes Wilma and Rita revealed a number of
limitations in the NRP, which prompted DHS and FEMA to undertake a
comprehensive review of the plan. The result of this process was the
issuance, in January 2008, of the NRF (the new name for the NRP). The
NRF states that it is to be a guide to how the nation conducts an all-
hazards response and manages incidents ranging from the serious but
purely local to large-scale terrorist attacks or catastrophic natural
disasters. The NRF became effective in March 2008.[Footnote 6] §
504(a)(13); see also § 509(b).
* Role of the National Advisory Council (NAC): The Post-Katrina Act
requires the FEMA Administrator to coordinate with the NAC, a
nonfederal advisory body established by the Post-Katrina Act, on all
aspects of emergency management. On February 6, 2007, the NAC filed its
charter, which recites the NAC's broad array of statutory
responsibilities. According to the NAC's Charter, the NAC advises the
FEMA Administrator on all aspects of emergency management and
incorporates state, local, and tribal government and private sector
input in the development and revision of, among other things, the NRF,
the National Incident Management System (NIMS), and other related plans
and strategies.[Footnote 7] § 504(a)(13)-(14); see also § 508(b).
* Grants Programs Administration and Grants Risk-Analysis Model:
Responsibility for allocating and managing DHS grants is seated within
FEMA. As part of its grant-management responsibilities, FEMA relies on
other DHS components such as the National Protection and Programs
Directorate and the Office of Intelligence and Analysis in the
development of the risk-analysis model for grants allocation.[Footnote
8] According to DHS/FEMA's publicly available organizational chart,
FEMA's Grant Programs office, led by an assistant administrator,
reports to the FEMA Administrator/Deputy Administrator's office. §
504(a)(12).
* Continuity of Operations and Government: The FEMA Office of National
Continuity Programs is the lead agent for the federal executive branch
on matters concerning continuity of national operations. National
Continuity Programs develops and promulgates standards and guidance for
executive branch departments and agencies on a broad range of
continuity topics, such as preparation and implementation of continuity
of operations, continuity of government and contingency programs during
emergencies and national-level exercises, and others. § 504(a)(15).
* National Response Coordination Center: According to the NRF, the FEMA
Administrator's responsibilities include the operation of the National
Response Coordination Center. § 504(a)(17).
Areas to Be Addressed:
* Technical Assistance to Nonfederal Stakeholders: According to the NRF
Resource Site, FEMA's National Preparedness Directorate is developing
steps to help states, tribes, and localities to synchronize their plans
and training with the NRF. § 503(b)(2).
* NRF Revision: As we have previously reported, FEMA officials
acknowledge that the NRF will need to be revised in the future.
[Footnote 9] According to officials from FEMA's Office of Policy
and Program Analysis, as FEMA nears the revision date, FEMA will
establish further guidance and policies on how it will manage future
NRF revisions and how the NAC will be incorporated into the next NRF
revision process. FEMA officials said that current efforts are focused
on creating training materials to assist all stakeholders in
implementing the current NRF. The NAC has not yet determined how it
would like to be involved in the next NRF revision process. Although
the NAC's February 2007 charter provides a broad description of the
NAC's statutory responsibilities, including its advisory role in any
NRF revision, the charter does not detail any specific responsibilities
the NAC would undertake relative to the NRF revision process. According
to the NAC's chairman, the NAC's NRF subcommittee may focus its efforts
on helping FEMA train nonfederal stakeholders on the NRF. § 504(a)(13)-
(14); see also §§ 508(b), 509(b).
Challenges FEMA and DHS Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
Post-Katrina Act § 611 (Homeland Security Act § 505), Functions
Transferred:
Maintains existing FEMA functions as of June 1, 2006, while
transferring to FEMA functions performed by DHS's Directorate of
Preparedness (with certain exceptions).
Actions Taken:
* Transfers to FEMA: On September 11, 2007, the Secretary of Homeland
Security notified Congress that DHS completed the functional transfers
to FEMA as required by the Post-Katrina Act. According to the
secretary's letter, the new FEMA encompasses all FEMA functions and
Preparedness Directorate functions existing as of June 1, 2006 (except
for those elements of the Preparedness Directorate statutorily excluded
from the transfer). The secretary's letter stated that the transfers
were effective as of March 31, 2007, as specified by section 614(b)(3)
of the Post-Katrina Act. § 505.
Areas to Be Addressed:
* Delegations of Authority Document: According to FEMA's Office of
Policy
and Program Analysis, FEMA has drafted a document that specifically
addresses the amended delegations of authority made by the Post-Katrina
Act. § 505.
Challenges FEMA and DHS Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
Post-Katrina Act § 611 (Homeland Security Act § 506), Preserving the
Federal Emergency Management Agency:
Requires FEMA to be maintained as a distinct entity within DHS, exempts
FEMA from the scope of the secretary's reorganization authority, and
affords FEMA specific protections from changes to its mission,
including functional or asset transfers.
Actions Taken:
* Preservation of FEMA: According to FEMA's Office of Policy and
Program Analysis, and FEMA General Counsel, FEMA is not aware of any
transfers of funds or authorities in violation of the Post-Katrina Act.
§ 506.
Challenges FEMA and DHS Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
Post-Katrina Act § 611 (Homeland Security Act § 508), National Advisory
Council:
Establishes the NAC to advise the FEMA Administrator on all aspects of
emergency management. The NAC is to incorporate state, local, and
tribal government and private-sector input in the development and
revision of the national preparedness goal, the national preparedness
system, NIMS, the NRF, and other related plans and strategies. Also
specifies terms of office for members of the NAC, as well as the
geographic and substantive composition of NAC membership.
Actions Taken:
* NAC Establishment: The NAC has been established. The inaugural
meeting
was October 22-23, 2007. § 508(a).
* NAC Membership: The NAC consists of 35 members, representing a range
of
federal, state, and local stakeholders from the emergency-management
fields. Each member is appointed for a 3-year term. § 508(c).
* NAC Responsibilities: The NAC filed a charter on February 6, 2007.
The charter articulates the NAC's statutory responsibilities in terms
of advising the FEMA Administrator on all aspects of emergency
management, incorporating state, local, and tribal government and
private-sector input in the development and revision of all statutorily
required plans and strategies, such as the NRF. § 508(b).
Areas to Be Addressed:
* NAC Input into the Revision of the NRF: As we have previously
reported,
the NAC held its inaugural meeting on October 22, 2007, which was the
last day of the public comment period for the revision of the draft
NRF. As a result, the NAC's only involvement in the NRF revision
process occurred when FEMA provided it with a copy of a draft in
December 2007, 2 months after the public comment period closed.
According to the NAC chairman, the NAC gathered and consolidated
comments from individual members and provided these comments to the
FEMA Administrator approximately 1 month before FEMA published the NRF
in January 2008. The chairman noted that these comments were from
individual members and did not reflect the official comments of the NAC
as a whole. For the next NRF revision, the chairman stated that he
expected the NAC to be actively involved with FEMA throughout the
entire revision process. However, neither FEMA nor the NAC have
developed any guidance or policies describing specifically how the NAC
will be included in the next NRF revision process. § 508(b).
Challenges FEMA and DHS Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
Post-Katrina Act § 611 (Homeland Security Act § 509), National
Integration Center:
Establishes specific responsibilities for the National Integration
Center (NIC) to ensure ongoing management and maintenance of NIMS and
the NRF. Requires the Secretary of Homeland Security, through the FEMA
Administrator, to provide a clear chain of command in the NRF that
accounts for the roles of the FEMA Administrator, the Federal
Coordinating Officer (FCO), and the Principal Federal Official (PFO),
as amended by the Post-Katrina Act.
Actions Taken:
* Role of the NIC: According to the Web site for the NIC, it oversees
all aspects of NIMS including the development of compliance criteria
and implementation activities at federal, state, and local levels. The
NIC provides guidance and support to jurisdictions and incident
management and responder organizations as they adopt NIMS. The NIC
Incident Management Systems Integration Division was established by the
Secretary of Homeland Security to provide strategic direction for and
oversight of NIMS. § 509(b).
* Management and Maintenance of the NRF: As we have previously
reported, FEMA's NIC assisted in the development and issuance of the
2008 NRF, which was a revision of its predecessor, the 2004 NRP. The
NRF became effective in March 2008 and retained the basic structure of
the 2004 NRP. For example, like the 2004 NRP, the NRF's core document
describes the doctrine that guides national response actions and the
roles and responsibilities of officials and entities involved in
response efforts. Further, the NRF also includes Emergency Support
Functions (ESF), Support Annexes, and Incident Annexes. The 2008 NRF
constituted an update not only of the core plan, but an update of the
ESFs and the Support Annexes, although, as of August 1, 2008, not all
of the NRF's Incident Annexes have been updated and some of the NRP's
annexes remain in effect. § 509(b)(2).
* NRF's Volunteer and Donation Processes: In reviewing and revising the
NRF, the NIC was required to consult with the Corporation for National
and Community Service to establish a process to better use volunteers
and donations. Several of the NRF's revised ESFs and support annexes
address the use of volunteers and donations and designate
responsibilities for the Corporation for National and Community
Service. These include ESF-3, Public Works and Engineering; ESF-6, Mass
Care, Emergency Assistance, Housing, and Human Service; ESF-14, Long-
Term Community Recovery; ESF-15, External Affairs; and the Volunteer
and Donations Management Support Annex. § 509(b)(2).
* Chain of Command in the NRF: According to the NRF, four federal
officials, among others, play key roles in the chain of command for
leading/coordinating Federal responses--the Secretary of Homeland
Security, the FEMA Administrator, the PFO, and the FCO.
- Role of the Secretary of Homeland Security: As stated in the NRF, the
Secretary of Homeland Security is the principal federal official for
domestic incident management. When the overall coordination of federal
response activities is required, it is implemented through the
Secretary of Homeland Security. The secretary's duties include
providing the President with an overall architecture for domestic
incident management and coordinating the federal response when
required, while relying upon support of other federal partners.
Depending upon the incident, the secretary also contributes elements of
the response consistent with DHS's mission, capabilities, and
authorities.
- Role of the FEMA Administrator: As stated in the NRF, the FEMA
Administrator reports to the Secretary of Homeland Security and assists
the secretary in meeting his or her responsibilities. The FEMA
Administrator is the principal advisor to the President, the Secretary
of Homeland Security, and the Homeland Security Council on all matters
regarding emergency management. According to the NRF, the FEMA
Administrator's duties include the effective support of all ESFs, and,
more generally, preparation for, protection against, response to, and
recovery from all-hazards incidents.
- Role of the PFO: According to the NRF, the Secretary of Homeland
Security may elect to designate a PFO to serve as his or her primary
field representative to ensure consistency of federal support as well
as the overall effectiveness of federal incident management. The NRF
repeats the Post-Katrina Act's prohibition that the PFO shall not
direct or replace the incident command structure established at the
incident or have directive authority over the FCO or other federal and
state officials. The PFO's duties include providing situational
awareness and a primary point of contact in the field for the
secretary; promoting federal interagency collaboration and conflict
resolution where possible; presenting to the secretary any policy
issues that require resolution; and acting as the primary federal
spokesperson for coordinated media and public communications. According
to the NRF, the following criteria limit the instances in which a PFO
may be assigned:
- The secretary will only appoint a PFO for catastrophic or unusually
complex incidents that require extraordinary coordination.
- The secretary may assign a PFO in cases in which FEMA should not be
the lead agency in charge of the response. For example, according to
DHS's Office of Operations Coordination, in the event that a nuclear
weapon was smuggled into the United States, the secretary may appoint a
PFO during the search for the weapon to coordinate prevention and law
enforcement incident management activities. An agency other than FEMA,
such as the Department of Justice's Federal Bureau of Investigation,
may be the lead agency in charge of the response. The PFO would be
appointed to promote interagency collaboration and seek resolution for
policy issues that arise.
- The secretary may assign a PFO in major non-Stafford Act events that
include a Stafford Act component. For example, according to DHS's
Office of Operations Coordination, a cyberattack initiated against the
United States may be a major non-Stafford Act event requiring incident
management. The cyberattack's effect upon a hydroelectric dam
operator's software could potentially result in a dam bursting and a
Stafford Act declaration being made for the resulting flooding. A PFO
could be appointed to manage incident activities associated with the
cyberattack, such as law enforcement and information-technology
response efforts; whereas the President would appoint an FCO to
coordinate flooding response activities for the Stafford Act component
of the event.
According to DHS officials, no PFOs have been operationally deployed
for a Stafford Act event since the response to Hurricane Katrina.
[Footnote 10]
- Role of the FCO: As stated in the NRF, for Stafford Act incidents
(i.e., presidentially-declared emergencies or major disasters), upon
the recommendation of the FEMA Administrator and the Secretary of
Homeland Security, the President appoints an FCO. According to the NRF,
the primary role and responsibilities of the FCO include the following:
- The FCO represents the FEMA Administrator in the field to discharge
all FEMA responsibilities for the response and recovery efforts
underway.
- The FCO has responsibility for administering Stafford Act
authorities, including the commitment of FEMA resources and the
issuance of mission assignments to other federal departments or
agencies.
- Within the Unified Coordination Group at the Joint Field Office, the
FCO is the primary federal official responsible for coordinating,
integrating, and synchronizing federal response activities.
- The FCO is the primary federal representative with whom the State
Coordinating Officer and other state, tribal, and local response
officials interface to determine the most urgent needs and set
objectives for an effective response in collaboration with the Unified
Coordination Group. § 509(c).
Areas to Be Addressed:
* Management and Maintenance of the NRF: Although the NRF acknowledges
the need for periodic review and revision, which is required by the
Post-Katrina Act, the NRF does not specify any procedures,
circumstances, or time frames for its review and revision, as did its
predecessor, the NRP. FEMA officials said that the process established
for the NRP revision would not apply to any NRF revisions because the
NAC was not involved in the NRP revision. However, FEMA has not yet
developed guidance and procedures for any future NRF revisions because
of the need to create training materials to assist stakeholders in
implementing the current NRF. § 509(b).
* NRF Catastrophic Incident Annex and Supplement: The NIC is
statutorily
responsible for revising the Catastrophic Incident Annex to the NRF and
for finalizing and releasing the Catastrophic Incident Supplement to
the annex. FEMA officials stated that FEMA's Disaster Operations
Directorate would provide subject matter expertise to assist NIC in
producing these documents. However, as of August 1, 2008, the NIC had
not revised the Catastrophic Incident Annex to conform with the NRF,
and the annex is still based on the NRF's predecessor, the now
superseded NRP. The release of the Catastrophic Incident Supplement is
also pending. § 509(b)(2).
Challenges FEMA and DHS Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
Post-Katrina Act § 611 (Homeland Security Act § 514), Department and
Agency Officials:
Grants the President the authority to appoint no more than four FEMA
Deputy Administrators with the advice and consent of the Senate,
establishes an Assistant Secretary for Cybersecurity and Communications
within DHS, and requires the Administrator for the United States Fire
Administration to have a rank equivalent to an Assistant Secretary of
Homeland Security.
Actions Taken:
* FEMA Deputy Administrators: FEMA's senior leadership includes two
deputy administrators--the Deputy Administrator and Chief Operating
Officer and the Deputy Administrator for National Preparedness. On June
27, 2008, Harvey E. Johnson Jr. was confirmed by the Senate to be
Deputy Administrator and Chief Operating Officer of FEMA. On August 3,
2007, Dennis R. Schrader was confirmed by the Senate to be Deputy
Administrator for National Preparedness at FEMA. § 514(a).
* DHS Assistant Secretary for Cybersecurity and Communications: Gregory
T. Garcia was appointed by Secretary Michael Chertoff on September 18,
2006, to be the first Assistant Secretary for Cyber Security and
Communications for DHS, within DHS's Preparedness Directorate (now
DHS's National Protection and Programs Directorate). § 514(b).
* Administrator for the United States Fire Administration: According to
FEMA's Office of Policy and Program Analysis, and DHS/FEMA's publicly
available organizational chart, the position of the United States Fire
Administrator is now an Assistant Administrator within FEMA. According
to FEMA's Office of Policy and Program Analysis, this is equivalent to
an Assistant Secretary at DHS. § 514(c).
Challenges FEMA and DHS Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
Post-Katrina Act § 611 (Homeland Security Act § 515), National
Operations Center:
Establishes the National Operations Center (NOC) as the principal DHS
operations center, which is to provide situational awareness for the
federal government and for state, local, and tribal governments as
appropriate, in the event of a natural or man-made disaster or act of
terrorism. The NOC is also to ensure that critical terrorism and
disaster-related information reaches government decision makers.
Actions Taken:
* Establishment of the NOC: Located in Washington, D.C., the Homeland
Security Operations Center was established on February 19, 2003, and
redesignated the NOC on May 25, 2006. § 515(b).
* NOC Mission: NOC is a standing inter-and intraagency organization
that fuses law enforcement, national intelligence, emergency response,
and private sector suspicious activity reporting and serves as a focal
point for natural and man-made crisis management and coordination. The
NOC--which operates 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year--
coordinates information sharing to help deter, detect, and prevent
terrorist acts and to manage domestic incidents. § 515(b).
Challenges FEMA and DHS Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
Post-Katrina Act § 611 (Homeland Security Act § 516), Chief Medical
Officer:
Establishes the role of the Chief Medical Officer in DHS, who shall be
appointed by the President, with the advice and consent of the Senate,
and delineates the position's responsibilities, including serving as
the principal advisor to the Secretary of Homeland Security and the
FEMA Administrator on medical and public health issues.
Actions Taken:
* Appointment of Chief Medical Officer: In July 2005, DHS Secretary
Michael Chertoff appointed Dr. Jeff Runge to be the department's first
Chief Medical Officer. Subsequently, in October, 2007, President Bush
nominated Dr. Runge to become the first DHS Assistant Secretary for
Health Affairs and Chief Medical Officer, which was confirmed by the
Senate on December 19, 2007. Dr. Runge resigned from both positions as
of August 2008. Dr. Jon R. Krohmer is the current Acting Assistant
Secretary for Health Affairs and Chief Medical Officer. § 516(a).
Challenges FEMA and DHS Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
Post-Katrina Act § 687 (Stafford Act § 302), Coordinating Officers:
Grants the President the authority to appoint a single Federal
Coordinating Officer (FCO) for a multistate major disaster or emergency
and such Deputy FCOs as the President determines appropriate to assist
the FCO.
Actions Taken:
* Federal Coordinating Officers for Multistate Major Disasters:
According to the Director of the FEMA Office of Federal Coordinating
Officer (FCO) Operations, the President has not, as of August 1, 2008,
appointed a single FCO for a multistate major disaster. In his view,
the President could have done so even before the passage of the Post-
Katrina Act; however, according to the Director of the FCO Office,
historically the general practice has been to have one FCO appointed
per state for multistate disasters. He further stated that FEMA
currently has 21 FCOs predesignated for each state from Maine to
Florida and along the Gulf Coast for the 2008 Hurricane Season. In the
event that a single FCO is appointed to lead a multistate disaster, he
said, the individual predesignated state FCOs would likely serve as the
multistate FCO's deputies. § 302(d).
Areas to Be Addressed:
* Policies and Procedures for Multistate FCOs: According to the
Director of the FCO Office, FEMA provides the President with
recommendations about whom to appoint as an FCO for a given Stafford
Act declaration, but FEMA currently has no predesignated multistate
FCOs and has not developed guidance to govern the process for
recommending a multistate FCO for appointment. Further, FEMA has not
developed guidance addressing the procedures FEMA would follow if the
President exercised the authority to appoint a multistate FCO. §
302(d).
Challenges FEMA and DHS Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
For Further Reading:
* U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Federal Emergency Management
Agency. "Homeland Security Grant Program Guidance and Application Kit."
[hyperlink,
http://www.fema.gov/txt/government/grant/hsgp/fy08_hsgp_guide.txt]
(accessed on Sept. 19, 2008).
* U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Federal Emergency Management
Agency. "National Response Framework." [hyperlink,
http://www.fema.gov/emergency/nrf/] (accessed on Sept. 19, 2008).
[End of section]
Enclosure III: Supporting and Enhancing Emergency Communications:
Post-Katrina Act § 671[Footnote 11] (Homeland Security Act § 1801),
Office of Emergency Communications:
Establishes the Office of Emergency Communications (OEC) in DHS and
enumerates the duties of the office and its director.
Actions Taken:
* Establishment: OEC became operational on April 1, 2007, and is
located within the Office of Cybersecurity and Communications in DHS's
National Protection and Programs Directorate. As of August 1, 2008, the
Director of OEC was Chris Essid. § 1801(a)-(b).
* SAFECOM and Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004
[Footnote 12] (IPRTA) Responsibilities: SAFECOM--a DHS program intended
to strengthen interoperable public safety communications at all levels
of government--has been designated as the program responsible for
carrying out certain requirements in both the Post-Katrina Act and
IRPTA, according to the Director of the Office for Interoperability and
Compatibility (OIC). OEC and OIC share responsibility in administering
SAFECOM.[Footnote 13] OEC administers elements of SAFECOM responsible
for the development of tools, guidance, and templates on communication-
related issues, while OIC is responsible for SAFECOM's research,
development, testing, evaluation, and standards activities, according
to DHS officials. § 1801(c)(1)-(2), (d)(1),
(e)(1).
* Transferred Functions: In addition to SAFECOM, OEC has assumed
responsibility of the Interoperable Communications Technical Assistance
Program and DHS's responsibilities related to the Integrated Wireless
Network program, according to the Deputy Director of OEC. § 1801(c)(2)-
(3),(d).
* Conducting Outreach: According to officials in DHS's National
Protection and Programs Directorate, OEC's stakeholder outreach efforts
included coordinating with 150 individuals from the emergency response
community to develop the National Emergency Communications Plan. These
officials stated that the outreach was primarily carried out through
several organizations that represent officials from federal, state, and
local governments and private-sector representatives from the
communications, information technology, and emergency services
sectors. According to these officials, OEC plans to work with the
emergency response community to implement the National Emergency
Communications Plan through these institutions and other stakeholder
outreach mechanisms. As of August 1, 2008, OEC was also providing
technical assistance to states and reviewing state interoperability
plans as part of its outreach efforts, according to OEC officials. §
1801(c)(4)-(5).
* Technical Assistance: Through the Interoperable Communications
Technical Assistance Program, OEC has been working with Urban Area
Working Groups and states to assess their communications infrastructure
for gaps and determine technical requirements that can be used to
design or enhance interoperable communications systems. According to
the Deputy Director of OEC, OEC provided technical assistance to 13
recipients of the 2007 Urban Area Security Initiative grants by
providing guidance on technical issues such as engineering solutions
and drafting requests for proposals, as well as providing best
practices information. In addition, OEC offered assistance to states
and territories in developing their Statewide Communication
Interoperability Plans (SCIP) and, as of August 1, 2008, conducted SCIP
development workshops for the 30 states and five territories that
requested such help, according to testimony from the Director of OEC
and the Under Secretary for the National Protection and Programs
Directorate. § 1801(c)(6), (d)(3).
* Coordination of Regional Emergency Communications Efforts: Officials
in DHS's National Protection and Programs Directorate told us that, as
of August 1, 2008, there were no formal agreements between OEC, FEMA,
and the National Communications System[Footnote 14] regarding regional
coordination activities; however, these three DHS elements have been
coordinating to minimize any overlap between the roles and
responsibilities of various DHS regional staff offices related to
emergency communications. According to the officials, these regional
staff offices plan to attend Regional Emergency Communications
Coordination (RECC) working group meetings and to share information
through the RECC working groups. According to OEC officials, OEC has
hired a federal employee to represent OEC at RECC working group
meetings. In addition, OEC intends to hire regional interoperability
coordinators for each of the 10 FEMA regional offices in fiscal year
2009. These coordinators are to work with FEMA on the activities of the
RECC working groups. § 1801(c)(7), (e)(2).
* Coordinating the Establishment of a National Response Capability for
a Catastrophic Loss of Local and Regional Emergency Communications:
Officials in the National Protection and Programs Directorate told us
that OEC works closely with FEMA and the National Communications System
to coordinate policy and planning efforts relating to the existing
response capability managed through the National Response Framework's
Communication Annex, Emergency Support Function 2.[Footnote 15]
According to these officials, an example of this coordination was the
inclusion of continuity of emergency communications and response
operations in the recently released National Emergency Communications
Plan. These officials also said that OEC will represent the National
Communication System in regions where the system has no presence and
support the system's private-sector coordination role as appropriate.
In addition, the Director and Deputy Director of OEC told us that OEC,
FEMA, and the National Communications System are in the early stages of
developing a strategy that involves the use of OEC's regional
interoperability coordinators to provide technical support, play a role
as needed in Emergency Support Function 2, coordinate with OIC SAFECOM
officials and provide response capabilities within their designated
regions. According to officials in the National Protection and Programs
Directorate, FEMA's Mobile Emergency Response Support and Incident
Management Assistance Team assets can also support state and local
officials with emergency communications during disasters. § 1801(c)(9),
(e)(2).
* Best-Practices Sharing: OEC has conducted a review of best practices
in emergency communications. Much of this information is available at
www.llis.gov, an online network of lessons learned and best practices
for emergency response providers and homeland security officials. OEC
also provided best practices information in its March 2008 progress
report on emergency communications. According to the Director and
Deputy Director of OEC, additional information on emergency
communications best practices will be included in future iterations of
the progress report. Furthermore, to facilitate information sharing
within the emergency management community at the federal, state, and
local levels, OEC plans to create a Web portal and central repository
for best practices information related to emergency communications,
according to OEC officials. In addition, according to OEC and OIC
officials, they will continue to maintain the SAFECOM Web site, which
holds tools, templates, and best practice guidance documents. §
1801(c)(8).
* Consensus Standards: In coordination with OEC, OIC has continued to
help establish and promote nonproprietary, voluntary consensus
standards for public safety radio and data communications systems and
equipment through participation in Project 25 (P25). P25 is an existing
venture that partners the emergency response communications community
with industry manufacturers to publish a suite of standards for
interoperable digital two-way wireless communications that meet the
needs of emergency response practitioners. § 1801(c)(11), (e)(1); see
also Homeland Security Act § 314(a)(2), (4), as added by section 672 of
the Post-Katrina Act.
* Review of Interoperability Plans: OEC, in coordination with FEMA's
Grant Programs Directorate[Footnote 16] and the Department of
Commerce's National Telecommunications and Information Administration,
oversaw a peer review of the SCIPs in March 2008. All 56 SCIPs for U.S.
states and territories were reviewed and approved by April 14, 2008,
according to OEC officials. Officials in DHS's National Protection and
Programs Directorate stated that FEMA's Disaster Operations Directorate
will be included in the review process for future plans to ensure that
shortfalls identified in the FEMA assisted statewide communications
plans are addressed. In addition, these officials also stated that
FEMA's regional disaster emergency communications staff will be
included in the reviews to ensure that regional issues are considered.
§ 1801(c)(12).
Challenges FEMA and DHS Officials Identified:
* According to officials in DHS's National Protection and Programs
Directorate, DHS confronted a number of issues in its original efforts
to fully comply with relevant statutory requirements contained in the
Post-Katrina Act, while balancing the delivery of essential technical
services to achieve emergency communications mission objectives. For
example, the Post-Katrina Act requires FEMA to perform certain
activities related to building operable and interoperable
communications capabilities that are nearly identical to some of OEC's
statutory responsibilities and also overlapped with other duties
assigned to the Secretary of Homeland Security.[Footnote 17] The Post-
Katrina Act also prohibits the transfer of assets, functions, or
missions from FEMA to DHS. As a result, according to these officials, a
number of interpretations were possible regarding the assignment of
responsibility for these certain emergency communications activities,
but the flexibility afforded to the secretary to make determinations
about how to assign these duties to minimize overlap is not clear.
Further, the officials noted that the requirement that the FEMA
Administrator minimize reporting requirements for state, local, and
tribal governments complicated reconciliation of the role conflicts,
particularly with respect to OEC's responsibilities for conducting
extensive outreach to the same set of stakeholders.
* In addition, according to OEC officials, OEC has had difficulties
finding high-quality candidates to fill specialized positions.
According to these officials, OEC has been seeking federal detailees
from within DHS, but has had limited success finding suitable
candidates. At the time of our work, OEC had been able to secure three
detailees from the Federal Communications Commission. The Director of
OIC said that his office has also provided support to OEC to compensate
for the staffing shortage. Officials in the National Protection and
Programs Directorate told us that OEC has made progress in filling its
full-time equivalent vacancies. According to these officials, OEC has
recently hired nine additional full-time equivalents with several
candidates currently in the pipeline. OEC officials also said they are
continuing to advertise available positions.
Post-Katrina Act § 671 (Homeland Security Act § 1803), Assessments and
Reports:
Requires a baseline assessment and inventory of emergency
communications capabilities and subsequent reports on DHS's progress in
achieving its goals in carrying out the emergency communications
requirements in the Post-Katrina Act.
Actions Taken:
* Baseline Assessment: OEC addressed the Post-Katrina Act requirement
for a baseline assessment by preparing the National Communications
Capabilities Report in two phases. OEC submitted an initial report
(phase 1) to Congress in March 2008. This report addresses the elements
described in section 1803(a) of the Homeland Security Act, as amended.
OEC issued phase 2--final results--of the report in July 2008.
According to the phase 2 report, it broadened the sample of federal and
local agency information and validated phase 1 findings, incorporated
state and tribal data from the SCIPs, and expanded the scope of
emergency response providers beyond government agencies to include
private sector entities. Further, it says phase 2 compiles all of these
findings to provide a comprehensive assessment on the state of
interoperable emergency communications. § 1803(a).
* Progress Report: In March 2008, DHS submitted a progress report to
Congress that addresses the elements described in section 1803(d) of
the Homeland Security Act, as amended. § 1803(d).
Challenges FEMA and DHS Officials Reported:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
Post-Katrina Act § 671 (Homeland Security Act § 1804), Coordination of
Department Emergency Communications Grant Programs:
Requires OEC to ensure that homeland security grant guidelines are
consistent with the goals and recommendations in the National Emergency
Communications Plan.
Actions Taken:
* Coordination on Developing Grant Guidance: According to senior OEC
officials, OEC and FEMA's Grant Programs Directorate have been working
together to develop the Interoperable Emergency Communications Grant
Program and guidance for the Homeland Security Grant Program to ensure
that the guidance for these grants is consistent with the goals of the
National Emergency Communications Plan. The purpose of the
Interoperable Emergency Communications Grant Program, according to DHS
officials, is to enable state, territorial, and local governments to
implement their SCIPs. For fiscal year 2008, all 56 states and
territories have submitted applications for this grant program.
According to DHS officials, funds were awarded by September 30, 2008.
The Interoperable Emergency Communications Grant Guidance and
Application Kit included program funding goals and application
requirements to ensure consistency between the goals and objectives of
the National Emergency Communications Plan (NECP) and each state and
territory's respective SCIP. OEC and FEMA Grants Program Directorate
partnered to conduct the federal review process of the grant
applications, to better ensure compliance with programmatic goals and
requirements of the Interoperable Emergency Communications Grant
Program. OEC and FEMA Grants Program Directorate are now in the process
of developing the fiscal year 2009 Interoperable Emergency
Communications Grant Guidance and Application Kit. § 1804(a).
* Grant Guidelines: According to OEC officials, OEC, in coordination
with OIC, has developed SAFECOM's coordinated guidance for federal
grant programs. The guidance has been incorporated into the fiscal year
2007 and 2008 Homeland Security Grant Program and the fiscal year 2007
Public Safety Interoperable Communications Grant Program. Efforts are
underway to incorporate the guidance into FY 2009 interoperable
emergency communications-related grant guidance. § 1804(a).
Challenges FEMA and DHS Officials Reported:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
Post-Katrina Act § 671 (Homeland Security Act § 1806), Emergency
Communications Preparedness Center:
Requires DHS, the Federal Communications Commission, the Department of
Defense, the Department of Commerce, the Department of Justice, and
other federal departments and agencies to operate jointly an Emergency
Communications Preparedness Center in accordance with a Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU). This center is, among other things, to serve as
the focal point and information clearinghouse for federal interagency
emergency communications efforts.
Actions Taken:
* Charter: According to OEC officials, OEC currently chairs the
Emergency Communications Preparedness Center working group. The
officials said that the working group has drafted an MOU that will
serve as the center's charter. § 1806(b).
Areas to Be Addressed:
* Establishment: The Emergency Communications Preparedness Center will
not be officially established until the MOU has been approved by the
signatory agencies, according to the Deputy Director of OEC. The deputy
director said that DHS, as of August 1, 2008, was still reviewing the
draft MOU. The deputy director also said that he does not know when the
MOU will be signed. § 1806(a)-(b).
* Strategic Assessment: The Post-Katrina Act requires the center to
prepare for Congress an annual strategic assessment on federal
coordination to advance the continuity and interoperability of
emergency communications, which it has not yet done, as the center has
not been officially established. The Deputy Director of OEC said that
although the center has not been formally established, OEC is preparing
a strategic assessment report, with input from the working group that
drafted the MOU, to be completed by the end of the calendar year. §
1806(c)(2).
Challenges FEMA and DHS Officials Reported:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
Post-Katrina Act § 672 (Homeland Security Act § 314), Office for
Interoperability and Compatibility, and Post-Katrina Act § 673
(Homeland Security Act § 315), Emergency Communications
Interoperability Research and Development:
Section 314 clarifies the responsibilities of the Director of OIC in
establishing standards, conducting research, development, testing, and
evaluation activities, and performing other duties; it also requires
OIC to coordinate with OEC with respect to the SAFECOM program.
Additionally, section 315 requires OIC to conduct research and
development for interoperability and further articulates the purposes
of that program.
Actions Taken:
* SAFECOM and Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act
Responsibilities: OIC administers the research, development, testing,
evaluation, and standards elements of the SAFECOM program, which
addresses its responsibility for carrying out certain requirements in
both the Post-Katrina Act and the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism
Prevention Act,[Footnote 18] according to the Director of OIC. §
314(a)(1), (5).
* Consensus Standards: OIC works with the National Institute of
Standards and Technology to accelerate the development of the P25 suite
of standards and equipment. In addition, OIC, according to its
Director, promotes standards for channel nomenclature for the public
safety interoperability channels. According to the Public Safety
National Coordination Committee, a common nomenclature enables
responders from different jurisdictions to know which radio channels to
use to communicate with one another during an incident. OIC promotes
the adoption of these standards through conferences, newsletters,
industry and responder publications, manuals, and other materials that
can be found at www.safecomprogram.gov. OIC is also partnering with
emergency responders, federal agencies, and standards development
organizations to accelerate the creation of data messaging standards
called Emergency Data Exchange Language, according to OIC officials.
The officials stated that these standards will create information
sharing capabilities between disparate emergency response software
applications, systems, and devices, allowing emergency responders to
share data seamlessly and securely when responding to an incident. §
314(a)(2), (4); see also Post-Katrina Act §§ 1801(c)(11), 1804(b)(2).
* Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation: The Director of OIC
said that OIC considers the Research, Development, Testing, and
Evaluation (RDT&E) programs described in sections 314(a)(3) and 315 of
the Homeland Security Act, as amended, as the same program. The
Director of OIC said an example of OIC's RDT&E activities is Digital
Radio Vocoder testing. In 2006, firefighters were reporting
communication problems with their radios due to background noise. A
working group that included emergency responders and industry
representatives determined that the problem was with the vocoders, the
component in a radio that converts speech into digital signals and vice
versa. As of August 1, 2008, OIC, in conjunction with its partners, was
performing tests to solve this problem. In addition, OIC, through
SAFECOM, and in conjunction with its partners, developed evaluation
criteria for the Tactical Interoperable Communications Scorecards,
according to the Director of OIC. These scorecards were designed to
assess the maturity of interoperable communications capabilities in
certain urban areas. The following are examples, but not a
comprehensive list of OIC RDT&E activities. For more information see
www.safecomprogram.gov.
- Evaluation and Assessment of New Technology: According to the
Director of OIC, DHS uses the P25 Compliance Assessment Program to
assess new technology. This program establishes a process for ensuring
that radio communication equipment complies with P25 standards and is
capable of interoperating across manufacturers.
- Testing Public Safety Communications Systems: According to the
Director of OIC, an example of OIC's testing of public safety
communications systems is the Radio over Wireless Broadband research
project. Radio over Wireless Broadband is intended to research how to
connect to existing land mobile radio systems with advanced wireless
broadband technologies, such as push-to-talk cellular, while leveraging
Geographic Information System technology. According to OIC officials, a
demonstration of this technology was held in Washington, D.C., in
August 2008.
- Pilot Projects: One of the pilots that OIC is currently administering
is the Multi-Band Radio project. The multi-band radio is a device that
can operate on all public-safety radio bands. OIC intends to test and
evaluate the multi-band radio through pilots nationwide. In February
2008, DHS awarded a $6.275 million, 1-year contract to demonstrate the
first portable multi-band radio.
- Other RTD&E Activities: According to OIC officials, OIC will launch a
program to support the development of technologies to increase the
number of commercial mobile service devices that can receive emergency
alerts. Additionally, OIC officials stated that FEMA has asked OIC to
assist in developing standards and protocols, providing technical
advice, coordinating with industry, and supporting and managing
technical demonstrations of applicable technologies for the Integrated
Public Alert Warning System. As of August 1, 2008, OIC is working to
improve bridge devices that connect radio systems for emergency
responders, and enable Computer Aided Dispatch systems to exchange
information across jurisdictions, according to OIC officials. §§
314(a)(3), (6), (8), (10), 315.
* Establishing Interoperable Emergency Communications Requirements:
According to OIC officials, OIC defined the operational and functional
requirements for voice and data communication in day-to-day, task
force, and mutual aid operations in its Public Safety Statement of
Requirements, which was released in 2004. A second volume of this
document was released on August 18, 2006. DHS officials stated that
these requirements help drive the identification of key interface
standards and the development of technologies that meet emergency
response requirements. These officials also stated that OIC and OEC
continually work with SAFECOM's Executive Committee and Emergency
Response Council to establish requirements that respond to the needs of
the emergency response community. Additionally, through its
Interoperability Capstone Integration Product Team process, OIC works
with FEMA and OEC to identify and prioritize operational capability
gaps and requirements to enable DHS to make informed decisions about
technology investments, according to the DHS officials. To promote
vendor adoption of certain interoperability standards for data (as
defined by the Statement of Requirements), OIC, according to its
director, developed a software package, using nonproprietary standards,
and distributed it to certain federal agencies for free. The Director
of OIC said that vendors had to adopt these standards in order to
provide the agencies with devices compatible with the free software
package. The Director of OIC also said that OIC is drafting Request for
Proposals (RFP) language to encourage the use of nonpropriety
standards. For example, OIC has developed a data messaging standards
guide for RFPs. According to OIC officials, the guide provides language
requiring manufacturers to incorporate data messaging standards into
their products. § 314(a)(2), (4); see also Post-Katrina Act §§
1801(c)(11), 1804(b)(2).
* Encouraging Efficiency: OIC, according to its Director, developed the
Interoperability Continuum to encourage more efficient use of existing
resources to achieve interoperability. The continuum is a tool designed
to assist emergency response agencies and policy makers to plan and
implement interoperability solutions by identifying elements that must
be addressed to achieve interoperability solutions. OIC also developed
an operational guide for this tool. To further promote efficiency, OIC
encourages the use of mutual aid agreements for instances when a large
number of agencies, personnel, and equipment from neighboring regions
and states must be brought in to assist the affected jurisdiction,
according to OIC officials. The officials stated that OIC describes
specific cases where mutual aid agreements would be beneficial in its
Statement of Requirements. The officials also stated that OIC developed
the Writing Guide for a Memorandum of Understanding to assist
localities in creating formal agreements to address multiorganization
coordination and communications.§ 314(a)(7).
* Private Sector Coordination: According to the Director of OIC, OIC
coordinates with private sector vendors through meetings, conferences,
round table discussions, and other venues to develop solutions to
improve emergency communications and interoperability. § 314(a)(9).
* SAFECOM Coordination: According to OIC officials, OIC and OEC
coordinate together to develop tools and guidance documents for
improving interoperability. The officials reported that OIC has
transitioned several of the tools that it has developed to OEC for
distribution to the emergency response community. OIC and OEC also work
together managing SAFECOM's Executive Committee and the Emergency
Response Council, and share responsibility for maintaining the SAFECOM
Web site, according to OIC officials. In addition, OIC officials stated
that OIC and OEC coordinate to report to the Office of Management and
Budget on SAFECOM activities. Moreover, OIC and OEC leadership meet on
a regular basis to maintain continuity in the SAFECOM program and
ensure that the two offices are collaborating, including jointly
participating in the DHS Science and Technology Directorate's
Interoperability Integrated Product Team, according to OIC officials.
Lastly, OIC officials stated that OIC has also provided resources,
including staff, to assist OEC as it continues to stand up the office.
§ 314(b).
Areas to Be Addressed:
* SAFECOM Coordination: The Director of OIC said that OIC does not have
a formal mechanism in place to ensure coordination with OEC for their
shared SAFECOM program responsibilities. However, the Deputy Director
of OEC said that he was in the process of developing a written
agreement to institutionalize the working relationships and agreements
about roles and responsibilities between OEC and OIC/SAFECOM. § 314(b).
Challenges FEMA and DHS Officials Reported:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
Post-Katrina Act § 674, 911 and E911 Services Report:
Requires the Federal Communications Commission to submit a report to
Congress on the status of efforts of state, local, and tribal
governments to develop plans for rerouting 911 and E911 services in the
event that public safety answering points are disabled during
disasters.
Actions Taken:
* Report: In September 2007, the Federal Communications Commission
submitted to Congress the report titled Rerouting 911 and E911 Services
when Public Safety Answering Points Are Disabled. § 674.
Challenges FEMA and DHS Officials Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
For Further Reading:
National Public Safety Telecommunications Council. Channel Naming
Report. Littleton, Colo.: June 2007.
U.S. Congress. House. Subcommittee on Emergency Communications,
Preparedness and Response and the Subcommittee on Management,
Investigations, and Oversight, Committee on Homeland Security.
Statement of Matt Jadacki, Deputy Inspector General for Disaster
Assistance Oversight, U.S. Department Of Homeland Security. 110th
Cong., 1st sess., February 28, 2007.
U.S. Congress. Senate. Committee on Homeland Security and Government
Affairs. Statement of R. David Paulison, Administrator, Federal
Emergency Management Agency, U.S. Department of Homeland Security.
110th Cong., 2nd sess., April 3, 2008.
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. National Emergency Communications
Plan. Washington, D.C.: July 2008.
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. National Communications
Capabilities Report: Phase 1, Initial Results. Washington, D.C.: March
2008.
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Progress Report to Congress on
Emergency Communications. Washington, D.C.: March 2008.
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Tactical Interoperable
Communications Scorecards: Summary Report and Findings. Washington,
D.C.: January 2007.
U.S. Department of Homeland Security, SAFECOM. Public Safety Statement
of Requirements for Communications & Interoperability, Volume 1,
Version 1.2. Washington, D.C.: October 2006.
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Operational Guide for the
Interoperability Continuum: Lessons Learned from RapidCom. Washington,
D.C.: September 2005.
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Federal Emergency Management
Agency. "Interoperable Communications Technical Assistance Program."
[hyperlink, http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/odp/ta_ictap.htm] (accessed on
Sept. 5, 2008).
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Federal Emergency Management
Agency. Lessons Learned Information Sharing. [hyperlink,
https://www.llis.dhs.gov/index.do] (accessed Nov. 12, 2008).
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. National Response Framework
Resource Center. "Annexes." [hyperlink,
http://www.fema.gov/emergency/nrf/] (accessed on Sept. 5, 2008).
U.S. Department of Homeland Security SAFECOM. "Interoperability
Basics." [hyperlink,
http://www.safecomprogram.gov/SAFECOM/library/interoperabilitybasics/]
(accessed on Sept. 5, 2008).
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. SAFECOM. "Technology Solutions &
Standards." [hyperlink,
http://www.safecomprogram.gov/SAFECOM/library/technology/]
(accessed on Sept. 5, 2008).
U.S. Department of Homeland Security SAFECOM. "Interoperability
Continuum Brochure." [hyperlink,
http://www.safecomprogram.gov/SAFECOM/library/interoperabilitybasics/119
0_interoperabilitycontinuum.htm] (accessed on Sept. 5, 2008).
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. SAFECOM. "P25 Compliance
Assessment Fact Sheet." [hyperlink,
http://www.safecomprogram.gov/SAFECOM/press/factsheets/1338.htm]
(accessed on Oct. 22, 2008).
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. SAFECOM. "Radio Over Wireless
Broadband Project Fact Sheet." [hyperlink,
http://www.safecomprogram.gov/SAFECOM/press/factsheets/1325.htm]
(accessed on Oct. 22, 2008).
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. SAFECOM. "Multi-Band Radio
Project Fact Sheet." [hyperlink,
http://www.safecomprogram.gov/SAFECOM/press/factsheets/1363.htm]
(accessed on Oct. 22, 2008).
U.S. Federal Communications Commission. Rerouting 911 and E911 Services
when Public Safety Answering Points Are Disabled. Washington, D.C.:
September 2007.
[End of section]
Enclosure IV: Providing Assistance to Disaster-Affected Areas and
Populations:
Post-Katrina Act § 639, Basic Life Supporting First Aid and Education:
Requires the FEMA Administrator to enter into agreements with
organizations to provide funds for emergency response providers to
provide life supporting first aid education and training to children.
Actions Taken:
* Agreements to Provide First Aid Education to Children: According to
officials in FEMA's National Preparedness Directorate, FEMA, through an
award funded by the fiscal year 2008 Competitive Training Grants
Program, funded the American College of Emergency Physicians to design,
develop, and deliver all-hazards preparedness training for children and
adults through interactive Web-based content. The training is to
include first aid and other life-saving education topics. The audience
for the training is to be responders, caregivers (such as day care
professionals), and parents. Training is also to be directed at
children in grades 1 through 8, using age-appropriate interactive Web-
based games, lessons, practice scenarios, and knowledge tests. The
award amount is $1,706,225. The award end date is currently September
30, 2011. These officials also noted that the fiscal year 2008
Competitive Training Grants Program funded the Partnership for
Environmental Technology Education to train U.S. citizens on specific
protective actions to save lives and minimize injuries after a disaster
and before the arrival of first responders. The award amount is
$3,500,000 and end date is September 30, 2011. According to the
officials, in addition to these programs, FEMA currently supports Teen
Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) training, which targets high
school students. Teen CERT training is a component of the national CERT
Program and includes substantial training on life-supporting first aid.
These officials told us that FEMA, through the Homeland Security Grant
Program (HSGP), provides funding to states for providing life-
supporting first-aid education to children through the Citizen Corps
Program. They said that CERT may also be funded by HSGP grants to the
states, which are passed through to local emergency responder
organizations who conduct the local CERT and Teen CERT training. In
addition, FEMA grants are used to provide training to CERT and Teen
CERT trainers, building capacity to deliver direct training to greater
numbers of high school students. § 639.
Challenges FEMA and DHS Officials Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
Post-Katrina Act § 640a, Disclosure of Certain Information to Law
Enforcement Agencies:
Grants the FEMA Administrator authority to provide information from any
FEMA individual-assistance database, consistent with the Privacy Act,
[Footnote 19] to law enforcement agencies to identify illegal conduct
or address public safety and security issues, including compliance with
sex offender laws, in the event of evacuations, sheltering, or mass
relocations.
Actions Taken:
* Compliance with the Privacy Act: In order to comply with the Privacy
Act, FEMA revised the routine uses of information in a Systems of
Record Notice, last updated on July 6, 2006. The Systems of Record
Notice:
- allows the disclosure to law enforcement of a record that, on its
face or in conjunction with other information, indicates a violation or
potential violation of law;
- permits FEMA to share information in the event of evacuation,
sheltering, or mass relocation, in order to identify illegal or
fraudulent conduct and address public safety and security issues;
- allows FEMA to release applicant information to the Department of
Justice (DOJ) or other federal agency in litigation or court-related
circumstances; and:
- allows FEMA to release applicant information in order to reunite
families and find missing children. § 640a.
* Disclosure of Information: Officials in the Office of Chief Counsel
told us that FEMA has exercised the authority to share information with
law enforcement officials. § 640a.
* Coordination: To facilitate the use of this authority, FEMA has
entered into multiple agreements with other federal agencies and signed
a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with each of the following:
- The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Crimes against Children
Unit, effective January 8, 2007. This MOA allows the FBI access to
FEMA's database system in order to assist the FBI in locating missing
children in the event of a disaster or an emergency.
- The United States Marshals Service, effective July 30, 2007, under
which FEMA will grant access to FEMA's disaster assistance database for
the purposes of identifying and locating sex offenders relocated as a
result of a major disaster, and for identifying, locating, and
apprehending fugitives and noncompliant sex offenders.
- DOJ's Hurricane Katrina Fraud Task Force, effective March 1, 2006,
under which FEMA will grant access to its database system in order for
the Hurricane Katrina Fraud Task Force to investigate fraud cases
related to Hurricanes Katrina, Rita, and Wilma. § 640a.
Challenges FEMA and DHS Officials Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
Post-Katrina Act § 689b, Reunification:
Establishes the National Emergency Child Locator Center within the
National Center for Missing and Exploited Children and enumerates the
responsibilities of the center, among other things, to provide
technical assistance in locating displaced children and assist in the
reunification of displaced children with their families.
Actions Taken:
* Establishment: The National Emergency Child Locator Center has been
established within the National Center for Missing and Exploited
Children. § 689b(b)(1).
* Center Responsibilities: The National Center for Missing and
Exploited Children Web site states that in the event of a natural
disaster, the child locator center will (1) establish a toll-free
hotline to receive reports of displaced children; (2) create a Web site
to provide information about displaced children; (3) deploy staff to
the location of a declared disaster area to gather information about
displaced children; (4) provide information to the public about
additional resources; (5) partner with federal, state, and local law
enforcement agencies; and (6) refer reports of displaced adults to the
Attorney General's designated authority and the National Emergency
Family Registry and Locator System. § 689b(b)(3).
* Hotline and Web site: The child locator center has established a toll-
free phone number that is to be activated during disasters and was
activated during the 2007 California wildfires. It also created a Web
site that is to be activated during disasters and will be found via a
link on the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children Web
site. § 689b(b)(3).
* Prior Activation: According to the Disaster Assistance Directorate
Unit Leader with responsibility for mass care, housing, and human
services, the child locator center was activated during the 2007
California wild fires--that is, it activated both the hotline and the
Web site, and it sent expert groups of volunteers and paid staff to
provide technical assistance to local law enforcement agencies. §
689b(b)(3).
* Emergency Response Plan: The National Center for Missing and
Exploited Children developed an emergency response plan for the
National Emergency Child Locator Center. Among other things, the plan
defines criteria to be used to activate the National Emergency Child
Locator Center, and defines roles and responsibilities of the National
Center for Missing and Exploited Children and its staff in operating
the National Emergency Child Locator Center. § 689b(b)(3).
* Reporting Requirement: FEMA submitted a report to Congress on the
status of the child locator center in September 2007. § 689b(d).
* Coordination: FEMA has established a memorandum of understanding
(MOU), effective March 6, 2007, with the following organizations: the
Department of Justice (DOJ), the Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS), the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children,
and the American Red Cross, that, among other things, requires
signatory agencies to participate in a cooperative agreement, and for
FEMA, through the National Emergency Family Registry and Locator
System, to provide relevant information to the National Emergency Child
Locator Center. § 689b(b)(3).
Areas to Be Addressed:
* Coordination: The Disaster Assistance Directorate Unit Leader told us
that the child locator center is in the process of finalizing
cooperative agreements with federal and state agencies and other
organizations such as the American Red Cross to help implement its
mission. Officials from the Disaster Assistance Directorate told us
just before the publication of this document that a cooperative
agreement between FEMA and the National Center for Missing and
Exploited Children is being reviewed by each entity's respective legal
department. § 689b(b)(3).
Challenges FEMA and DHS Officials Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
Post-Katrina Act § 689c, National Emergency Family Registry and Locator
System:
Requires the FEMA Administrator to establish the National Emergency
Family Registry and Locator System to help reunify families separated
after an emergency or major disaster, outlines the operation of the
system, and requires a mechanism to inform the public of the system.
Also requires the FEMA Administrator to coordinate information sharing
to facilitate reunification of families by entering into an MOU with
DOJ, the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, the
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), the American Red Cross,
and other private organizations.
Actions Taken:
* Establishment: The National Emergency Family Registry and Locator
System has been established. The Disaster Assistance Directorate Unit
Leader told us that FEMA will activate the locator system in an
emergency situation. § 689c(b).
* Operation of System: The family locator system has established a
permanent toll-free number and has a Web site that is to be publicly
available when the family locator system is activated to allow users to
register as displaced persons, to search for displaced persons, and to
register and search for displaced children. § 689c(c)(1)-(3).
* Publication of Information: According to an Executive Officer of the
Disaster Assistance Directorate, public affairs officials at the
national and regional level will be alerted to the activation of the
family locator system, and FEMA will publicize the toll-free number and
the Web site on local and national media, as well as share the family
locator system information with law enforcement. § 689c(d).
* Referring Displaced Children: The family locator system has a
mechanism to redirect any request to search for or register displaced
children to the National Emergency Child Locator Center, part of the
National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. § 689c(c)(4).
* Coordination: As previously described, FEMA has established an MOU,
effective March 6, 2007, with the following organizations: DOJ and HHS,
the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, and the
American Red Cross. Among other things, the MOU is designed to
establish and articulate the mission of the family locator system, and
to enhance information sharing to facilitate reuniting displaced
individuals with their families. § 689c(e).
* Reporting Requirement: FEMA submitted a report to Congress describing
the status of the family locator system in December 2007.[Footnote 20]
§ 689c(f).
Challenges FEMA and DHS Officials Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
Post-Katrina Act § 689e (Stafford Act § 616), Disaster-Related
Information Services Requires FEMA to ensure that disaster-related
information is made available in understandable formats for population
groups with limited English proficiency and for individuals with
special needs. Also requires FEMA to develop an informational
clearinghouse of model language-assistance programs and best practices
for use by state and local governments.
Actions Taken:
* Identifying Population Groups with Limited English Proficiency, in
Coordination with State and Local Governments: Officials from FEMA's
National Processing Service Center told us that they obtain information
on language requirements from the region, state, and the U.S Census
Bureau at the beginning of each disaster. National Processing Service
Center officials further stated that their housing inspectors and
contractors include bilingual inspectors and that they hire local
interpreters when necessary. Additionally, these contractors recruit
inspectors from the actual disaster locations when feasible, to improve
relationships in the community and to assist with language barriers. §
616(a)(1)-(2).
* Ensuring Information Is Made Available in Formats That Can Be
Understood by Special Needs Populations: FEMA's Disability Coordinator
and the Civil Rights Program Manager reported they are working to
develop information in formats such as Braille, large print and sign
language, as well as using interpreters for foreign languages, as part
of an effort to implement section 689e of the Post-Katrina Act. In
addition, a FEMA working group has developed a series of
recommendations for FEMA-wide implementation of section 689e. According
to the FEMA Civil Rights Program Manager, this working group was one of
several working groups established to develop methods for implementing
various provisions of the Post-Katrina Act. The document produced by
the working group states that its aim is to ensure that information and
services for all disaster victims are not a specialized function of a
single individual or office, but rather are integrated into appropriate
emergency training, planning, response, and recovery policies and
procedures, and part of the overall awareness of all FEMA staff.
According to the Civil Rights Program Manager, the document produced by
the working group, with recommendations and identified best practices,
was circulated to directorates as guidance on implementing limited
English proficiency practices and principles. He stated that the
document can be used to identify opportunities and requirements for
making program functions accessible to limited English proficiency
populations. Also, officials from FEMA's National Processing Service
Center told us they had implemented several new policies to improve
communications with the public, including limited English proficiency
populations and those with special needs. For example, they said the
National Processing Service Centers rewrote the eligibility letters for
disaster victims to make them easier to understand, by, among other
things, using plain language, and that they offer translations upon
request. After each disaster, FEMA regions can choose to include
Spanish translations of the disaster assistance letters. In addition,
applicant letters and a guide to FEMA assistance can also be sent in
Braille or large print upon request. These officials also told us that
all National Processing Service Center registration, help-line, and
caseworker personnel have been provided with training and job aides to
better prepare them to communicate with deaf and hard of hearing
callers using a variety of methods and devices, including video relay.
§ 616(a)(2).
* Informational Clearinghouse: FEMA's Disability Coordinator and the
Civil Rights Program Manager also stated that they are developing an
informational clearinghouse of model language-assistance programs and
best practices. In researching limited English proficiency programs,
the Disability Coordinator stated that she has found some of the best
to be in medical facilities, and her office plans to include these best
practices in the clearinghouse. According to the Disability
Coordinator, her office has identified about 21 or 22 languages thus
far to include in the clearinghouse. § 616(a)(3).
Areas to Be Addressed:
* Issuing the Limited English Proficiency Policy: FEMA officials told
us that FEMA completed a Limited English Proficiency Policy, which was
approved by DOJ in 2003. However, before the policy was published in
the Federal Register, DHS determined that one overarching limited
English proficiency policy would be written and published. The
officials did not estimate when the overarching DHS policy would be
finalized. § 616(a)(1)-(2).
* Launching the Informational Clearinghouse: FEMA has not yet launched
the informational clearinghouse of model language-assistance programs.
§ 616(a)(3).
Challenges FEMA and DHS Officials Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
Post-Katrina Act § 689f (Stafford Act § 425), Transportation Assistance
to Individuals and Households:
Authorizes transportation assistance to relocate displaced individuals
to and from alternate locations for short-or long-term accommodations,
or return them to their predisaster primary residences.
Actions Taken:
* Development of Policy and Regulations: FEMA officials in the Disaster
Assistance Directorate told us shortly before we published this
document that they have developed a draft policy for implementing the
transportation assistance authority, which is under review and requires
implementation of proposed regulatory changes before becoming
effective. A copy of this draft policy did not accompany their
comments. § 425.
* Development of Procedures: FEMA developed procedures for
transportation assistance in the Mass Sheltering and Housing Assistance
Strategy, issued in July 2006. § 425.
* Relocation Policy: According to the strategy, if the scale of the
evacuation overwhelms affected states' sheltering capabilities, FEMA
will coordinate and provide air or surface transportation in support of
interstate evacuation. § 425.
* Return Policy: If the evacuated area is without extensive damage to
residences, as stated in the strategy, FEMA will coordinate and fund
return mass transportation to the point of transportation origin. If
the evacuated area suffered extensive damage to residences, eligible
evacuees are authorized, with host state consent, to use FEMA funding
known as Other Needs Assistance to purchase return transportation, when
they are able to do so. § 425.
Challenges FEMA and DHS Officials Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
Post-Katrina Act § 689f (Stafford Act § 426), Case-Management Services:
Grants the President authority to provide case-management services,
including financial assistance to state or local government agencies or
private organizations to provide such services, to victims of major
disasters.
Actions Taken:
* Case-Management Projects and Pilots: Using this authority, FEMA has
developed two case-management projects and pilots:
- FEMA-HHS/Administration for Children and Families (ACF) Disaster Case-
Management Pilot:
- The FEMA-HHS/ACF Disaster Case Management Pilot is to be tested
during summer 2008 in a Region 4 state to be determined based on
disaster activity.
- Participants in the FEMA-HHS/ACF Disaster Case Management Pilot will
include: FEMA, HHS, Coordinated Assistance Network, Catholic Charities,
and other agencies. The period of assistance will depend on the type
and size of the presidentially declared disaster, but is not to exceed
18 months.
- FEMA and HHS/ACF signed an Interagency Agreement for this pilot in
April 2008.
- Disaster Case-Management Pilot Program (DCMPP):
- DCMPP will provide grant funding to the states of Mississippi and
Louisiana, which are then expected to award grants to case-management
providers within the state that have a history of offering services to
victims of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita.
- DCMPP is to give assistance to victims of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita
who are currently housed in FEMA-provided temporary housing units,
those whose case-management services are not yet fully completed, and
those who vacated their FEMA temporary housing units and were
authorized to stay in a hotel due to health concerns.
- The DCMPP period of assistance is June 16, 2008-March 1, 2009.
- Victims are to receive assistance through DCMPP until case closure is
achieved or until the end of the grant period, March 1, 2009, whichever
occurs first.
- FEMA plans to gather information through DCMPP to create a permanent
disaster case-management program.
- In DCMPP guidance, FEMA lists June 1, 2009, as the due date for final
program, fiscal, and evaluation reports. § 426.
* FEMA officials told us in October 2008 that the state of Texas is in
the process of identifying which case-management program to pursue for
Hurricane Ike disaster victims, the FEMA-HHS/ACF Case Management Pilot
Program or DCMPP. § 426.
Challenges FEMA and DHS Officials Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
Post-Katrina Act § 689i, Individuals and Households Pilot Program:
Requires the President, acting through the FEMA Administrator, and in
coordination with state, local, and tribal governments, to establish a
pilot program to make better use of existing rental housing located in
major disaster areas, where alternative housing options are less
available or less cost-effective.
Actions Taken:
* Program Development: In May 2008, the Deputy Assistant Administrator
for the Disaster Assistance Directorate stated that FEMA had developed
the Rental Repair Pilot Program and would implement it as soon as FEMA
identified a cost-effective opportunity to do so, something he said
FEMA was actively looking to do. § 689i(a)(1).
* Program Implementation: FEMA officials in the Disaster Assistance
Directorate told us shortly before we published this document that FEMA
had implemented the Rental Repair Pilot Program in Iowa. FEMA officials
told us that after the Midwest floods during summer 2008, they entered
into a lease agreement with a nonprofit organization that owns a
multifamily unit in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, an area that was affected by
the disaster. Under the 14-month lease with the nonprofit organization,
FEMA is to provide funds to repair seven two-bedroom units and, once
repaired, is to house eligible applicants in the units for 14 months;
but, documentation did not accompany their comments. According to FEMA
officials, additional pilot opportunities have yet to be identified or
requested by the state-led Housing Task Forces in Texas and Louisiana,
following Hurricane Ike in summer 2008. § 689i(a)(1--2).
Challenges FEMA and DHS Officials Identified:
* The Deputy Assistant Administrator for the Disaster Assistance
Directorate said that one of the elements of the pilot program under
the Post-Katrina Act is cost-effectiveness. However, finding cost-
effective opportunities--where the cost is at least evenly offset by a
demonstrable benefit--to repair rental housing in a major disaster area
has proven difficult.
* The Deputy Assistant Administrator stated that pressing housing needs
often dictate the use of mobile homes. He noted that FEMA cannot defer
housing to disaster victims while it makes repairs on rental units.
Once FEMA incurs the costs of transporting a mobile home, he said it is
more cost-effective to continue to use the mobile home than to repair
alternative rental housing.
* In addition, the Deputy Assistant Administrator cited diffculties for
FEMA to repair apartments in a cost-effective manner: FEMA would have
to lease the units from the apartment owners, who would not have an
incentive to lease if they could as easily repair apartments themselves
and then charge rent at market value or higher. Therefore, the only
stock available to FEMA would be buildings with very extensive repair
needs, requiring high expenditures for rehabilitation, he concluded.
* The Deputy Assistant Administrator suggested that if the Department
of Housing and Urban Development managed the program and bought the
apartments, which could then be added to the public housing inventory,
the program might be cost-effective for the government as a whole.
Post-Katrina Act § 689j, Public Assistance Pilot Program:
Requires the President, acting through the FEMA Administrator, and in
coordination with state and local governments, to establish a pilot
program to reduce costs, increase flexibility, and expedite assistance
for specified public-assistance (PA) projects under the Stafford Act.
The legislation outlined six procedures that FEMA could--but was not
required to--adopt in carrying out the pilot including, among other
things, increasing the federal government's share of debris and
wreckage removal for state and local governments that have a FEMA-
approved debris-management plan and one or more prequalified
contractors for such services.
Actions Taken:
* Establishment and Coordination: The Deputy Assistant Administrator
for the Disaster Assistance Directorate stated that establishing the PA
Pilot program was an extensive effort, and that FEMA coordinated with
members of the National Emergency Management Association and the
International Association of Emergency Managers, including the states
of Georgia, New York, California, and North Carolina. § 689j(a)(1).
* Pilot Program Workgroup: FEMA convened a PA Pilot workgroup to
develop program guidance and an implementation plan:
- The work group was composed of members of the National Emergency
Management Association, the International Association of Emergency
Managers, and FEMA regional and headquarters staff, including members
of the Federal Coordinating Officer cadre, to develop program guidance
and an implementation plan.
- The PA Pilot workgroup held two in-person meetings, as well as
teleconferences through March 2007. § 689j(a)(1).
* Pilot Program Procedures: The PA Pilot workgroup focused on four of
the six procedures outlined in the legislation, and identified the
following procedures to implement the PA Pilot program:
- FEMA will provide grants on the basis of estimates for large projects
up to $500,000.
- FEMA will provide an additional 5 percent federal cost share (i.e.,
the amount of money the federal government will share in the cost), not
to exceed 100 percent of the total cost, to applicants who have a FEMA-
approved debris-management plan and at least two prequalified debris-
and wreckage-removal contractors identified prior to a disaster.
Usually the minimum federal cost share is 75 percent, with 90 percent
possible by the President's authorization in situations of severe
economic impact.
- FEMA will allow an applicant to retain any revenue from the salvage
value of recyclable disaster debris as an incentive to recycle debris.
- FEMA will reimburse the straight-or regular-time salaries (i.e., not
overtime salaries) and benefits of an applicant's permanently employed
staff that performs debris-related activities. § 689j(a)(3).
* Implementation Period: FEMA stood up the PA Pilot program on June 1,
2007, and it will be implemented until December 31, 2008. § 689j(d).
* Available Guidance: In June 2007, FEMA published the Public
Assistance Pilot Program Guidance for State and Local Officials. §
689j(a)(3).
* Reporting Requirement: FEMA has acknowledged in its Public Assistance
Pilot Program Guidance its March 2009 legislative reporting
requirement. § 689j(b).
Challenges FEMA and DHS Officials Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
Post-Katrina Act § 689k, Disposal of Unused Temporary Housing Units:
Requires the FEMA Administrator, in coordination with the Department of
the Interior or other appropriate federal agencies, to transfer any
unused temporary housing units authorized for disposal to tribal
governments, if appropriate.
Actions Taken:
* Unused Mobile Homes: FEMA has made available 1,000 unused mobile
homes located in Hope, Arkansas, and Texarkana, Texas, for transfer to
tribal governments. While FEMA will not impose a cost for the mobile
homes, tribal governments will be responsible for transportation, unit
set up, and if necessary, retrofitting. The Department of Housing and
Urban Development has determined that these costs will be considered
eligible costs under the Indian Housing Block Grant Program. § 689k.
Challenges FEMA and DHS Officials Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
For Further Reading:
The National Center for Missing & Exploited Children. "Natural
Disasters: Is Your Family Prepared?" [hyperlink,
http://www.missingkids.com/missingkids/servlet/PageServlet?LanguageCount
ry=en_US&PageId=3252] (accessed on Sept. 5,
2008).
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Federal Emergency Management
Agency. "The Establishment of the National Emergency Child Locator
Center: FY 2007 Report to Congress." September 2007.
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Federal Emergency Management
Agency. "The Establishment of the National Emergency Family Registry
and Locator System: FY 2007 Report to Congress." December 2007.
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Federal Emergency Management
Agency. "Program Guidance for the Public Assistance Pilot Program:
Guidance for FEMA, State and Local Officials." [hyperlink,
http://www.fema.gov/government/policy/papilot.shtm] (accessed Sept. 5,
2008).
"Privacy Act System of Records: Notice of Amendment to Existing Routine
Uses." Federal Register, vol. 71, no. 129. July 6, 2006.
[End of section]
Enclosure V: Implementing the Components of the National Preparedness
System and Other Preparedness Activities:
Post-Katrina Act § 671[Footnote 21] (Homeland Security Act §1802),
National Emergency Communications Plan:
Requires the Secretary of Homeland Security, acting through the
Director for Emergency Communications and in cooperation with other
relevant entities, to develop a National Emergency Communications Plan
(NECP) that includes, among other things, recommendations for how to
support and promote the ability of first responders and government
officials to continue to communicate during disasters and the
attainment of interoperability, nationwide.
Actions Taken:
* Plan Release: The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) released the
NECP on July 31, 2008. § 1802(a).
* Cooperation with Other Entities: The Deputy Director of the Office
for Emergency Communications said that when drafting the NECP, his
office reached out to obtain input from federal, state, and local
officials, as well as the private sector, including the major
telecommunications companies. In addition, this official said that the
Emergency Communications Preparedness Center working group, comprised
of representatives from DHS, the Federal Communications Commission, the
Department of Defense, the Department of Commerce, and the Department
of Justice, provided input into the development of the NECP. According
to a DHS press release announcing the plan, the Office of Emergency
Communications developed the plan with more than 150 public and private
sector-emergency communications officials. § 1802(a)-(b).
* Plan Contents: The NECP includes an appendix that identifies which
NECP sections address the nine content requirements of the Post-Katrina
Act (and an additional requirement established by the Implementing
Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007).[Footnote 22]
Examples of some NECP initiatives include: targeting federal emergency
communications grants to address gaps identified in the NECP, Statewide
Communication Interoperability Plans, and Tactical Interoperable
Communications Plans; leveraging existing and emerging technologies to
expand and integrate disaster communications capabilities among
emergency-response providers; and developing and injecting
standardized emergency communications performance objectives and
evaluation criteria into operational exercises. § 1802(c).
Challenges DHS and FEMA Officials Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
Post-Katrina Act § 611 (Homeland Security Act § 512), Evacuation Plans
and Exercises:
Allows grants made to state, local, and tribal governments by DHS
through the State Homeland Security Program (SHSP) or the Urban Area
Security Initiative (UASI) to be used to establish programs for the
development and maintenance of mass evacuation plans, prepare for the
execution of mass evacuation plans, and conduct exercises of mass
evacuation plans.
Actions Taken:
* SHSP and UASI Grants Authorized for Evacuation Planning: According to
the Director of Grants Development and Administration, the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has informed state, local, and
tribal governments that they may use SHSP and UASI grants to assist
mass evacuation planning via the fiscal year 2008 Homeland Security
Grant Program written guidance, of which both grants are components.
The guidance lists strengthening preparedness planning as one of its
three objectives, and evacuation planning is included under that
objective. Further, the guidance states that developing or enhancing
evacuation plans is an allowable expense. § 512(a).
* State Evacuation Plan Development: FEMA developed the Mass Evacuation
Incident Annex to the National Response Framework (NRF), which provides
an overview of mass evacuation functions, agency roles and
responsibilities, and overall guidelines for the integration of
federal, state, tribal, and local support in the evacuation of large
numbers of people in incidents requiring a coordinated federal
response. Officials in FEMA's Disaster Operations Directorate also
noted that the states participating in FEMA's Catastrophic Disaster
Planning Initiative benefit from detailed federal, state, and local
catastrophic planning that includes examination of evacuation topics.
These states include Florida, Louisiana, California, and the eight
Midwestern states in the New Madrid Seismic Zone. In addition, National
Preparedness Directorate officials told us that for the last 2 years,
FEMA has provided technical assistance to the state of Louisiana in
Baton Rouge, helping to develop a mass evacuation plan, including
leveraging transportation resources--rail, air, buses, and so forth. §
512(c)(1).
Areas to Be Addressed:
* State Evacuation Plan Development: According to officials in FEMA's
Disaster Operations Directorate, as of August 1, 2008, FEMA was in the
process of finalizing the Mass Evacuation Incident Annex Operational
Supplement to the NRF, which is intended to provide additional guidance
for mass evacuations. In addition, officials in FEMA's National
Preparedness Directorate said that a third document, the Comprehensive
Preparedness Guide (CPG) 101, provides guidance for state and local
governments to develop emergency operations plans. FEMA released an
interim version of CPG 101 in August 2008 with the final CPG 101
expected to be released in December 2008. § 512(b), (c)(1).
* Technical Assistance for Mass Evacuation Planning: The Post-Katrina
Act requires FEMA to provide mass evacuation planning assistance to
institutions that house individuals with special needs upon request by
a state, local, or tribal government. FEMA officials in the Disaster
Operations Directorate told us that they had not received any requests
for such assistance. These officials said that the draft Mass
Evacuation Incident Annex Operational Supplement will include a tab on
evacuation issues related to people with special needs and, once
issued, can provide guidance to hospitals, nursing homes, and other
institutions that house individuals with special needs. Officials from
FEMA's National Preparedness Directorate also noted that the Homeland
Security Preparedness Technical Assistance Program provides technical
assistance upon request to jurisdictions interested in planning for
mass evacuations. Additionally, they said the directorate is developing
evacuation and reentry planning guidance for use by state and local
governments. § 512(c)(2).
Challenges DHS and FEMA Officials Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
Post-Katrina Act § 631 (Stafford Act § 613), State Catastrophic
Incident Annex:
Amends grant requirements that states must meet under section 613 of
the Stafford Act to be eligible for up to a 50 percent federal cost
share for emergency preparedness personnel and administrative expenses,
based on state plans approved by FEMA. In addition to other
requirements, state plans must now provide for the development of
catastrophic incident annexes pursuant to standards approved by the
FEMA Administrator. A state catastrophic incident annex submitted to
FEMA must be consistent with national-level planning documents, such as
the national preparedness goal and the NRF's[Footnote 23] catastrophic
incident annex, and must be developed in consultation with emergency
responders, local governments, multijurisdictional councils, and
regional planning commissions.
Actions Taken:
* Grant Guidance for State Catastrophic Incident Planning: In FEMA's
overview of its Emergency Management Performance Grant (EMPG) program
for fiscal year 2008, FEMA stated that the principal priority for
fiscal year 2008 EMPG funds is to sustain and enhance catastrophic
planning capabilities, to include addressing the findings of FEMA's gap
analysis program and similar capability assessment efforts, and
assisting state and local jurisdictions to address national and
regional catastrophic planning needs. The fiscal year 2008 EMPG grant
process requires applicants to submit a work plan that outlines the
state's emergency management enhancement and sustainment efforts,
including projects proposed for the EMPG period of performance.
According to the fiscal year 2008 EMPG grant guidance, states must
focus their EMPG program activities on addressing shortfalls and
sustaining capabilities in their emergency management programs, with a
specific focus on planning for catastrophic events and reducing loss of
life and property through mitigation activities. In addition, the grant
guidance requires states to work closely with FEMA regional offices in
developing their EMPG work plans to address critical assessment
findings and ensure appropriate regional coordination and
collaboration. FEMA regional offices must concur on final work plans
before states may draw down EMPG funds, which will be released on a
rolling basis upon approval of the state's final work plan. §
613(b)(3), (c)(2).
Areas to Be Addressed:
* Update to Federal Catastrophic Incident Annex: The federal
Catastrophic Incident Annex, which states are to use as a model for
their own catastrophic incident planning, is still based on the NRF's
predecessor, the now superseded National Response Plan. A revised
federal Catastrophic Incident Annex has yet to be approved and
released, and a Catastrophic Incident Supplement to this annex has yet
to be revised. Post-Katrina Act § 509(b)(2); Stafford Act, § 613(c)(1).
Challenges DHS and FEMA Officials Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
Post-Katrina Act § 632, Evacuation Preparedness Technical Assistance:
Requires the FEMA Administrator, in coordination with the heads of
other federal agencies, to provide evacuation preparedness technical
assistance to state, local, and tribal governments.
Actions Taken:
* Providing Evacuation Preparedness Technical Assistance: FEMA
officials in the Disaster Operations Directorate cited various examples
of the agency having provided evacuation preparedness technical
assistance. According to these officials, FEMA has provided such
assistance in some cases through the Catastrophic Planning Initiative,
an effort to strengthen response planning and capabilities for select
scenarios (e.g., a Category 5 hurricane making landfall in southern
Florida). Other examples include FEMA regional offices providing mass
evacuation technical assistance to the state of Louisiana. FEMA
officials also cited workshops in Georgia and Florida and outreach to
Texas and Louisiana as further examples of technical assistance
provided. § 632.
Challenges DHS and FEMA Officials Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
Post-Katrina Act § 633 (Stafford Act § 303), Emergency Response Teams:
Requires the FEMA Administrator to establish emergency response teams
(at least three at the national level and a sufficient number at the
regional level); target capability levels for the emergency response
teams; and adequate numbers of properly planned, organized, equipped,
trained, and exercised personnel to achieve the target capability
levels.
Actions Taken:
* Establishment of Emergency Response Teams: One national incident
management assistance team (IMAT), FEMA's term for emergency response
team, has been established in the National Capital Region, according to
FEMA officials in the Disaster Operations Directorate. At the regional
level, Disaster Operations Directorate officials said that IMATs had
been established in FEMA Regions 4, 5, and 6, as of August 1, 2008.
According to these officials, they are in the process of establishing a
second national IMAT in Sacramento, California, and a fourth regional
IMAT in Region 2. They said that FEMA intends to establish IMATs in all
10 regions by the end of fiscal year 2010 and the third national team
in Fiscal Year 2011. § 303(b)(1).
* Personnel: National IMATs are to consist of 26 positions, including a
designated team leader and senior managers for operations, logistics,
planning, and finance and administration sections. This sectional
organization mirrors the incident command structure presented in the
National Incident Management System (NIMS). According to FEMA officials
in the Disaster Operations Directorate, although the National IMAT
established in the National Capital Region is fully staffed, some IMAT
positions are not yet filled with permanent full-time (PFT) employees,
but rather with FEMA detailees who have been selected for their
advanced training and expertise. In general, the detailees are to
provide guidance and support to the PFT personnel until the teams are
fully staffed with PFTs who are fully capable of managing their
respective IMATs. According to Disaster Operations Directorate
officials, FEMA continues to hire personnel for authorized IMAT
positions. § 303(b)(3).
* Exercising: The National IMAT participated in the National Level
Exercise 2008. In addition, Disaster Operations Directorate officials
told us that IMATs have supported a number of disasters and special
events in 2008 (including recent storms and hurricanes and the
Democratic and Republican National Conventions). § 303(b)(3).
* Equipping: According to officials in FEMA's Disaster Operations
Directorate, FEMA has procured personal equipment for IMAT members and
has ordered communications vehicles. § 303(b)(3).
Areas to Be Addressed:
* Establishment of Emergency Response Teams: FEMA officials in the
Disaster Operations Directorate said that by the end of fiscal year
2008, FEMA intends to establish another national IMAT in Sacramento,
California, and two additional regional teams in Regions 2 and 7 in
fiscal year 2009. In addition, these officials said that the agency
intends to establish IMATs in all 10 regional offices by the end of
fiscal year 2010 and the third national team in fiscal year 2011 §
303(b)(1).
* Target Capability Levels: According to officials in FEMA's Disaster
Operations Directorate, FEMA is finalizing an IMAT doctrine and a
Concept of Operations Plan that contain operational details. However,
FEMA has not yet described to us how it established or intends to
establish target capabilities for the IMATs, which are required by the
Post-Katrina Act as the basis for determining whether the IMATs consist
of an adequate number of properly planned, organized, equipped,
trained, and exercised personnel. § 303(b)(2)--(3).
* Training and Credentialing: FEMA has established mandatory training
courses for all IMAT personnel, in addition to the standard training
required for all FEMA employees. According to officials in FEMA's
Disaster Operations Directorate, they are in the process of
implementing a credentialing program for the IMATs. FEMA is planning to
incorporate training and credentialing for all hazards by identifying
core competencies required for each IMAT position and assessing the
competencies against existing task descriptions to guide the
development of mandatory training and credentialing plans. § 303(b)(3).
* Readiness Reporting: FEMA has yet to release the Federal Preparedness
Report, which is required by the Post-Katrina Act to include
information on readiness levels for the IMATs. Information on the
Federal Preparedness Report appears later in this enclosure.
§ 303(b)(4).
Challenges DHS and FEMA Officials Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
Post-Katrina Act § 634, Urban Search and Rescue Response System:
Establishes the Urban Search and Rescue Response System within FEMA.
Actions Taken:
* Administration of the Urban Search and Rescue Response System: FEMA
administers 28 Urban Search and Rescue Task Forces in the continental
United States. According to officials in FEMA's Disaster Operations
Directorate, the Urban Search and Rescue Response System received a
$7.5 million increase of funding over the fiscal year 2007 budget of
$25 million, for a total of $32.5 million in fiscal year 2008. §
634(a).
Challenges DHS and FEMA Officials Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
Post-Katrina Act § 635, Metropolitan Medical Response Grant Program:
Establishes the Metropolitan Medical Response Grant Program and
requires it to include each program purpose as it existed on June 1,
2006.
Actions Taken:
* Continuation of the Metropolitan Medical Response Grant Program: The
Metropolitan Medical Response System program retains the basic
purposes, funds similar preparedness activities, and supports similar
target capabilities of the program as it was constituted in fiscal year
2006. According to the fiscal year 2008 grant guidance, priorities for
Metropolitan Medical Response System recipients are improvements to the
Emergency Triage and Pre-Hospital Treatment capability within their
operational areas. § 635(a)-(b).
Challenges DHS and FEMA Officials Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
Post-Katrina Act § 642, National Preparedness, and § 643, National
Preparedness Goal:
Requires the President, acting through the FEMA Administrator, to
complete, revise, and update as necessary a national preparedness goal
that defines the target level of preparedness to ensure the nation's
ability to prevent, respond to, recover from, and mitigate against
natural disasters, acts of terrorism, and other manmade disasters.
Requires the goal to be consistent with NIMS and the NRF to the
greatest extent practicable. The national preparedness goal is also
required by section 642.
Actions Taken:
* Issuance of National Preparedness Guidelines: In September 2007, DHS
published the National Preparedness Guidelines, which renamed and
replaced the Interim National Preparedness Goal issued in March 2005.
The guidelines state that the nation should be prepared with
coordinated capabilities to prevent, protect against, respond to, and
recover from all hazards in a way that balances risk with resources and
need. The guidelines further state that they collate many plans,
strategies, and systems into an overarching framework, the National
Preparedness System. Among the documents within the umbrella of the
guidelines are NIMS and the NRF. § 643; see also § 642.
Challenges DHS and FEMA Officials Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
Post-Katrina Act § 642, National Preparedness, and § 644, Establishment
of National Preparedness System:
Requires the President, acting through the FEMA Administrator, to
establish a national preparedness system to enable the nation to meet
the national preparedness goal. The national preparedness system must
include eight required components, which are further described in
sections 646 through 653 of the Post-Katrina Act, and may include one
optional component, national planning scenarios, as further described
in section 645 of the Post-Katrina Act. The national preparedness
system is also required by section 642.
Actions Taken/Areas to Be Addressed:
* For each component of the national preparedness system, information
related to FEMA's Actions Taken and Areas to Be Addressed will be
presented in the specific Post-Katrina Act section that provides
additional information on the components' structure and requirements.
Challenges DHS and FEMA Officials Identified:
* FEMA officials in the National Preparedness Directorate cited the
following three challenges in implementing the National Preparedness
System:
(1) FEMA must coordinate with a large number and wide range of entities
such as DHS components, other federal agencies, and state and local
governments. For example, these officials said that it will be a
challenge to integrate plans and implement them across different
governmental boundaries.
(2) Developing data and performance metrics is a challenge because
there are several legacy data systems, with FEMA facing the challenge
of picking the best available. In addition, finding the owners of the
processes and associated data described in the national preparedness
system and incorporating these data into a distributed data system is
challenging.
(3) FEMA needs to develop protocols and guidelines for assessing target
capabilities and any capability gaps that may exist across the federal,
state, and local levels. However, these officials said that having
staff available at the state level to collect data on target
capabilities is a challenge.
Post-Katrina Act § 645, National Planning Scenarios:
Allows the FEMA Administrator, in coordination with the heads of
appropriate federal agencies and the National Advisory Council (NAC),
to develop planning scenarios to reflect the relative risk requirements
presented by all hazards, including natural disasters, acts of
terrorism, and other manmade disasters, to aid in the development of
target capabilities and target capability levels to meet the national
preparedness goal.
Actions Taken:
* Development: The September 2007 National Preparedness Guidelines
include 15 National Planning Scenarios, which are: Improvised Nuclear
Device, Aerosol Anthrax, Pandemic Influenza, Plague, Blister Agent,
Toxic Industrial Chemicals, Nerve Agent, Chlorine Tank Explosion, Major
Earthquake, Major Hurricane, Radiological Dispersal Device, Improvised
Explosive Device, Food Contamination, Foreign Animal Disease, and Cyber
Attack. According to the guidelines, while preparedness applies across
the all-hazards spectrum, the 15 National Planning Scenarios reflect a
special emphasis on catastrophic preparedness and are designed to
illustrate the potential scope, magnitude, and complexity of a range of
major events, from terrorist attacks to major disasters and other
emergencies. These scenarios are similar to the scenarios DHS has used
for planning since July 2004. § 645.
Areas to Be Addressed:
* Coordination: According to the National Preparedness Guidelines, the
National Planning Scenarios, utilized by the guidelines, were developed
by the Homeland Security Council in partnership with DHS and other
federal agencies and state, local, and tribal governments. In its role
as the DHS component responsible for the National Planning Scenarios,
FEMA did not coordinate with the NAC, because the NAC did not hold its
inaugural meeting until October 2007. § 645.
Challenges DHS and FEMA Officials Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
Post-Katrina Act § 646, Target Capabilities and Preparedness
Priorities:
Requires the FEMA Administrator, in coordination with the heads of
appropriate federal agencies, the National Council on Disability (NCD),
and the NAC to develop specific, flexible, and measurable guidelines to
define risk-based target capabilities for federal, state, local, and
tribal government preparedness, and to establish preparedness
priorities that reflect an appropriate balance between the relative
risks and resources associated with all hazards. Also requires prompt
distribution of the target capabilities guidelines to Congress and the
states. Further, authorizes the FEMA Administrator to provide support
for the development of state mutual aid agreements.
Actions Taken:
* Establishment of Guidelines on Target Capabilities: DHS published the
Target Capabilities List (TCL) in September 2007, which supports an
all-hazards approach to building 37 core capabilities to prevent,
protect against, respond to, and recover from major events such as
terrorist attacks, natural or manmade disasters, or health emergencies.
However, FEMA officials in the National Preparedness Directorate said
that there is a 3 year effort underway within FEMA to update and revise
the TCL. According to these officials, the preliminary concept for the
revision is to develop target capabilities that are divided into tiers
based on a jurisdiction's population. Further, these officials said
that the revised TCL will allow for performance metrics that focus more
on outcomes. In addition, according to National Preparedness
Directorate officials, FEMA intends to provide more user-friendly,
accessible, and credible capability targets with which to link all
activities performed along the preparedness cycle, as described in the
National Preparedness Guidelines, through the Target Capabilities List
Implementation Project. According to these officials, the TCL will be
streamlined to provide jurisdictions clearer guidance on the levels of
capability they need in order to prevent, protect against, respond to,
and recover from a catastrophic natural disaster or large scale
terrorist attack. Each of the 37 target capabilities described in the
TCL will be revised and released as capability frameworks. § 646(a).
* Coordination: According to FEMA, the development of the September
2007 TCL included coordination with stakeholders from federal, state,
local, and tribal governments as well as the private sector through
workshops and working groups. FEMA officials also said they have
briefed the NAC and the NCD on TCL development. Further, FEMA intends
to coordinate with the NAC as it updates the TCL, according to
officials in FEMA's National Preparedness Directorate. § 646(a).
* Distribution of Target Capabilities Guidelines: According to
officials in FEMA's National Preparedness Directorate, DHS has posted
the TCL, the National Preparedness Guidelines, and other national
preparedness documents on the Lessons Learned Information Sharing
System, [hyperlink https://www.llis.dhs.gov]. These officials also told
us that FEMA briefs Congress on the elements of the national
preparedness system on a recurring basis. § 646(b).
* Specific, Flexible, and Measurable Capabilities: According to the TCL
introduction, it supports an all-hazards approach to building
interchangeable, flexible capabilities needed to address a broad range
of incidents to include terrorist attacks, natural disasters, health
emergencies, and other major incidents. The current TCL version
contains 37 core capabilities, and each capability includes the
following: a definition of the capability, an outcome statement that
describes the expected results to be achieved, a description of the
major activities and tasks performed with the capability, and
performance measures associated with the capability. § 646(c).
* Risk Assessment Guidelines: To assist planners and officials at all
levels with assessing and determining their greatest risks and to
establish priorities for addressing resource gaps, training, and
exercises, the TCL introduction describes a preparedness-cycle
framework, in which risk assessment is one step. The TCL states that
risk is a combination of credible threats, vulnerabilities, and
consequences. It identifies the following risk factors that affect the
need for and placement of target capabilities: population and
population density; the presence of critical infrastructure and key
resources; location in a high-risk area for terrorist events or natural
disasters; and capabilities to prevent, protect against, or mitigate
against a threat. The TCL explains that the relative importance of
these risk factors determines capability needs. § 646(d).
* Preparedness Priorities: The National Preparedness Guidelines, also
issued in September 2007, and containing the TCL as one of its
elements, establish the following eight priorities to guide
preparedness efforts: (1) expand regional collaboration; (2) implement
NIMS and the NRF; (3) implement the National Infrastructure Protection
Plan; (4) strengthen information sharing and collaboration
capabilities; (5) strengthen communications capabilities; (6)
strengthen chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, and explosive
detection, response, and decontamination capabilities; (7) strengthen
medical surge and mass prophylaxis capabilities; and (8) strengthen
planning and citizen preparedness capabilities. § 646(e).
* Mutual Aid Agreements: FEMA has provided funds to the National
Emergency Management Association (NEMA) to develop and market model
intrastate mutual aid legislation. According to these officials, this
model legislation provides states with a legal framework to address
reimbursement, workers compensation and liability issues for official
actions, and the foundation to execute mutual aid. This model
legislation, according to the officials, also encourages participants
to develop a system that addresses the logistical issues of inventory,
status, ordering, support, and returning of resources. Moreover,
according to officials in FEMA's National Preparedness Directorate,
FEMA has entered into a cooperative agreement with the International
Association of Fire Chiefs for the development of state mutual aid
systems that implement the NEMA-developed model legislation for
intrastate mutual aid compacts. These officials told us that as of
August 1, 2008, $3 million has been committed to the cooperative
agreement with the International Association of Fire Chiefs and 25
states have been engaged in the project with the remaining 25 expected
to be incorporated in the next 2 years. Finally, officials in the
National Preparedness Directorate said that FEMA provides support to
the development of the United South and Eastern Tribes Tribal Emergency
Mutual Aid Compact, which is modeled on the interstate Emergency
Management Assistance Compact and provides a mechanism that enables
participant tribes to support each other during disasters. § 646(f).
Challenges DHS and FEMA Officials Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
Post-Katrina Act § 647, Equipment and Training Standards:
Requires the FEMA Administrator to support the development,
promulgation, and updating, as necessary, of national voluntary
consensus standards for (1) equipment used by federal, state, local,
and tribal governments and other emergency response providers, and (2)
training. In carrying out this section, the FEMA Administrator must
consult with public-and private-sector organizations with expertise in
the development of national voluntary consensus standards. With respect
to equipment standards, the FEMA Administrator must also consult with
the heads of appropriate federal agencies and the NAC. With respect to
training standards, the FEMA Administrator must ensure that the
training provided by the national training program is consistent with
the standards.
Actions Taken:
* Equipment Standards: Officials in FEMA's National Preparedness
Directorate reported that since fiscal year 2005, DHS has been working
with the InterAgency Board for Equipment Standardization and
Interoperability to support voluntary consensus standards reflected in
the Authorized Equipment List. These officials also noted that DHS has
established an online tool (the Responder Knowledge Base), which
provides up-to-date information on commercial equipment and technology
to the state, local, and tribal homeland security community in order to
assist them with their purchasing and operational equipment decisions.
This includes an online, integrated source of equipment-related
information such as an interactive version of the FEMA Authorized
Equipment List, with the associated FEMA grants, applicable standards
and specifications, related certifications, test reports, and other
information. Additionally, officials in FEMA's National Preparedness
Directorate told us FEMA leverages the activities of DHS's Science and
Technology Directorate--specifically, the efforts of the Test &
Evaluation and Standards Division in coordinating the development of
voluntary consensus standards for equipment used by federal, state,
local, and tribal governments and other emergency response providers.
According to these officials, FEMA also participates in the work of the
American National Standards Institute's Homeland Security Standards
Panel, which promotes a cooperative partnership between the public and
private sectors in order to meet the needs of the nation for homeland
security standards. In addition, these officials told us that FEMA
coleads several DHS working groups that address equipment standards,
and through these groups, has been able to identify and recommend for
DHS the adoption of over 20 equipment standards. § 647(a).
* Training Standards: FEMA officials in the National Preparedness
Directorate said that DHS adopted training standards in accordance with
the American National Standards Institute and the National Fire
Protection Association in 2004. According to officials in the U.S. Fire
Administration, the National Fire Protection Association consulted with
the U.S. Fire Administration in developing their standards. National
Preparedness Directorate officials noted that in addition to the U.S.
Fire Administration, several other organizations will also be involved
in establishing training standards, including the Law Enforcement
Training Center and the Center for Domestic Preparedness. In addition,
they said training courses are reviewed by FEMA's National Integration
Center for compliance with NIMS standards. § 647(b).
* Consultation with Standards Organizations: According to officials in
FEMA's National Preparedness Directorate, FEMA is working with DHS's
Science and Technology Directorate and its Infrastructure Protection
Directorate to survey standards for equipment and training currently in
use and identify gaps. These officials said that they are working with
the National Institute of Standards and Technology on this standards
survey. § 647(c).
Areas to Be Addressed:
* Coordination on the Development of Equipment Standards: Officials in
FEMA's Disaster Operations Directorate told us FEMA has participated in
federal, state, local, and private organization forums that are
involved in standards setting and development, but did not specify
coordination with the NAC. § 647(a)(1), (c).
Challenges DHS and FEMA Officials Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
Post-Katrina Act § 648, Training and Exercises:
Requires the FEMA Administrator, in coordination with the heads of
appropriate federal agencies, the NCD, and the NAC, to carry out a
national training program and a national exercise program.
Actions Taken:
* National Exercise Program: In 2007, the National Exercise Division
within FEMA's National Preparedness Directorate introduced and
implemented the National Exercise Program. According to officials from
the National Preparedness Directorate, the National Exercise Program
conducts four Principal Level Exercises and one National Level Exercise
annually. These FEMA officials said that the Principal Level Exercises
are discussion-based (i.e., tabletop or seminar) to examine emerging
issues, and that one is conducted in preparation for the annual
National Level Exercise. Further, these officials noted that the
National Level Exercise are operations-based exercises (drills,
functional exercises, and full-scale exercises) intended to evaluate
existing national plans and policies, in concert with other federal and
nonfederal entities. § 648(b).
Areas to Be Addressed:
* National Training Program: DHS and FEMA are developing the Homeland
Security National Training Program, which will oversee and coordinate
homeland security training programs, increase training capacity, and
ensure standardization across programs, according to FEMA's Deputy for
National Preparedness. The Homeland Security National Training Program
has provided funding to a variety of training partners, including the
National Domestic Preparedness Consortium and the Rural Domestic
Preparedness Consortium, for the development and delivery of all-
hazards training for federal, state, local, and tribal emergency
responders. § 646(a).
* Coordination: In developing the National Training Program, FEMA has
not yet coordinated with the NCD, the NAC, or other federal agencies.
In carrying out the National Exercise Program, FEMA has coordinated
with other federal agencies. However, FEMA officials in the National
Preparedness Directorate noted that the National Training Program is
still being developed. They said that before it is finalized, it will
be fully coordinated within the federal interagency community,
including NCD and the NAC. § 648(a)(1), (b)(1).
Challenges DHS and FEMA Officials Identified:
* The FEMA official responsible for overseeing the National Training
Program said that the greatest challenge to implementing the program is
ensuring that lessons learned from each and every exercise and real
world incidents are recorded and fed back into the preparedness cycle,
including training plans, so that plans and training can be improved.
* Officials from FEMA's National Preparedness Directorate reported that
other challenges include identifying and prioritizing training
requirements for a wide range of federal, state, local, and tribal
positions and recharacterizing the requirements based on the TCL;
allocating and balancing training responsibilities among FEMA and DHS
training organizations; controlling duplication; and ensuring
consistency of doctrine and course content.
Post-Katrina Act § 649, Comprehensive Assessment System:
Requires the FEMA Administrator, in coordination with the NCD and the
NAC, to establish a comprehensive system to assess, on an ongoing
basis, the nation's prevention capabilities and overall preparedness,
including operational readiness.
Areas to Be Addressed:
* Establishment: FEMA has not yet implemented a comprehensive
assessment system. In fiscal year 2008, according to officials in
FEMA's National Preparedness Directorate, they began development of the
system and established an outreach strategy. The officials said they
conducted a comprehensive review of six major assessment systems
developed by DHS/FEMA in the last decade with the intention of using
the results of the analysis to inform the development and
implementation of the Comprehensive Assessment System. According to the
officials, they intend to apply the best practices of the six systems
to develop an integrated planning and assessment methodology, process,
and system. § 649(a).
* Coordination: FEMA does not currently have a plan for coordinating
with the NCD or the NAC as it develops the comprehensive assessment
system. § 649(a).
Challenges DHS and FEMA Officials Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
Post-Katrina Act § 650, Remedial Action Management Program:
Requires the FEMA Administrator, in coordination with the NCD and the
NAC, to establish a remedial action management program to, among other
things, track lessons learned and best practices from training,
exercises, and actual events.
Actions Taken:
* Establishment of Remedial Action Management Program: FEMA launched
the Remedial Action Management Program (RAMP) in 2003 and released it
as a Web application for all FEMA intranet users in January 2006. RAMP
uses FEMA facilitators to conduct sessions immediately after exercises
or events, and these facilitators are responsible for developing issue
descriptions for remedial actions. In addition, FEMA has a related
program called the Corrective Action Program (CAP) that is to be used
for governmentwide corrective action tracking by federal, state, and
local agencies. While RAMP is FEMA's internal remedial action program,
CAP is designed to serve as an overarching program for linking federal,
state, and local corrective actions. § 650.
Areas to Be Addressed:
* Coordination: FEMA developed RAMP prior to enactment of the Post-
Katrina Act. However, FEMA has not yet established any mechanisms to
coordinate ongoing implementation of RAMP or CAP with the NCD or the
NAC. § 650.
Challenges DHS and FEMA Officials Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
Post-Katrina Act § 651, Federal Response Capability Inventory:
Requires the FEMA Administrator to accelerate the completion of the
inventory of federal response capabilities required by the Stafford
Act; develop a list of organizations and functions within the
Department of Defense (DOD) that may be used to provide support to
civil authorities during natural and manmade disasters and terrorist
events; and establish an inventory database to allow, among other
things, real-time exchange of information regarding capabilities.
Areas to Be Addressed:
* Completion of Federal Response Capability Inventory: FEMA has not yet
completed the inventory of federal response capabilities. According to
FEMA officials in the National Preparedness Directorate, the agency is
assessing federal capabilities as part of its comprehensive assessment
system efforts. In addition, FEMA is also culling information from work
previously conducted to assess overall preparedness and is awaiting the
results of the State Preparedness Reports in order to conduct a
comprehensive assessment of state and federal response capabilities. §
651(a).
* List of DOD Organizations and Functions to Support Civil Authorities:
According to FEMA officials in the National Preparedness Directorate,
DOD is currently conducting a capabilities-based assessment of homeland
security requirements and related capabilities to help prepare for
situations in which DOD capabilities would need to be integrated into
the homeland security mission. Representatives from DHS are
participating with DOD in the assessment. § 651(c).
* Establishment of Inventory Database: According to FEMA officials in
the National Preparedness Directorate, there is an information system,
based on the TCL, that includes a feature that allows grouping of
resources into capabilities, but the information system does not
provide information in real time. FEMA officials also stated that the
system has the capability for real-time exchange to be established in
the future, but it needs to be able to pull data from a number of
systems that are not currently linked. According to officials in FEMA's
Disaster Operations Directorate, FEMA intends to upgrade its National
Response Coordination Center capabilities with the installation of a
Web-based software system called the Emergency Management Information
Management System. These officials said that the software system will
operate in real-time and will be used to support disaster operations
management, maintain situational awareness, and coordinate information
sharing. According to these officials, FEMA's longer term goal is to
use this software system to create a larger national asset database of
all federal response teams for all hazards. § 651(d).
Challenges DHS and FEMA Officials Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
Post-Katrina Act § 652, Reporting Requirements:
Requires the FEMA Administrator to submit annually to Congress a
Federal Preparedness Report, describing the nation's level of
preparedness for all hazards, and a Catastrophic Resource Report,
describing the federal resources needed for and devoted to developing
the capabilities of all levels of government to respond to a
catastrophic incident. This section also requires a state receiving
federal preparedness assistance to submit a report to the FEMA
Administrator on the state's level of preparedness.
Actions Taken:
* State Preparedness Report: In the fiscal year 2008 Homeland Security
Grant Program guidance, DHS required that State Preparedness Reports be
submitted by March 31, 2008, and DHS received all 56 reports (for the
states, territories, and the District of Columbia) by early April 2008.
According to officials in FEMA's National Preparedness Directorate,
FEMA analyzed each report and used them to produce substantive analysis
on nationwide trends, identify areas for increased attention, and
inform broader assessments of national preparedness. These officials
told us that the agency provided guidance on how states should
interpret Post-Katrina Act language for reporting purposes. For
example, the law requires states to provide an assessment of their
current capability levels, and FEMA guidance for this requirement
instructed states to report data using the capabilities included in the
TCL. § 652(c).
Areas to Be Addressed:
* Federal Preparedness Report: FEMA has not submitted this report to
Congress. According to officials in FEMA's National Preparedness
Directorate, the Federal Preparedness Report is in the final stages of
review, and they expect to submit it to Congress soon. They said that
the National Preparedness Directorate is also providing detailed
briefings to Congress every 90 days addressing its progress and
gathering congressional recommendations for additional data and
information. According to these officials, the draft report is based
primarily on DHS data and information, but it does contain some other
federal information, such as hospital preparedness grants funded by the
Department of Health and Human Services. § 652(a).
* Catastrophic Resource Report: FEMA has not submitted this report to
Congress. Officials in FEMA's National Preparedness Directorate said
that FEMA plans to merge this reporting requirement with its Federal
Preparedness Report and to incorporate information from the State
Preparedness Reports. However, FEMA officials did not provide
information regarding the combined report's status or its expected
submission date to Congress. § 652(b).
Challenges DHS and FEMA Officials:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
Post-Katrina Act § 653, Federal Preparedness:
Requires, among other things, that each federal agency with
responsibilities under the NRF develop operational plans and
corresponding capabilities to ensure a coordinated federal response.
Such plans must be certified by the President on an annual basis. This
section further requires the FEMA Administrator, in coordination with
other federal agencies with responsibilities under the NRF, to develop
prescripted mission assignments.
Actions Taken:
* Prescripted Mission Assignments: FEMA finalized a catalogue of
prescripted mission assignments (PSMA) in June 2008. There are 223
PSMAs in the catalogue, and they are listed by Emergency Support
Function employed under the NRF. According to FEMA officials in the
Disaster Operations Directorate, the PSMA catalogue will be continually
updated based on experiences and lessons learned from disasters and
simulation exercises. For example, since the June publication of the
catalogue, officials in the Disaster Operations Directorate reported
that it has already been updated with a supplement, bringing the total
number of PSMAs to 236, scripted for 33 separate agencies. § 653(c).
Areas to Be Addressed:
* Development of Operational Plans: FEMA officials in the National
Preparedness Directorate stated that federal agency operational plans
in support of the NRF are being developed, but they have yet to be
finalized or disseminated. Officials in FEMA's Disaster Operations
Directorate told us that the federal government's Integrated Planning
System is currently in the final stages of interagency review. The
planning system is intended to be the underlying framework for
conducting all deliberate federal interagency incident planning,
including operational planning. According to these officials, the
Secretary of Homeland Security begins the planning process by approving
Strategic Guidance Statements for each of the 15 National Planning
Scenarios. Once a statement is approved for a planning scenario, a
strategic plan will be developed, which will define overarching
missions and authorities, and delineate federal roles and
responsibilities. FEMA will also begin developing a concept plan, which
will describe a concept of operations for integrating and synchronizing
existing capabilities to accomplish mission essential tasks.
Departmental and agency operational plans, which will identify detailed
resource, personnel, and asset allocations in order to execute the
objectives of the strategic plan, will be developed, after FEMA
completes a concept plan. § 653(a)(4).
Challenges DHS and FEMA Officials Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
Post-Katrina Act, § 654, Use of Existing Resources:
Requires the FEMA Administrator to use existing preparedness documents,
planning tools, and guidelines in establishing the national
preparedness goal and the national preparedness system, to the extent
practicable and consistent with the Post-Katrina Act.
Actions Taken:
* Revision of Existing Preparedness Documents: Several initiatives
underpinning the Post-Katrina Act's national preparedness system were
underway as a result of Homeland Security Presidential Directive-8
(HSPD-8), which was issued on December 17, 2003. HSPD-8 required the
development of the national preparedness goal; preparedness priorities;
a comprehensive assessment system; a training and exercise program; a
system to collect, analyze, and disseminate lessons learned, best
practices, and information from exercises, training events, and actual
incidents; equipment standards; and a federal response capability
inventory, including DOD civil support resources. Because HSPD-8
preceded the Post-Katrina Act, FEMA was able to adapt existing
preparedness documents, tools, and guidelines in developing the new
preparedness system. For example, the Interim National Preparedness
Goal, issued in March 2005, was revised and renamed the National
Preparedness Guidelines. Likewise, the TCL and the National Planning
Scenarios, which accompanied the Interim National Preparedness Goal,
have been retained and updated as part of the new national preparedness
system. Other initiatives, such as RAMP (i.e., one of the programs for
tracking lessons learned and best practices from training, exercises,
and actual events), preceded the Post-Katrina Act and have been
continued within the new national preparedness system. § 654.
Challenges DHS and FEMA Officials Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
Post-Katrina Act § 663, Transfer of Noble Training Center:
Specifies that the Noble Training Center is transferred to the Center
for Domestic Preparedness, which shall integrate the Noble Training
Center into its program structure.
Actions Taken:
* Transfer: According to officials in FEMA's National Preparedness
Directorate, the Noble Training Center was transferred to the Center
for Domestic Preparedness in April 2007 at the same time that the
Center for Domestic Preparedness was transferred to FEMA. Officials in
the National Preparedness Directorate also told us that the medical
training curriculum previously offered at the Noble Training Center,
renamed the Center for Domestic Preparedness Noble Training Facility,
has been completely revised and fully integrated into the Center for
Domestic Preparedness's training program. § 663.
Challenges DHS and FEMA Officials Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
Post-Katrina Act § 664, National Exercise Simulation Center:
Requires the President to establish a National Exercise Simulation
Center (NESC) that uses a mix of live, virtual, and constructive
simulations to, among other things, provide a learning environment for
the homeland security personnel of all federal agencies, and that uses
modeling and simulation for training, exercises, and command and
control functions at the operational level.
Actions Taken:
* Preliminary Support: FEMA has been using FEMA Simulation Centers, DOD
facilities, and other facilities to support exercise simulation while
it develops the NESC. For example, FEMA officials said that FEMA has
provided initial exercise simulation support for exercises requiring
the two highest levels of federal interagency participation in the
National Exercise Program. § 664.
Areas to Be Addressed:
* Establishment: According to an official in FEMA's National
Integration
Center, the NESC is currently under development and is estimated to
take 3-4 years to fully establish. FEMA, in conjunction with its
relevant partners, has started to define requirements for the NESC,
according to the Assistant Deputy Administrator for National
Preparedness. § 664.
Challenges DHS and FEMA Officials Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
Post-Katrina Act § 682, National Disaster Recovery Strategy:
Requires the FEMA Administrator, in coordination with specified and
other appropriate federal agencies, nonfederal government officials
(including through the NAC), and representatives from appropriate
nongovernmental organizations, to develop, coordinate, and maintain a
National Disaster Recovery Strategy (NDRS) to serve as a guide to
recovery efforts after major disasters and emergencies. Specifies
required contents for the NDRS and requires the FEMA Administrator to
submit a report to Congress describing the NDRS in detail and any
additional authorities necessary to implement it.
Actions Taken:
* Initial Draft: FEMA has developed the NDRS, which is currently in
draft form. According to the Deputy Assistant Administrator for
Disaster Assistance, the NDRS has had initial vetting by federal
partners, but it has not yet gone to the states or out of the Disaster
Assistance Directorate for internal DHS review. § 682(a).
Areas to Be Addressed:
* Completion of the NDRS: As of August 1, 2008, the NDRS was still
under review and FEMA officials could not estimate when it would be
released. § 682(a).
* Coordination: While FEMA officials stated that they shared the draft
NDRS with federal partners for initial vetting, FEMA has not yet taken
action to coordinate with nonfederal or nongovernmental stakeholders,
including the NAC. § 682(a).
* Reporting Requirement: FEMA has not yet reported to Congress on the
NDRS and has not yet taken action to consider what, if any, additional
authorities will be required to carry out the NDRS for inclusion in
that report. § 682(c)(1).
Challenges DHS and FEMA Officials Identified:
* According to the Deputy Assistant Administrator for Disaster
Assistance, a number of factors have contributed to the delay in the
completion of the NDRS. These factors included waiting for the
completion of National Disaster Housing Strategy and the NRF, obtaining
current program information from other federal agencies, and deciding
the proper extent of the NDRS's review process.
Post-Katrina Act § 683, National Disaster Housing Strategy:
Requires the FEMA Administrator, in coordination with specified federal
and nonfederal government agencies, the American Red Cross, the NAC,
and the NCD, to develop, coordinate, and maintain a National Disaster
Housing Strategy (NDHS). Specifies required contents for the NDHS and
requires the FEMA Administrator to issue guidance summarizing the types
of Stafford Act housing assistance, eligibility requirements, and
application procedures.
Actions Taken:
* Release of Draft National Disaster Housing Strategy: FEMA released a
draft NDHS on July 21, 2008, for a 60-day public comment period, which
it later extended by 7 days to September 29, 2008. The draft includes
four chapters: (1) Introduction, (2) Responsibilities and Roles (which
is a required component of the strategy), (3) Disaster Housing: Current
Practices and Future Directions, and (4) Implementing the Strategy. §
683(a), (b)(2).
* Coordination: According to officials in FEMA's National Preparedness
Directorate, the NAC became involved in October 2007 and has
participated in drafting annexes for the second draft version of the
NDHS. The officials said the draft has been shared with the NAC and
other external agencies and that FEMA has received comments from the
NAC, as well as others. In addition, these officials reported that in
drafting the annexes, FEMA has been coordinating with several other
agencies including, among others, the Department of Housing and Urban
Development, the Department of Health and Human Services, the General
Services Administration, the Small Business Administration, the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers, the Department of Labor, the Bureau of Indian
Affairs, and the Veteran's Administration. § 683(a), (b)(2).
Areas to Be Addressed:
* Plan Content: The draft NDHS released for public comment lists seven
annexes, but states that these are "under development." The titles of
these annexes appear to correspond with specific content requirements
of the Post-Katrina Act, as well as the requirement to provide guidance
on the types of Stafford Act housing assistance. § 683(b)--(c).
* Completion of the Strategy: FEMA has yet to finalize the NDHS. As of
August 1, 2008, FEMA officials could not estimate when the draft would
be finalized and its annexes completed. § 683(a).
Challenges DHS and FEMA Officials Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
For Further Reading:
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. National Emergency Communications
Plan. Washington D.C.: July 2008.
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. National Preparedness Guidelines.
Washington D.C.: September 2007.
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. National Response Framework.
Washington D.C.: January 2008.
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Target Capabilities List.
Washington D.C.: September 2007.
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Federal Emergency Management
Agency. Authorized Equipment List. [hyperlink,
https://www.rkb.us/mel.cfm?subtypeid=549] (accessed Sept. 5, 2008).
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Federal Emergency Management
Agency. Comprehensive Preparedness Guide 101: Producing Emergency Plans
(Interim Version 1.0). Washington D.C.: August 1, 2008.
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Federal Emergency Management
Agency. Fiscal Year 2008 Emergency Management Performance Grants
Guidance and Application Kit. Washington D.C.: February 2008.
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Federal Emergency Management
Agency. Fiscal Year 2008 Homeland Security Grant Program Guidance and
Application Kit. Washington D.C.: February 2008.
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Federal Emergency Management
Agency. Lessons Learned Information Sharing. [hyperlink,
https://www.llis.dhs.gov] (accessed Nov. 12, 2008).
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Federal Emergency Management
Agency. National Disaster Housing Strategy (Draft). Washington D.C.:
July 2008.
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Federal Emergency Management
Agency. National Response Framework Resource Center. "Incident
Annexes." [hyperlink,
http://www.fema.gov/emergency/nrf/incidentannexes.htm]
(accessed Sept. 4, 2008).
[End of section]
Enclosure VI: Supporting Regional Preparedness and Cooperation:
Post Katrina Act § 611 (Homeland Security Act § 507), Regional Offices:
Requires that each of the 10 regional offices be headed by a Regional
Administrator; enumerates the responsibilities of Regional
Administrators; designates area offices for Alaska, the Pacific, and
the Caribbean; requires each Regional Administrator to establish a
Regional Advisory Council; requires each Regional Administrator to
oversee regional office strike teams; and, if the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) Administrator determines additional
authorities are necessary for deploying or preparing regional office
strike teams, requires the FEMA Administrator to report this need to
Congress.
Actions Taken:
* Management of Regional Offices: According to officials in FEMA's
Disaster Operations Directorate, Regional Administrators head each of
the regional offices, and are members of the Senior Executive Service.
They report directly to the FEMA Administrator. Each of the Regional
Administrators had professional experience in emergency management and
homeland security prior to his or her appointment as Regional
Administrator. § 507(b).
* Regional Administrator Responsibilities: According to officials in
FEMA's Disaster Operations Directorate, the Regional Administrator's
role in enhancing capabilities to prevent, protect against, respond to,
and recover from all hazards is outlined in the Regional-National
Preparedness Concept of Operations. This document specifies that
Regional Administrators and Deputy Regional Administrators are
responsible for the day-to-day management and administration of
regional activities and staff. This document also specifies that
Federal Preparedness Coordinators, as representatives of the Regional
Administrators, oversee and coordinate regional preparedness program
management for their regional offices. In addition, FEMA has expanded
the authority of the Regional Administrators by transferring
administrative and operational authority of specific preparedness
personnel from their respective headquarters elements to the Regional
Administrators. The following are additional actions FEMA and regional
offices have taken to implement their Post-Katrina Act
responsibilities:
- Coordinating the Establishment of Operable and Interoperable
Emergency Communications Capabilities: According to the Deputy
Assistant Administrator of FEMA's Disaster Operations Directorate, each
of the regional offices has a designated disaster emergency
communications staff member who provides operational and tactical
support.
- Strategic and Operational Planning: According to FEMA officials in
the Disaster Operations Directorate, the regional offices are in the
process of hiring regional operational planners. FEMA expects to have
three to four operational planners in each of the regional offices by
the end of fiscal year 2008. As stated in the Regional-National
Preparedness Concept of Operations, each of the regional offices is to
have a Preparedness Analysis and Planning Officer, who is responsible
for, among other things, the development of annual and multiyear
regional preparedness strategies. According to Disaster Operations
Directorate officials, each planning officer is expected to have a
number of Preparedness Analysis and Planning Specialists to provide
support. In addition, FEMA reported that it has a new Regional
Catastrophic Planning Grant Program in place to help improve the level
of planning capabilities within the states. The program is administered
by the Federal Preparedness Coordinators through their regional
offices.
- Fostering Cooperative Agreements: According to FEMA officials in the
Disaster Operations Directorate, the FEMA Regional Offices have
established Regional Emergency Management Advisory Committees that are
cross-border emergency management groups comprised of U.S. states,
Canadian provinces, and federal partners. For example, one such
committee includes Ontario, Quebec, Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana,
Michigan, Ohio, New York, and Pennsylvania. These officials said that
there are three other committees based in different regions of the
country, two of which have emergency management assistance compacts in
place that have been ratified by Congress. Additionally, the officials
noted that the regional offices have fostered the development of
cooperative agreements through evacuation planning with their
respective states as well as New Madrid Seismic Zone catastrophic
planning. Furthermore, the officials said the National Emergency
Management Association has developed and markets model intrastate
mutual aid legislation. According to these officials, this model
legislation provides states with a legal framework to address
reimbursement, workers compensation and liability issues for official
actions, and the foundation to execute mutual aid. This model
legislation, according to the officials, also encourages participants
to develop a system that addresses the logistical issues of inventory,
status, ordering, support, and returning of resources.
- Identifying Capability Gaps in Responding to Special Needs
Populations: According to officials in the Disaster Operations
Directorate, FEMA's Gap Analysis Program uses a consistent, national
approach to determine asset gaps at the local, state, and national
levels, which they consider to be a critical component of preparedness
and planning. The Gap Analysis Program examines transportation and
evacuation, sheltering/mass care (general and special needs populations
and companion animals), and other areas.
- Regional Response Coordination Centers: According to officials in
FEMA's Disaster Operations Directorate, each regional office maintains
a Regional Response Coordination Center. In addition, they said that
the regional offices continue to hire Watch Analysts to support the
coordination centers.
- Participation in Exercises: According to officials in FEMA's Disaster
Operations Directorate, a review of Regional Exercise Support program-
funded exercises indicates that out of the 44 regional exercises
conducted in fiscal year 2008, all 10 Regional Administrators
participated in at least 1 regional-level exercise. These officials
said that Regional Administrators from Regions 9 and 10 participated in
a national-level exercise program called Top Officials 4 Full-Scale
Exercise in 2007. In addition, they reported that Regional
Administrators from Regions 3 and 10 participated in a national-level
exercise, while the Regional Administrator from Region VI participated
in both planning and conducting a regional-level exercise in 2008.
Finally, they said that Region 9's Regional Administrator also
participated in the conduct of a tabletop exercise in 2008.
§ 507(c)(2)-(3).
* Area Offices: FEMA established area offices for Alaska, the Pacific,
and the Caribbean. The Pacific office is located in Hawaii (FEMA Region
9), the Caribbean office is located in Puerto Rico (Region 2), and the
Alaska office is located in Anchorage, Alaska (Region 10). § 507(d).
* Regional Advisory Councils: The FEMA Associate Deputy Administrator
said that each of the regional offices has established a Regional
Advisory Council. According to the Regional Administrator for Region 3,
each of the Regional Advisory Councils has met at least once and
discussed issues ranging from training and exercises to strategies to
enhance private/public partnerships. § 507(e).
* Regional Strike Teams: According to Disaster Operations Directorate
officials, "strike teams" and "emergency response teams," the Post-
Katrina Act's terms for the support teams deployed to assist in major
disasters and emergencies under the Stafford Act, are now called
Incident Management Assistance Teams (IMAT). IMATs are interagency
national-or regional-based teams composed of subject matter experts and
incident-management professionals, and are designed to manage and
coordinate national response emergencies and major disasters. According
to the officials, Regional Administrators oversee IMATs based within
their regions. IMAT personnel are intended to be permanent, full-time
employees whose duties and responsibilities are solely focused on their
IMAT functions. The officials said that the IMATs' other functions
include working with state and local emergency managers to plan,
prepare, and train for disasters; running exercises; and building
relationships with emergency managers and other IMAT personnel.
- Staffing Regional IMATs: Disaster Operations Directorate officials
said that IMATs had been established in FEMA Regions 4, 5, and 6, as of
August 1, 2008. The officials also said that FEMA intends to establish
IMATs in all 10 regions by the end of fiscal year 2011. According to
the officials, each of the strike team positions described in the Post-
Katrina Act, for example, the Federal Coordinating Officer, is
represented in the established IMATs. Further, the officials explained
that each of the 10 FEMA Regions has a Defense Coordinating Officer.
This officer can be added to augment and support the IMAT when
activated in response to a major disaster or an emergency. A Defense
Coordinating Officer is required by the Post-Katrina Act in each
Regional Office Strike Team. According to the officials, FEMA's draft
IMAT Concept of Operations states that personnel from FEMA
headquarters, other regional offices, and other federal agencies may be
organized with the IMAT as appropriate depending on the situation.
Further, the draft IMAT Concept of Operations also specifically
includes a designated Liaison Officer within the National Team to
coordinate with external entities, including the Department of Defense.
- Statutory Authority: According to FEMA officials in the Disaster
Operations Directorate, FEMA has made no determination that the
statutory authority is inadequate in regards to the IMATs. § 507(c)(2),
(f).
Areas to Be Addressed:
* Establishing IMATs: According to Disaster Operations Directorate
officials, as of August 1, 2008, FEMA had not established IMATs for 7
of the 10 regions, but intends to do so by the end of fiscal year 2011.
§ 507(c)(2), (f).
* IMAT Credentialing and Training Program: Officials in the Disaster
Operations Directorate said that FEMA intends to develop a
credentialing and training program for all IMAT positions. According to
these officials, the agency is in the process of setting up focus
groups to analyze positions and existing courses to identify training
requirements for each position. FEMA plans to use this information to
guide the development of the IMAT Training and Credentialing Standard
Operating Procedures and establish a training curriculum (i.e.,
courses, field experience, and exercises) for various positions by
types/levels. § 507(f)(5).
* Training for Regional Administrators: As of August 1, 2008, FEMA has
not established specific training requirements for its Regional
Administrators. § 507(c)(3).
Challenges FEMA and DHS Officials Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
Post Katrina Act § 661, Emergency Management Assistance Compact Grants:
Authorizes FEMA to provide grants to administer the Emergency
Management Assistance Compact (EMAC).[Footnote 24]
Actions Taken:
* EMAC Grant: In an undated memorandum of agreement regarding resource
typing, credentialing, and mutual aid systems, FEMA agreed to provide
the National Emergency Management Association (NEMA) with funds to
serve as EMAC's executive agent and administrator through a cooperative
agreement. According to the Assistant Deputy Administrator of FEMA's
National Preparedness Directorate, in 2007, FEMA provided NEMA $1
million in accordance with this agreement and the amount was increased
in 2008 to $2.5 million. FEMA officials said that the funds have been
committed and obligated. According to the EMAC Cooperative Agreement
Scope of Work, NEMA intends to implement the following objectives and
tasks to enhance and improve interstate mutual aid through EMAC: (1)
develop and implement an online training and education program; (2)
hire additional training and education staff; (3) enhance coordination
with FEMA, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and the federal
government; (4) continue to develop National Incident Management
System-compliant resource-typed mission packages and review and analyze
existing registries used to support credentialing programs; (5) conduct
a pilot project to develop resource staging capabilities in select
states; (6) develop internal operational capacity to support major EMAC
activations; (7) fund full-time administration and staff for EMAC; and
(8) facilitate international mutual aid assistance. Several of these
tasks, such as the training and education program, resource typing and
credentialing, and developing operational capacity, reflect
recommendations that NEMA had made after conducting an after-action
review of the mutual aid response during the 2005 Hurricane season.
§ 661(a)-(b).
* Coordination: According to FEMA officials, NEMA, under the EMAC
Cooperative Agreement, established and maintains the EMAC Advisory
Group for the purpose of bringing stakeholders together to coordinate
activities, and prevent duplication of efforts and confusion. FEMA
officials said that the EMAC Senior Policy Advisor serves on the
National Incident Management System Project Support Team as well as
several of the nine working groups, which are composed of various
emergency management disciplines, to bring EMAC expertise to their
deliberations on resource management, resource typing, credentialing,
information management for decision support, and Incident Command
System field operating guides and forms. In addition, the officials
said that the EMAC Executive Task Force Chair served as the Chair of
the National Incident Management System Credentialing Working Group
that drafted credentialing guidelines. Furthermore, they noted that the
EMAC Director has served as a member of the subcommittee preparing a
national standard on resource management. § 661(b)(3)-(4), (c).
Challenges FEMA and DHS Officials Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
Post Katrina Act § 671 (Homeland Security Act § 1805), Regional
Emergency Communications Coordination:
Establishes in each regional office a Regional Emergency Communications
Coordination (RECC) working group and enumerates its duties, which
include reporting to the Regional Administrator and coordinating across
regional entities and jurisdictions to support the ability to
communicate during disasters; identifies the agencies and organizations
that the working groups are required to represent; and identifies
public and private organizations with which to coordinate their
activities.
Actions Taken:
* Establishment: As of August 1, 2008, 7 of the 10 RECC working groups
had been established with 6 having met at least once, according to
Disaster Operations Directorate officials. § 1805(a).
* Coordination: FEMA officials in the Disaster Operations Directorate
stated that 2 RECC workings groups, as of August 1, 2008, had partial
coordination with the groups described in the Post-Katrina Act. §
1805(c).
* Local Emergency Communications Systems Assessment: According to FEMA
officials in the Disaster Operations Directorate, 1 RECC working group,
as of August 1, 2008, had completed its assessment of the
survivability, sustainability, and interoperability of local emergency
communications systems to meet the goals of the National Emergency
Communications Plan. The agency further specified that 4 of the
regional offices (3 of which have established RECC working groups, but
1 does not) were in the process of completing this assessment, as of
August 1, 2008. § 1805(d)(1).
* Process for Multijurisdictional Coordination: As of August 1, 2008, 1
RECC working group was establishing a process for the coordination of a
multijurisdictional, multiagency emergency communication network for
use during disasters through the use of mutual aid agreements,
according to officials in the Disaster Operations Directorate. §
1805(d)(3).
Areas to Be Addressed:
* Establishment: As of August 1, 2008, three of the ten RECC working
groups had not yet been established, according to FEMA Disaster
Operations Directorate Officials. § 1805(a).
* Federal Representation in RECC Working Groups: We received membership
rosters for the seven RECC working groups that have been established to
date. At the federal level, although the Post-Katrina Act requires each
RECC working group to include representatives from DHS, the Federal
Communications Commission, and other federal agencies with relevant
responsibilities, only one of the rosters included a representative
from the Federal Communications Commission, and two of the rosters
listed no federal representatives at all, including none from DHS. §
1805(b)(2).
* Nonfederal Representation in RECC Working Groups: As of August 1,
2008, four of the seven RECC working group membership rosters that we
received do no not include all the representatives from the nonfederal
elements described in the Post-Katrina Act. § 1805(b)(1).
* Coordination: FEMA officials from the Disaster Operations Directorate
reported that five of the seven established RECC working groups, as of
August 1, 2008, had not coordinated with the nonfederal groups
described in the Post-Katrina Act. § 1805(c).
* Local Emergency Communications Systems Assessment: According to FEMA
Disaster Operations Directorate officials, five regional offices (two
of which are without RECC working groups), as of August 1, 2008, had
not started their assessment of the survivability, sustainability, and
interoperability of local emergency communications systems to meet the
goals of the National Emergency Communications Plan. § 1805(d)(1).
* Annual Reporting: As of August 1, 2008, FEMA officials in the
Disaster Operations Directorate said that all the regional offices
(i.e., the seven regional offices with established RECC working groups
and the three regional offices without them) were preparing to report
on the status of their regions in building robust and sustainable
interoperable voice and data emergency communications networks.
According to these officials, the reports are due on September 31,
2008. § 1805(d)(2).
* Process for Multijurisdictional Coordination: As of August 1, 2008,
six of the seven established RECC working groups have yet to start
establishing a process for the coordination of a multijurisdictional,
multiagency emergency communication network for use during disasters
through the use of mutual aid agreements, according to officials in the
Disaster Operations Directorate. § 1805(d)(3).
* Establishment of Support Services: FEMA's Disaster Operations
Directorate officials reported that, as of August 1, 2008, none of the
RECC working groups have coordinated the establishment of federal,
state, local, or tribal support services and networks designed to
address immediate and critical human needs in responding to disasters.
§ 1805(d)(4).
Challenges FEMA and DHS Officials Identified:
* A senior FEMA official in the Disaster Operations Directorate stated
that the lack of travel funds for members of the RECC working groups
prevented them from meeting and carrying out the duties of the working
groups.
Post Katrina Act § 671 (Homeland Security Act § 1807), Urban and Other
High-Risk Area Communications Capabilities:
Requires DHS to provide technical guidance, training, and other
assistance, as appropriate, to support the rapid establishment of
consistent, secure, and effective interoperable emergency
communications capabilities in the event of an emergency in urban and
other high-risk areas.
Actions Taken:
* Technical Assistance: According to the Deputy Director of the Office
of Emergency Communications, DHS has supported the rapid establishment
of interoperable emergency communications capabilities of urban and
other high-risk areas by providing technical assistance to Urban Area
Security Initiative (UASI) grant recipients. Through the Interoperable
Communications Technical Assistance Program, FEMA provided technical
support and conducted workshops to assist UASI grant recipients in
developing Tactical Interoperable Communications Plans, which are plans
designed to prepare agencies for tactical interoperable communications
sharing during an incident. For example, we reported in 2007 that
FEMA's technical assistance representatives met with public safety
agencies in the Miami area to compile an inventory of regional
emergency communications capabilities in support of developing the
area's tactical plan. § 1807(a).
Challenges FEMA and DHS Officials Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
For Further Reading:
Emergency Management Assistance Compact. "Intrastate-Mutual Aid
Legislation." [hyperlink, http://www.emacweb.org/?150] (accessed on
Aug. 29, 2008).
U.S. Congress. House. Subcommittee on Emergency Communications,
Preparedness and Response, Committee on Homeland Security. Hearing on
the National Emergency Communications Plan. 110th Cong., 2nd sess. July
15, 2008.
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Federal Emergency Management
Agency. "Disaster Operations Directorate: Fact Sheet." [hyperlink,
http://www.fema.gov/media/fact_sheets/dod.shtm] (accessed on July 17,
2008).
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Federal Emergency Management
Agency. "FEMA Leadership." [hyperlink,
http://www.fema.gov/about/bios/index.shtm] (accessed on Feb. 26, 2008).
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Federal Emergency Management
Agency. "Interoperable Communications Technical Assistance Program."
[hyperlink, http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/odp/ta_ictap.htm] (accessed on
Sept. 5, 2008).
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Federal Emergency Management
Agency. "Regional Contacts." [hyperlink,
http://www.fema.gov/about/contact/regions.shtm] (accessed on Sept. 5,
2008).
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Federal Emergency Management
Agency. "Resource Management: Mutual Aid." [hyperlink,
http://www.fema.gov/emergency/nims/rm/ma.shtm] (accessed on Sept. 5,
2008).
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. National Response Framework
Resource Center. "References." [hyperlink,
http://www.fema.gov/emergency/nrf/] (accessed on Sept. 5, 2008).
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. "TOPOFF: Exercising National
Preparedness." [hyperlink,
http://www.dhs.gov/xprepresp/training/gc_1179350946764.shtm] (accessed
on Sept. 5, 2008).
[End of section]
Enclosure VII: Improving Timely Delivery of Goods and Services in
Disaster Events:
Post-Katrina Act § 636, Logistics:
Requires FEMA to develop an efficient, transparent, and flexible
logistics system for procurement and delivery of goods and services
necessary for an effective and timely emergency response.
Actions Taken:
* FEMA's Logistics Mission: According to the National Response
Framework's Emergency Support Function 7, Logistics Management and
Resource Support, FEMA is responsible for providing a comprehensive
national disaster logistics planning, management, and sustainment
capability that uses the resources of federal partners, public and
private groups, and other stakeholders to meet disaster response and
recovery needs. FEMA's Logistics Management Directorate (LMD) is the
program office responsible for carrying out this mission. The following
are actions taken by LMD to improve its logistics capabilities:
- Enhancing Logistics Management: Seeking to develop an effective and
efficient logistics planning and operations capability, FEMA elevated
its logistics office from the branch to the directorate level in April
2007. Additionally, LMD has adopted the concept of the National
Logistics Coordinator (NLC) as its mission. The NLC, as envisioned by
FEMA, will work with its partners to coordinate domestic emergency
logistics capabilities, promote the collaboration of government
agencies, private sector groups and other stakeholders, and improve
disaster readiness, responsiveness, and preparedness.
- Building Logistics Partnerships: FEMA and the U.S. General Services
Administration--FEMA's colead for Emergency Support Function 7--
sponsored the National Logistics Coordination Forum, which was held in
March 2008. The forum was intended to open a dialogue between the
sponsors and their logistics partners, and to discuss how to better
involve the private sector in planning for and recovering from
disasters. The forum was also intended to initiate the development of a
charter and operating doctrine for the NLC concept. In attendance were
representatives from other federal agencies, public and private sector
groups, nongovernmental organizations, and other stakeholders.
- Improving the Supply Chain: According to the agency, FEMA's supply
chain can deliver disaster commodities and equipment from its logistics
centers to points of distribution during disaster operations. To
improve its supply chain management, FEMA brought in a supply chain
expert from the United Parcel Service through its Loaned Executive
Program. FEMA also has a Private Sector Office to exchange information
on best practices and to facilitate engagement with the private sector.
In addition, FEMA established a Distribution Management Strategy
Working Group in January 2008 to analyze and develop a comprehensive
distribution and supply chain management strategy.
- Improving Logistics Visibility: As of August 1, 2008, FEMA had fully
implemented Total Asset Visibility (TAV) programs in Regions 4 and 6 to
track and manage electronically and in real time the movement of its
disaster commodities and assets. According to FEMA LMD officials, TAV
is partially available in the other 8 FEMA regions. The tracking and
monitoring of disaster assets is performed by a group of trained TAV
Specialists in each region.
- Assuming Emergency Transportation Responsibility: FEMA's LMD assumed
emergency transportation responsibility from the Department of
Transportation in 2007, according to LMD officials. These LMD officials
said FEMA carries out its emergency transportation responsibilities by
(1) processing and coordinating requests for federal transportation
support from FEMA Regions, Distribution Centers, National Logistics
Staging Areas and Joint Field Offices, Emergency Support Functions, and
other organizations, including requests for military transportation;
(2) acquiring transportation services and in-transit visibility of
transportation assets into and out of disaster areas; and (3) assisting
in the implementation of alternate transportation services. DHS and
FEMA signed a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with the General Services
Administration for emergency transportation support, which had
previously been supplied by a private-sector vendor under the
Department of Transportation. Additionally, the MOA outlines FEMA and
the General Services Administration's respective responsibilities for
Emergency Support Function 7 (Logistics). The officials also noted that
LMD's Transportation Branch works closely with Emergency Support
Function 1 (Transportation), to be aware of highway infrastructure
issues that could affect FEMA movements.
- Staffing a Professional Workforce: At the time of our work, LMD had
hired 22 of 25 full-time employees (FTE) for fiscal year 2008, and is
continuing the hiring process to meet its fiscal year 2008 hiring goal.
LMD intends to complete its hiring actions by September 30, 2008, and
has been allocated an additional 30 FTEs for fiscal year 2009.
- Delivering Individual Assistance Services: According to the FEMA
Administrator, as of August 1, 2008, FEMA can mobilize 60 Mobile
Disaster Recovery Centers to assist disaster victims on-site. Mobile
Disaster Recovery Vehicles are used to support these centers. As of
August 1, 2008, FEMA was in the process of hiring a permanent, full-
time manager and drafting a budget for a program to manage its fleet of
60 Mobile Disaster Recovery Vehicles, according to LMD officials.
- Providing Logistical Support for FEMA's Housing Program: FEMA
transitioned the logistics management of its temporary housing unit
program from the regional offices to FEMA headquarters, according to
LMD officials. The officials said that the Concept of Operations for
the temporary housing unit program was signed by the Assistant
Administrator of LMD on May 12, 2008, and issued as a "Working Draft"
for the 2008 hurricane season. The officials further noted that LMD
plans to collect lessons learned from the 2008 hurricane season and
publish a final operating procedure in the first or second quarter of
fiscal year 2009. § 636.
Areas to Be Addressed:
* Transforming LMD: In 2007, FEMA conducted the Logistics Management
Transformation Initiative, a comprehensive assessment of FEMA's
logistics planning, processes, and technology. LMD officials intend for
this initiative to help inform the development of a long-term strategy
to transform FEMA's business processes and identify information
technology (IT) development opportunities. According to LMD officials,
FEMA plans to complete this transformation by 2009, and review and
refine business processes by 2014. § 636.
* Strategic and Operational Plans: The DHS Office of Inspector General
reported in May 2008 that, while FEMA had developed a logistics
planning strategy that calls for developing three levels of logistics
plans (strategic, operational, and tactical), the FEMA Incident
Logistics Concept of Operations and a Logistics Management Operations
Manual were still in draft. As of August 1, 2008, LMD officials could
not estimate when the documents would be finalized. § 636.
* Logistics Visibility: In May 2008, the DHS Office of the Inspector
General also reported that FEMA's IT systems do not provide the agency
with complete asset visibility, comprehensive asset management, or
integrated information during disaster response, but noted that FEMA
has made efforts to improve its IT systems. According to LMD officials,
the aspect of TAV FEMA uses to manage warehouse inventory is only
available at Distribution Centers in Atlanta, Georgia, and Fort Worth,
Texas. The officials stated that FEMA expects to deploy the warehouse
management portion of TAV to the other six FEMA distribution centers--
in Berryville, Virginia; Frederick, Maryland; San Jose, California;
Guam; Hawaii; and Puerto Rico--in fiscal years 2009 and 2010. Further,
the officials said that shipments from FEMA's logistics partners are
not yet tracked through TAV, but FEMA is working with the General
Services Administration, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and American Red
Cross to integrate their shipments into TAV to provide full visibility
of these partners' critical shipments to disaster areas. § 636.
* Logistics Credentialing: As of August 1, 2008, LMD was planning to
implement a prototype logistics-management credentialing program,
according to LMD officials. The officials said that LMD plans to focus
the program initially on the FEMA headquarters workforce, then expand
it to the regions, and eventually include other agencies and states. §
636.
Challenges FEMA and DHS Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
Post-Katrina Act § 637, Prepositioned Equipment Program:
Requires FEMA to establish a prepositioned equipment program in at
least 11 different locations. This section also requires FEMA, when
closing a prepositioned program, to notify affected state, local, and
tribal officials not later than 60 days before such closure.
Actions Taken:
* Prepositioned Equipment Program: FEMA's Disaster Operations
Directorate is responsible for the management of the Prepositioned
Equipment Program. As of August 1, 2008, there were prepositioned
equipment programs in eight different locations across the country,
according to officials in the Disaster Operations Directorate. §
637(a).
* Advance Notice of Closure: According to officials in FEMA's Disaster
Operations Directorate, four Prepositioned Equipment Program sites were
transferred in spring 2006 (prior to the passage of the Post-Katrina
Act) from: Long Beach, California to Moffett Field, California;
Albuquerque, New Mexico to Ft. Worth, Texas; Chantilly, Virginia to
Frederick, Maryland; and Tampa/St. Petersburg, Florida to Atlanta,
Georgia. At the time the program was managed by FEMA's Logistics Branch
(now the Logistics Management Division). According to Disaster
Operations Directorate officials, FEMA coordinated, to varying degrees,
with the affected states prior to the transfers. The officials noted
that as of August 1, 2008 they had not closed a prepositioned equipment
location since assuming management of the program. § 637(b).
Areas to Be Addressed:
* Establishing Prepositioned Equipment Programs: According to FEMA
officials, the Disaster Operations Directorate is drafting the business
plans for three additional prepositioned programs, and intends to
establish these remaining three programs by fiscal year 2012. The total
estimated cost for establishing these three programs is $9 million,
said the officials. § 637(a).
* Advance Notice of Closure Policies: According to FEMA officials
responsible for the Prepositioned Equipment Program, FEMA has not yet
developed written guidance for providing advance closure notice, but
plans to do so. § 637(b).
Challenges FEMA and DHS Identified:
* FEMA officials reported funding as a challenge. They said that
adequate funding was critical to maintain the current 8 prepositioned
equipment program pods, establish 3 additional program pods, and
ultimately maintain all 11 program pods, as mandated by the Post-
Katrina Act.
Post-Katrina Act § 681 (Stafford Act §§ 402, 502), General Federal
Assistance:
Amends the Stafford Act to authorize the President to provide
accelerated federal assistance in the absence of a specific request
where necessary to save lives, prevent human suffering, or mitigate
severe damage in a major disaster or emergency. This section also
requires the President to promulgate and maintain guidelines to assist
governors in requesting the declaration of an emergency in advance of a
disaster event.
Actions Taken:
* Accelerated Federal Assistance Directive: According to officials in
FEMA's Disaster Operations Directorate, FEMA is currently reviewing a
draft policy directive for providing accelerated federal assistance.
The officials said that the directive states that FEMA can provide
federal assistance without a major disaster or emergency declaration if
a state agrees to assume the normal cost share after a declaration has
been made or assume total cost if no declaration is made. §§ 402(5),
502(a)(8).
* Providing Accelerated Federal Assistance: According to officials in
FEMA's Disaster Operations Directorate, FEMA provides accelerated
federal assistance in two forms. The first form involves the
prepositioning of goods and services in advance of a potential
disaster. For example, the officials explained that FEMA was able to
respond quickly to a state that had been affected by ice storms because
the agency, acting without an initial request from the state, had
prepositioned goods in advance of the storms. The officials said that
the second form includes the use of gap analysis, a tool in which FEMA
asks a given jurisdiction to provide information on its disaster
response needs and its current capabilities. According to the
officials, the resulting difference identifies the resources and
services FEMA should provide in the event of a disaster. §§ 402(5),
502(a)(8).
* Guidelines for Governors: FEMA issued an interim Disaster Assistance
Policy in July 2007, which provides guidelines to assist Governors in
requesting the declaration of an emergency in advance of a disaster. §
502(c).
Challenges FEMA and DHS Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
For Further Reading:
U.S. Congress. Senate. Committee on Homeland Security and Government
Affairs. Statement of R. David Paulison, Administrator, Federal
Emergency Management Agency, U.S. Department of Homeland Security.
110th Cong., 2nd sess., April 3, 2008.
U.S. Congress. Senate. Committee on Homeland Security and Government
Affairs. Statement of Richard L. Skinner, Inspector General, U.S.
Department of Homeland Security. 110th Cong., 2nd sess., April 3, 2008.
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Federal Emergency Management
Agency. "Declaration Policies and Guidance." [hyperlink,
http://www.fema.gov/hazard/guidance.shtm] (accessed on Sept. 5, 2008).
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Federal Emergency Management
Agency. "Logistics Management Directorate." U.S. Department of Homeland
Security. [hyperlink, http://www.fema.gov/media/fact_sheets/lmd.shtm]
(accessed on Sept. 5, 2008).
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Federal Emergency Management
Agency. "National Logistics Coordination Forum." [hyperlink,
http://www.fema.gov/about/divisions/logistics.shtm] (accessed on Sept.
5, 2008).
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. National Response Framework
Resource Center. "Annexes." [hyperlink,
http://www.fema.gov/emergency/nrf/] (accessed on Sept. 5, 2008).
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Office of Inspector General.
Emergency Preparedness and Response Could Better Integrate Information
Technology with Incident Response and Recovery. Washington, D.C.:
September 2005.
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Office of Inspector General.
FEMA's Preparedness for the Next Catastrophic Disaster. Washington,
D.C.: March 2008.
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Office of Inspector General.
Logistics Information Systems Need to Be Strengthened at the Federal
Emergency Management Agency. Washington, D.C.: May 2008.
[End of section]
Enclosure VIII: Changing Contracting Practices to Enhance Preparedness
and Strengthen Accountability:
Post-Katrina Act § 691, Advance Contracting:
Requires the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Administrator
to report to Congress on recurring disaster response requirements for
which the agency is and is not capable of contracting in advance, to
enter into at least one advance contract for each type of the goods and
services identified in the report, and to report quarterly on disaster
assistance contracts entered into using other than competitive
procedures. Also requires the FEMA Administrator to encourage state and
local governments to establish prenegotiated contracts for goods and
services.
Actions Taken:
* Initial Reporting Requirement: FEMA submitted a report to Congress in
December 2007 on advance contracting that:
- identified specific goods and services that FEMA could contract for
in advance of an event, such as construction supplies, communications
gear, and food items and services such as engineering, communication
services, and environmental services;
- identified specific goods and services that FEMA could not contract
for in advance of an event, such as perishable food items, plasma, and
hazmat materials;
- described FEMA's strategy for maximizing use of advance contracts;
- identified prenegotiated federal contracts for goods and services;
and:
- described FEMA's continuing efforts to coordinate with state and
local governments, as well as other federal agencies, on prenegotiated
contracts. § 691(a), (b)(1), (3).
* Entering into Contracts: Since the December 2007 Congressional
Report, FEMA officials told us the following prepositioned goods and
services have been placed under contract: consulting and management
services for the placement of disaster victims into hotels during a
mass evacuation; damage inspection services and field registration;
mail services for processing incoming mail and claim forms from
disaster victims; installation and maintenance of temporary housing;
rail and bus services for evacuees; ground, air fixed and rotary
winged, and para-transit services for removal of people and supplies;
mass evacuation transportation planning; communications; technical,
analytical, planning, and coordination services; base camp initiation
and management; fuel and other provisions; hazard mitigation
engineering services and technical services; storage, shipping, and
maintenance of mail equipment; maintenance of disaster response
vehicles; temporary housing units for disaster victims; emergency
family registry and locator system for law enforcement; disaster legal
services; satellite network communications for disaster operations;
verification and authentication of applicants applying for aid; remote
registration intake capability at shelters; unemployment assistance;
animal and health inspection services; truck drivers and emergency
response support specialists; disaster kits to include basic sundry
items, cots, and equipment rentals; Web-based disaster training for
federal, state and local government, and tribal and private
organizations that respond to disasters; and formaldehyde testing. §
691(b)(1).
* Quarterly Reporting Requirements: FEMA submitted the first-quarter
report for fiscal year 2007 on contracts not using competitive
procedures as part of the advance contracting report in December 2007.
FEMA submitted a combined third-and fourth-quarter report for fiscal
year 2007 in May 2008 on contracts not using competitive procedures.
The combined report included two spreadsheet attachments, one listing
overall disaster assistance contract awards, and the second listing a
subset of noncompetitive contract awards, made during the 2007 third
and fourth fiscal quarters. In May and July 2008, FEMA submitted first-
and second-quarter 2008 reports, respectively, to Congress on contracts
not using competitive procedures. FEMA also submitted the third-quarter
2008 report to Congress in July 2008. § 691(d).
* Encouraging Prenegotiated State and Local Contracts: FEMA has taken
the following actions to encourage state and local governments to
establish prenegotiated contracts for goods and services:
- Guidance: FEMA has provided guidance to Public Assistance applicants
through the Debris Removal Applicant's Contracting Checklist, which was
prepared August 2006. The checklist can be found at www.fema.gov under
the search words Debris Removal Applicant's Contracting Checklist. FEMA
issued a 98-page Public-Assistance Debris-Management Guide in July 2007
to encourage nonfederal entities to take a proactive approach to
coordinating and managing their debris removal operations as part of
their overall emergency management plan.
- Strategy: FEMA produced a Debris-Removal Operations Disaster-
Assistance Strategy in June 2007, in order to assist state and local
governments, which have principal responsibility for coordinating and
managing debris removal operations.
- Registry: FEMA has established a Web-based Debris-Removal Contractor
Registry, with over 800 contractors, specifically for state and local
governments to use to plan in advance to establish institutional
capability for managing debris removal operations. This registry can be
found at www.fema.gov under the search words Debris Removal Contractor
Registry. This registry is separate from the one required by section
697 of the Post-Katrina Act, which is discussed later in the enclosure.
The registry homepage states that the information in the registry is
provided and maintained by contractors, not by FEMA, and that state and
local governments are responsible for exercising due diligence before
entering a contract. However, the registry is available as a tool to
assist state and local governments in identifying and contacting
debris-removal contractor resources. § 691(b)(4).
Challenges FEMA and DHS Officials Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
Post-Katrina Act § 692, Limitations on Tiering of Subcontractors:
Requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to promulgate regulations
to limit contractors' use of subcontracts--at a minimum the regulations
are to limit subcontracts to 65 percent of the cost of any DHS disaster
response contract, task, or delivery order above the simplified
acquisition threshold, unless the secretary determines that such
requirement is not feasible or practicable.
Actions Taken:
* Draft Regulation: FEMA's Director of Acquisition Operations told us
that DHS has drafted a regulation to implement section 692. § 692.
* Coordination with FEMA: The FEMA Director of Acquisition Operations
told us that DHS has coordinated the drafting of the regulation with
FEMA, which is the component likely to be most affected by it. § 692.
Areas to Be Addressed:
* Final Regulation: The regulation to implement section 692 is still
under review at DHS and has not been published as a proposed rule in
the Federal Register. § 692.
Challenges FEMA and DHS Officials Identified:
* The DHS Inspector General (IG) reported in July 2008 that "it does
not appear that multitier subcontracting, as an isolated factor, caused
significant increases in costs to the government, nor did it reduce
subcontracting opportunities for small and local businesses. The prime
contractors subcontracted a significant amount of the value of their
contracts to small and local business." The DHS IG further reported
that, "by limiting subcontracting, section 692 could restrict funding
available to small and local businesses while potentially impairing
FEMA's ability to respond quickly to future catastrophic disasters."
The DHS IG calculated that had section 692 "been in effect following
Hurricane Katrina, approximately $300M worth of subcontracting would
not have been allowed." The DHS IG report recommended that FEMA and DHS
officials work with the Office of Federal Procurement Policy to seek
congressional relief from section 692 and the promulgation of less
restrictive rules over multitier contracts. FEMA officials told us that
they are advocating the repeal of section 692, absent evidence that
section 692 would not adversely affect small businesses or the contract
workforce available to FEMA. DHS's Office of the Chief Procurement
Officer also advocates the repeal of section 692 because, under a new
law, the Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) must be amended to limit
the tiering of subcontractors for cost-type contracts and orders above
the simplified acquisition threshold.[Footnote 25] Because all civilian
executive branch agencies will be subject to the new FAR requirement,
DHS's Office of the Chief Procurement Officer believes that Congress
should repeal the DHS-specific requirement in section 692, which it
views as inconsistent with the new civilianwide requirement.
Post-Katrina Act § 694 (Stafford Act § 307), Use of Local Firms and
Individuals:
Requires federal agencies to provide a local contracting preference in
the award of emergency-response contracts to the extent feasible and
practicable, to provide a written justification for awards made to
nonlocal businesses, and to transition any preexisting emergency-
response contracts to local businesses following a Stafford Act
declaration, unless the head of the contracting agency determines that
it is not feasible or practicable to do so.
Actions Taken:
* Rule: The DHS Director of Acquisition Policy and Legislation reported
that DHS/FEMA sponsored a governmentwide rule to implement section 694
of the Post-Katrina Act. The rule, which is subject to the Federal
Acquisition Regulation (FAR) rulemaking process, was published as an
interim rule in the Federal Register in November 2007 and took effect
at that time, accompanied by a request for public comments.[Footnote
26] No public comments were received, and the interim rule was adopted
as a final rule in September 2008.[Footnote 27] The rule addresses the
requirements of the statute as follows:
- Local Area Contracting Preference: The rule requires federal agencies
to provide a local area contracting preference in the award of
emergency response contracts to the extent feasible and practicable.
- Written Justification: The rule requires contracting officers to
issue a written justification to the contracting file when awarding
emergency response contracts to nonlocal businesses.
- Local Area Business Transition: The rule requires agencies to
transition any preexisting emergency response contracts to local
businesses following a Stafford Act declaration, unless the agency head
determines that such transition is not feasible or practicable.
Further, the rule states that agencies should not structure emergency-
response contracts in such a way that may inhibit the transition of the
work to local firms after a Stafford Act event is declared. §
307(a)-(b).
* Local Area Contracting Preference Instructions: FEMA's Disaster
Contracting Course, published in February 2008, includes specific
information on the local area contracting preference. The FEMA Director
of Acquisition Operations told us that the tenet of using local sources
is covered in FEMA's disaster training and communicated frequently to
help ensure that the contracting officers and specialists are aware of
it; for example, during recent disaster assistance activities, an e-
mail reminded staff of the local area preference. § 307(a).
Areas to Be Addressed:
* Local Area Business Transition Guidance: According to FEMA's Branch
Chief of Acquisition Policy and Legislation, FEMA plans to issue
acquisition guidance to assist contracting officials in structuring
emergency response contracts to allow for the transition of the work to
local firms, which will reportedly supplement existing guidance issued
by the FAR Councils and the DHS Office of the Chief Procurement
Officer. FEMA officials told us that FEMA is developing the additional
guidance through the use of an Integrated Process Team composed of both
acquisition and program personnel and expects to have the guidance in
draft no later than October 31, 2008. According to officials from
FEMA's Office of Management, FEMA sent a small business and local
transition team to Austin, Texas, to pilot a transition program. The
process is being documented and from this effort, the local area
business transition guidance will be finalized. The officials said the
guidance is expected to be finalized no later than March 31, 2009. §
307(b)(2).
Challenges FEMA and DHS Officials Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
Post-Katrina Act § 695, Limitation on Length of Certain Noncompetitive
Contracts:
Requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to promulgate regulations
restricting the contract period for noncompetitive emergency-response
contracts awarded by DHS. The contract period shall be the minimum
necessary to complete the urgent and compelling requirements of the
work and enter into another contract using competitive procedures, but
shall not exceed 150 days unless the secretary determines that
exceptional circumstances apply.
Actions Taken:
* Inclusion in Homeland Security Acquisition Manual: DHS has addressed
the section 695 restrictions in its Homeland Security Acquisition
Manual. In the case of contracts awarded based on unusual and
compelling urgency, the manual states that the contract period should
be the minimum necessary, but not to exceed 150 days unless a
justification is approved that exceptional circumstances apply. § 695.
Areas to Be Addressed:
* Inclusion in Regulations: Senior DHS officials in the Office of the
Chief Procurement Officer for Acquisition Policy told us that they will
include the section 695 restrictions in DHS's Homeland Security
Acquisition Regulation, as required by the Post-Katrina Act, but this
action has not yet been completed. However, they told us that the
Homeland Security Acquisition Manual was mandatory, so the restrictions
are effective pending the issuance of a regulation in the Homeland
Security Acquisition Regulation. § 695.
Challenges FEMA and DHS Officials Identified:
* DHS officials told us that DHS is seeking a repeal of section 695
because it holds DHS to a different standard than the rest of the
federal government, as provided for in section 862 of the recently
enacted Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2009.[Footnote 28] This law establishes a maximum 1-year period
for noncompetitive federal contracts awarded on the basis of unusual
and compelling urgency, unless the head of the agency determines that
exceptional circumstances apply.[Footnote 29] In comparison, DHS's
limit is 150 days under section 695. Absent unique requirements based
on DHS's mission needs, DHS advocates that it be subject to the same
restrictions on the length of noncompetitive awards in times of
disaster that govern other executive agencies. DHS supports the
governmentwide 1-year maximum period of performance for noncompetitive
procurements because, according to DHS, it is precisely in a time of
emergency that the department's scarce contracting resources need to
focus on urgently procuring relief-related goods and services. DHS
believes that it is counterproductive to major disaster relief efforts
to require DHS contracting officers to generate new contracts after
only 150 days.
Post-Katrina Act § 697, Registry of Disaster Response Contractors:
Requires FEMA to establish and maintain a registry of disaster-response
contractors that includes their names, locations, areas served, goods
or services provided, bonding levels, and socioeconomic status; to
verify, through contractors' attestations and documentation, that the
information submitted for the registry is true; and to make the
registry available on the FEMA Web site for other federal agencies to
consult.
Actions Taken:
* Modification of Existing Registry: FEMA asked the General Services
Administration (GSA) to modify an existing federal contractor registry,
Central Contractor Registration (CCR), to meet the requirements to
include additional information on disaster-response contractors. This
registry is the primary contractor registrant database for the federal
government. FEMA asked GSA to supplement existing CCR data fields to
include bonding levels and areas served for disaster response
contractors. According to FEMA's Branch Chief of Acquisition Policy and
Legislation, the addition of these two fields, coupled with the
information already in the CCR, will cover the content required by
section 697. GSA added these two categories to the CCR registration
process in an optional Disaster Relief Registry, which, according to
officials in FEMA's Office of Management, went public on September 24,
2008, in an effort to begin capturing local firm information from the
states of Texas and Louisiana. § 697(b)(1)-(2).
* Categories Included in Registry Contents: CCR already includes:
- the name of the business concern;
- its location, telephone information, primary place of business, and
whether the business concern is:
(1) a small business concern:
(2) a small business concern owned and controlled by socially and
economically disadvantaged individuals:
(3) a small business concern owned and controlled by women or:
(4) a small business concern owned and controlled by service-disabled
veterans. § 697(b)(2).
* Representation of Small Business Status: According to FEMA officials,
the CCR allows traditional small businesses, women-owned small
businesses, veteran-owned small businesses and service-disabled
veteran-owned small businesses to self-attest to their small business
status. § 697(b)(2)-(3).
* Certification of Other Statuses: For other special statuses like
small disadvantaged businesses (SDB), section 8(a) small businesses,
[Footnote 30] and historically underutilized business zone (HUBZone)
small businesses, FEMA officials stated that vendors must enter proof
of certification by the Small Business Administration.[Footnote 26] §
697(b)(2)-(3).
* Web Site: A link to the CCR has been added to the FEMA Web site:
[hyperlink, http://www.fema.gov/business/contractor.shtm]. § 697(b)(4).
Areas to Be Addressed:
* Attestation Process: FEMA officials have not determined how they
intend to implement the attestation requirement contained in section
697. § 697(b)(3).
* Verification Process: FEMA officials have not determined how they
intend to implement the verification requirement contained in section
697. Shortly before we published this document, FEMA officials told us
that they are meeting with Dun & Bradstreet to determine whether the
firm can verify the accuracy of information entered into the CCR by
vendors. If the firm cannot, FEMA officials said that they will develop
the verification process by March 31, 2009. However, they did not
provide any related project details. § 697(b)(3).
* Federal Consultation of Registry: Just before our publication
deadline, the DHS Office of the Chief Procurement Officer, Acquisition
Policy and Legislation Branch, advised us that it had developed and
submitted a FAR business case to the GSA Civilian Agency Acquisition
Council Chairperson, requesting rule making to implement the
requirement in section 697 for federal agencies to consult the disaster
response contractor registry as part of their acquisition planning.
According to DHS, the proposed FAR rulemaking will complement the CCR's
collection of business concerns' data (including added data fields for
disaster response contractors) for agencies involved with disaster
contracting. They told us the FAR rule will provide guidance to federal
agencies when contracting for disaster relief activities to consult the
registry during acquisition planning. § 697(b)(5).
Challenges FEMA and DHS Officials Identified:
Cost is a challenge in setting up a FEMA-administered disaster-response
contractor registry: the Branch Chief of Acquisition Policy and
Legislation estimated that developing a stand-alone registry would cost
millions of dollars.
* Cost is also a challenge for the verification of the information
submitted to the database: the Branch Chief raised concerns about the
cost-effectiveness of vetting, in advance, each registered business
nationwide, and said that funding to set up such a system would be
needed.
* FEMA officials in the Office of Management also expressed concern
about the attestation and verification elements of the law. They told
us that neither FEMA, nor any present DHS organization, possesses the
personnel, resources, or funds necessary to review and verify
attestations of entities' records in the CCR; presently, there are over
460,000 entities registered in the CCR that can voluntarily register
for the "Disaster Response Registry" fields. These officials said they
would be required to divert FEMA resources (personnel and funds) that
could best be utilized on mission-critical efforts. They also noted
concerns about complexities that could arise from the need to handle
disputes of records and nonverifiable information and data. The
officials noted that the process of verifying voluntary business
submittals in the CCR before any entity receives a contract would be
redundant to contracting officials' existing responsibilities to verify
business information before the award of a contract.
* In light of these concerns, the DHS Office of the Chief Procurement
Officer told us that it is seeking legislative relief from the
submission, attestation, and verification requirements of section 697.
According to DHS, the legislative proposal reportedly requests relief
from what DHS views as very costly and redundant attestation and
verification requirements by FEMA at the time of entry into the
disaster registry by business concerns. DHS believes the use of the
existing CCR, a proven business system, offers the appropriate cost
effective electronic business solution to collect the section 697 data
for the disaster response registry, and that validation and
verification by the contracting officer at the time of award, an
existing inherent responsibility, provides more current, cost-
effective and potentially more reliable verification than at the time
of business concerns' entries into the registry.
For Further Reading:
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Federal Emergency Management
Agency. "Advance Contracting of Goods and Services: Report to
Congress." December 2007.
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Federal Emergency Management
Agency. "Debris Management Guide." July 2007. [hyperlink,
http://www.fema.gov/government/grant/pa/demagde.shtm] (accessed on
September 5, 2008).
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Federal Emergency Management
Agency. "Disaster Contracts Report for First Fiscal Quarter 2008:
Report to Congress." May 2008:
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Federal Emergency Management
Agency. "Disaster Contracts Report for Second Fiscal Quarter 2008:
Report to Congress." July 2008.
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Federal Emergency Management
Agency. "FEMA Recovery Division Fact Sheet RP9580.201: Debris Removal
Applicant's Contracting Checklist." [hyperlink,
http://www.fema.gov/pdf/government/grant/pa/9580_201.pdf]. (accessed on
Sept. 5, 2008).
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Federal Emergency Management
Agency. "Report on Disaster Contracts Issued on a Non-Competitive
Basis, 3RD and 4TH Quarters of Fiscal Year 2007: Report to Congress."
May 2008.
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Office of Inspector General.
"Hurricane Katrina Multitier Contracts." OIG-08-81. July 2008.
[End of section]
Enclosure IX: Improving Information Technology Systems to Support
Compatibility, Accessibility, and Tracking:
Post Katrina Act § 640, Improvements to Information Technology Systems:
Requires the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to take
measures to update and improve its information technology (IT) systems
and submit to the appropriate committees of Congress a report on its
progress in implementing this section.
Actions Taken:
* Compatibility of FEMA IT Systems and Asset Tracking Capability:
According to FEMA's 2007 report to Congress on its IT systems, FEMA's
Office of the Chief Information Officer (CIO) was managing an IT
environment composed of a multitude of independent systems that were
experiencing difficulties in sharing information. FEMA employs three IT
systems to track personnel, supplies, and commodities during disasters.
To electronically track its property, FEMA uses the Logistics
Information Management System III. For tracking disaster response
personnel and their employee information, FEMA uses the Automated
Deployment Database (ADD). Lastly, FEMA uses the Total Asset Visibility
(TAV) system for supply-chain management, enabling FEMA to track
commodities in real time. FEMA has several initiatives underway to
improve system interaction, information sharing, and communication,
with the aim to begin integrating the information in its three distinct
personnel and asset tracking systems in fiscal year 2009. Through these
initiatives, FEMA intends to achieve a more seamless information-
sharing environment among its asset-tracking systems, resulting in a
more integrated common operating picture for FEMA management. In
addition, according to officials in the Office of the CIO, FEMA has
developed a data analysis and reporting process that examines and
collates data from multiple sources so that FEMA's program offices can
analyze combined data and create reports for FEMA offices. FEMA also
has a separate system designed to track mission assignments and
requests for goods and services. In addition, this system has the
capability to store prescripted mission assignments in advance, so that
program operations can more quickly and easily manage the assignments
during disasters. § 640(a)(1), (4).
* Timely Technology Enhancements: According to officials in the Office
of the CIO, FEMA currently has a process for the rapid development of
technology applications to ensure that technology enhancements reach
its offices in a timely fashion. These officials said that FEMA intends
to replace that process with a centrally managed process under the
Enterprise Application Development Integration Sustainment contract,
which is a contract vehicle intended to execute all the software
development needs of FEMA offices. § 640(a)(2).
* Asset Tracking Capability: FEMA officials told us shortly before we
published this document that, as of August 1, 2008, all 10 FEMA regions
have TAV program capability to electronically track all orders,
shipments in transit, and shipments received of its disaster
commodities and assets in real-time status. The tracking and monitoring
of disaster assets is performed by a group of trained TAV Specialists
in each region. In addition, FEMA officials told us that in September
of 2008, FEMA began coordinating with the Defense Logistics Agency, the
U.S. Army Corp of Engineers, and the American Red Cross to link the TAV
system to these external agency supply systems to enable tracking of
Mission Assignment purchases and shipments from these activities to
FEMA disaster support operations, which FEMA expects will be
operational by spring 2009. FEMA officials also told us that planned
improvements to the TAV program in the next fiscal year include linking
the system to a new property management system recommended by DHS,
inclusion a function to allow visibility of partner--such as Red Cross
and the Defense Logistics Agency--shipments and purchases, and
improving the field connectivity of the TAV system by inclusion of
these requirements in the overall CIO communications upgrades, but no
documentation of these current and planned efforts accompanied their
remarks. § 640(a)(4).
* National Emergency Management Information System Improvements: FEMA
has increased the capacity of its IT system for response and recovery
operations--the National Emergency Management Information System
(NEMIS)--to process concurrent requests, said officials in the Office
of the CIO. According to the officials, FEMA intends to centralize
NEMIS into one departmental data center and establish disaster recovery
capabilities in a second departmental data center. § 640(a)(5).
* IT Training: The Emergency Management Institute (EMI) and FEMA
vendors provide training on FEMA's IT systems. EMI provides training on
NEMIS and other FEMA systems. EMI training includes user guides,
manuals, and other materials. According to officials in the Office of
the CIO, training materials and user guides are required on delivery of
all commercial-off-the-shelf software packages, and the vendors for ADD
and TAV provide training for their systems. § 640(a)(6).
* Reporting Requirement: FEMA submitted a report to Congress entitled
Public Law 109-295, Section 640 Response: Improvements to Information
Technology Systems in September 2007. § 640(b).
Areas to Be Addressed:
* Completion of IT Upgrades: FEMA expects that completing alignment of
its IT systems with its mission needs will be a long-term process that
will extend well into fiscal year 2010 and will require the commitment
of both resources and leadership. Officials in the Office of the CIO
stated that FEMA anticipates investing $1 million in the redesign of
NEMIS (for disaster assistance requests) in fiscal year 2009. In
addition to NEMIS's redesign, FEMA plans to transfer ADD's (personnel)
functions to a new Human Resource system. FEMA officials told us that a
Web-enabled Automated Deployment Database is currently under
development, with an introduction scheduled for late first quarter
fiscal year 2009, and that it will serve as a bridge to a future Human
Resource system. Further, FEMA plans to replace the Logistics
Information Management System III (property management) with a new
software platform, and improve its mission-assignment (operations)
system capabilities. § 640(a).
* Developing a Testing Environment: According to FEMA's 2007 IT report,
the Office of the CIO's testing environment is limited and needs
improvement. To improve its testing capability, FEMA is developing the
Consolidated Test Facility, according to officials in the Office of the
CIO. The officials said that FEMA plans to house two testing
environments in the facility. One environment will be used to perform
integration testing and development for software delivered to the
agency. The other will be used to perform stress and performance
testing. § 640(a)(3).
Challenges FEMA and DHS Officials Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
For Further Reading:
U.S. Congress. House Subcommittee on Emergency Communications,
Preparedness and Response and Subcommittee on Management,
Investigations, and Oversight, Committee on Homeland Security.
Statement of Matt Jadacki, Deputy Inspector General for Disaster
Assistance Oversight, U.S. Department Of Homeland Security. 110th
Cong., 1ST sess., February 28, 2007.
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Federal Emergency Management
Agency. Public Law 109-295, Section 640 Response: Improvements to
Information Technology Systems. Washington, D.C.: September 2007.
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Office of Inspector General. DHS'
Efforts to Develop the Homeland Secure Data Network. Washington, D.C.:
April 2005.
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Office of Inspector General.
Management of the DHS Wide Area Network Needs Improvement. Washington,
D.C.: December 2005.
[End of section]
Enclosure X: Human Capital: Ensuring a Well-Trained, Professional
Workforce to Prepare for, Respond to, and Recover from Disasters:
Post-Katrina Act § 611 (Homeland Security Act § 510), Credentialing and
Typing:
Requires the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Administrator
to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the
administrators of the Emergency Management Assistance Compact (EMAC),
[Footnote 32] as well as state, local, and tribal governments, and
organizations that represent emergency response providers, to
collaborate on developing standards for deployment capabilities,
including credentialing and typing[Footnote 33] of personnel and
resources likely needed for a disaster response.
Actions Taken:
* Establishment of MOU: Effective April 1, 2007, the FEMA Administrator
entered into an MOU with the National Emergency Management Association,
which is the administrator of EMAC, regarding resource typing and
credentialing of personnel and mutual aid systems. § 510.
* Draft Credentialing Standards: The National Incident Management
System (NIMS) Draft Guideline for the Credentialing of Personnel was
published in August 2008. The guideline has been developed to establish
definitions to explain and identify actions and processes that can
provide the foundation for consistent use and interoperability of
credentialing on a national scale. By establishing recommended
protocols to facilitate coordinated response to incidents, the
guideline is intended to encourage interoperability between federal,
state, and local officials, and will facilitate deployment for
response, recovery, and restoration. § 510.
Areas to Be Addressed:
* Final Credentialing Standards: FEMA has not yet published the final
Guideline for the Credentialing of Personnel, but FEMA officials in the
National Preparedness Directorate told us that as of October 1, 2008,
the draft guideline was being prepared for publication in the Federal
Register for a 30-day public comment period. § 510.
* Resource-Typing Standards: FEMA has not yet developed resource-typing
standards to complement its draft personnel standards; however, FEMA's
National Integration Center (NIC) Incident Management Systems Division
has a national resource-typing initiative underway. § 510.
Challenges FEMA and DHS Officials Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
Post-Katrina Act § 621 (5 U.S.C. § 10102), Strategic Human Capital
Plan:
Requires the FEMA Administrator to develop a Strategic Human Capital
Plan (SHCP) to shape and improve its workforce. Specifically, the plan
is to include: a workforce gap analysis, a plan of action for
addressing those gaps, and a discussion of selected aspects of the
Surge Capacity Force.
Actions Taken:
* Plan Development: FEMA published its SHCP for 2008-2012 in May 2008
and submitted it to Congress in June 2008. § 10102(a).
* Plan Contents: The SHCP is organized around five key strategic
initiatives: Understanding the Composition and Character of the
Workforce; Right Sizing the Agency; Building Core Competencies;
Training and Professionally Developing the Workforce; and Building the
Culture of the New FEMA. § 10102(b).
* Workforce Gap Analysis: The SHCP identifies nine operational core
competencies such as service to disaster victims and operational
planning, and states that FEMA intends to develop occupational
competencies for its mission-critical occupations that mirror the
operational core competencies. The SHCP also identifies the staffing
levels and vacancies of each category of employee type, such as
leadership positions, permanent, temporary, and so forth, and addresses
workforce trends, including hiring projections and retirement
eligibility. § 10102(b)(1).
* Recruitment and Retention Plan: The SHCP states that FEMA will use
the operational core competencies as the foundation for recruiting and
retaining employees and that FEMA will review its current recruitment
and employment processes for achievement of maximum results, including
review of recruitment bonuses, among other actions. § 10102(b)(2).
* Developing and Training the Workforce: The SHCP lists FEMA's
objectives for improving its learning and development program, such as
building a FEMA professional leadership program focused on FEMA's core
competencies. FEMA also plans to formally adopt and implement
Individual Development Plans for each employee, with annual reviews by
the employee and supervisors, and credentialing or certification plans
for certain jobs. Lastly, the SHCP states that credentialing programs
will measure skills development and competency achievement and that the
implementation of a standardized training program for Reservists will
ensure that salary and promotions are tied to a consistent
qualifications and credential plan. § 10102(b)(2).
Areas to be Addressed:
* Specific Recruitment and Retention Goals: The SHCP states FEMA's
target levels and intentions for recruitment, including the need to
review available human capital flexibilities such as bonuses to support
recruitment. The SHCP also states that the new employee training and
development initiatives will help support retention goals. However, the
SHCP contains no specific list of recruitment and retention goals,
including how FEMA will use bonus authorities to support those goals or
how FEMA's program objectives will be achieved through such goals. §
10102(b)(2).
* Recruiting for State Experience: While the SHCP refers to critical
considerations for rightsizing the agency's workforce, there is no
mention of a strategy for recruiting individuals who have had
experience carrying out emergency management responsibilities in state
agencies. § 10102(b)(2).
* Surge Capacity Force: While the SHCP states that FEMA has established
a Disaster Reserve Workforce Division, which will integrate each of the
existing elements of workforce readiness, the SHCP's discussion of the
surge capacity force does not address the content requirements of the
statute, such as the number of surge staff not employed by DHS or FEMA
and their qualifications or credentials. § 10102(b)(3).
Challenges FEMA and DHS Officials Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
Post-Katrina Act § 621 (5 U.S.C. § 10103), Career Paths:
Requires the FEMA Administrator to identify and publish information on
career paths for FEMA personnel, including the education, training,
experience, and assignments needed for career progression within the
agency; ensure that opportunities for such necessary education,
training, and experience are available; and establish a policy for
assigning FEMA personnel to positions that balances the need for
personnel to serve in career-enhancing positions with the need to
require service for a sufficient amount of time to provide necessary
stability.
Areas to Be Addressed:
* Career Paths: The Deputy Director of FEMA's Human Capital Division
told us that FEMA has no structured system that outlines career paths,
nor has FEMA developed a new policy for assigning personnel. The
Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Inspector General reported in
April 2008 that FEMA could not verify the completion of the
establishment of career paths. § 10103.
Challenges FEMA and DHS Officials Identified:
* The Deputy Director stated that, in his opinion, the statutory
provision is not necessarily structured to match FEMA processes. He
said a better question would be how FEMA structures and manages
mission-critical positions.
Post-Katrina Act § 621 (5 U.S.C. § 10104), Recruitment Bonuses:
Grants the FEMA Administrator the authority, for 5 successive years, to
pay recruitment bonuses for positions that would be difficult to fill
in the absence of such a bonus; and requires an annual report to
Congress on the use of recruitment bonuses.
Actions Taken:
* Payment of Recruitment Bonuses: FEMA has exercised the authority to
pay recruitment bonuses, totaling over $111,000, to eight new employees
in fiscal year 2007. § 10104(a).
* Service Agreements: FEMA has established written service agreements
for employees receiving recruitment bonuses. § 10104(c).
* Reporting Requirement: FEMA submitted a "Combined Report: FEMA Use of
Recruitment and Retention Bonuses FY 2007" to Congress in December
2007. § 10104(f).
Challenges FEMA and DHS Officials Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
Post-Katrina Act § 621 (5 U.S.C. § 10105), Retention Bonuses:
Grants the FEMA Administrator the authority, for 5 successive years, to
pay retention bonuses to retain employees who are essential based on
their unique qualifications or a special need of the agency; and
requires an annual report to Congress on the use of retention bonuses.
Actions Taken:
* Payment of Retention Bonuses: FEMA has exercised the authority to pay
retention bonuses. FEMA gave relocation bonuses, for the purpose of
retention, totaling over $24,000, to two employees in fiscal year 2007.
§ 10105(a).
* Service Agreements: FEMA has established written service agreements
for employees receiving relocation bonuses. § 10105(b).
* Reporting Requirement: FEMA submitted a "Combined Report: FEMA Use of
Recruitment and Retention Bonuses FY 2007" to Congress in December
2007. § 10105(f).
Challenges FEMA and DHS Officials Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
Post-Katrina Act § 621 (5 U.S.C. § 10106), Quarterly Report on Vacancy
Rate in Employee Positions:
Requires the FEMA Administrator to submit to Congress an initial
report, then quarterly updates for 5 successive years, on the vacancies
in employee positions at the agency. Specifies the reports are to
include: vacancies of each category of employee position; the number of
applicants for each publicly advertised vacancy; the length of time
that each vacancy has been pending; the hiring-cycle time for each
vacancy that has been filled; and a plan for reducing the hiring-cycle
time and reducing the current and anticipated vacancies with highly
qualified personnel. Quarterly updates are additionally to contain an
assessment on the progress in filling vacant positions.
Actions Taken:
* Initial Report: FEMA submitted its initial report in September 2007,
which covered the first two quarters of fiscal year 2007. For the first
quarter of fiscal year 2007, FEMA's Human Capital Division was still in
the process of developing the capacity to provide quarterly vacancy
reports and developed a baseline for comparison and measurement of
improvement. For first quarter fiscal year 2007, there was an average
pending time of 61 days and an average hiring-cycle time of 120 days.
In the second quarter, FEMA reported improvements in reducing the
pending-cycle time to 31 days and the hiring-cycle time to 80 days. §
10106(a).
* Quarterly Updates: FEMA submitted quarterly vacancy reports for the
4th quarter of fiscal year 2007, and the 1st and 2nd quarters of fiscal
year 2008 in May 2008. § 10106(b).
* Progress Assessments: The quarterly reports include information on
how FEMA is assessing its progress in filling vacancies. §10106(a)(2),
(b).
* Reporting Requirements: The vacancy reports FEMA has submitted
generally contain the elements specified by the Post-Katrina Act:
vacancies of each category of employee position; the number of
applicants; the length of time that each vacancy has been pending; the
hiring-cycle time for each vacancy that has been filled; and planned
actions to achieve 95 percent personnel strength by September 30, 2008.
§10106(a)(2), (b).
Challenges FEMA and DHS Officials Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
Post-Katrina Act § 622 (Homeland Security Act § 844), Homeland Security
Rotation Program:
Requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to establish the Homeland
Security Rotation Program to, among other things, expand the knowledge
base of the department by providing for rotational assignments of
employees to other components. Requires the Chief Human Capital Officer
to administer this program and enumerates associated responsibilities,
including ensuring the Rotation Program provides professional education
and training.
Actions Taken:
* Establishment: DHS established a Department Rotational Assignments
Program on November 13, 2007. This program is open to all civilian DHS
employees. § 844(a)(1).
* Best Practices: The DHS Chief Learning Officer told us that a
subcommittee of the DHS Training Leaders Council ensured an inclusive
and collaborative process was used to obtain best practices from DHS
legacy organizations, as well as best practices from the Department of
Defense. § 844(a)(1).
* Stated Program Goals: DHS's Management Directive for the rotation
program states that the program seeks to foster greater information
sharing and team building between DHS and its components and to be a
means for employees to obtain depth and breadth of experience while
cross-pollinating knowledge, experience, and corporate perspectives. §
844(a)(2).
* Employee Eligibility and Participation: All DHS employees in Senior
Executive Service (SES) candidate development and selective management
or career development programs are to complete a rotational assignment
before completion of the program. Other SES members, supervisors, and
managers are eligible for rotational assignments. Rotational assignment
opportunities may be made available on an individual basis with
supervisor support and agreement. From October 1, 2007, to March 31,
2008, more than 269 DHS employees from 20 different DHS components
participated in the rotation program. That number does not include DHS
employees who have been detailed to support operational or surge
mission requirements. A FEMA Semi-Annual Rotational Assignment Report
shows that employees ranging from the GS-7 to GS-14 levels participated
in the rotation program. § 844(a)(1)-(2); see also 5 U.S.C. § 10103(b).
* Administration: The Chief Human Capital Officer administers the
rotation program. § 844(a)(3).
* Reporting Requirement: DHS submitted the Rotational Assignments
Program Report to Congress in June 2008. § 844(a)(5).
Areas to Be Addressed:
* Incentives: The DHS Management Directive for the Rotation Program
does not specify any incentives for employee participation. §
844(a)(3).
Challenges FEMA and DHS Officials Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
Post-Katrina Act § 623 (Homeland Security Act § 845), Homeland Security
Education Program:
Requires the Secretary of Homeland Security, acting through the FEMA
Administrator, to establish a graduate-level Homeland Security
Education Program in the National Capital Region (NCR) to provide
educational opportunities to senior federal officials and selected
state and local officials with homeland security and emergency
management responsibilities; and requires the leveraging of existing
resources, as well as establishing student enrollment priorities and
selection criteria and employee service commitments.
Actions Taken:
* Establishment: The Naval Postgraduate School's Center for Homeland
Defense and Security, FEMA, and DHS have created an 18-month Homeland
Security Master's Degree Program for the NCR. The Homeland Security
Master's Degree Program is taught, and the degree awarded, by the Naval
Postgraduate School's Center for Homeland Defense and Security. The NCR
Academy was launched June 6, 2007, in Shepherdstown, West Virginia, at
the Office of Personnel Management's Eastern Management Development
Center. § 845(a).
* FEMA Appointment of Program Administrator: The Deputy Administrator,
National Preparedness Directorate, formally requested in October 2008
that the FEMA Administrator appoint the Assistant Administrator for the
National Integration Center as the administrator of the Homeland
Security Education Program. In the request memorandum, the Deputy
Administrator stated that because the majority of the resources for the
program are managed by the National Integration Center, the Assistant
Administrator of the center would be best positioned for the
appointment. The FEMA Administrator approved the appointment on October
20, 2008. § 845(a).
* Leveraging of Existing Resources: The Center for Homeland Defense and
Security has two campuses for the Homeland Security Master's Degree
Program. The accredited Master's degree program in the NCR is a
reproduction of a degree program, based out of Monterey, California.
The DHS Chief Learning Officer stated that DHS had previously reviewed
and approved the Naval Postgraduate School Homeland Security Master's
Degree Program for the Monterey cohort, which has been in place since
2003. The DHS Chief Learning Officer told us the recently established
NCR Homeland Security Master's Degree Program uses the already approved
program and curricula. He also told us the program employs adjunct
faculty from universities and colleges across the United States. He
said that the program leveraged the curricula already in use by the
adjunct faculty at their home institutions and incorporated them into
the program's curriculum. § 845(b).
* Student Enrollment Sources: The NCR student body has a greater
percentage of DHS and federal officials than state and local officials,
while the program in Monterey has more state and local than federal
officials. § 845(c)(1).
* Enrollment Priorities and Selection Criteria: The Master's Program is
open to DHS employees at the GS-13, GS-14, GS-15, and exceptional GS-12
levels, as well as other federal and nonfederal employees. Applicants
must have a minimum 3.0 GPA and an undergraduate degree from an
accredited college or university, or been awarded a graduate degree,
and have relevant work experiences and qualifications. § 845(c)(2).
* Service Commitment: DHS has established an interim service commitment
agreement for employees who receive training and educational
opportunities that specifies that the employee will continue in service
to the agency for at least three times the length of the training
period, and states that if the employee leaves DHS prior to that time,
he or she will pay back expenses. § 845(d).
Areas to Be Addressed:
* Diversity: In a Comptroller General opinion dated December 20, 2007,
we reported that FEMA had not yet taken measures to ensure diversity
within the Homeland Security Education Program. Although FEMA reported
that it was following existing laws prohibiting discrimination, FEMA
stated that DHS's Office of the Chief Learning Officer and the Training
Leaders Council were in the process of developing guidelines to support
diversity.[Footnote 34] FEMA officials have not provided any updated
information during this review about how the FEMA Administrator is
ensuring racial, gender, and ethnic diversity in the graduate degree
program. § 845(c)(3).
* Service Commitment: DHS's interim service commitment agreement is not
specific to the Homeland Security Education Program. Under the statute,
before any employee selected for the program may be assigned to
participate, the employee must agree in writing to continue in the
service of the sponsoring agency for 2 years following the end of the
program and to repay his or her educational expenses on a pro rata
basis if the employee voluntarily separates from service before the end
of the commitment. DHS's interim agreement requires its employees to
remain in service for three times the length of their training--
amounting to 4-1/2 years in the case of the Homeland Security Education
Program--which would appear to expose DHS employees to repayment
liability for longer than the 2-year statutory service commitment.
Further, because DHS has not developed a service commitment agreement
specific to the Homeland Security Education Program, other agencies do
not have such an agreement available to execute with their own
employees. § 845(d).
Challenges FEMA and DHS Officials Identified:
* The Branch Chief for FEMA's Human Capital Division stated that it is
a challenge for some FEMA applicants to be competitive for programs
that preference graduate school education, as many FEMA officials have
moved up the ranks as police officers, fire fighters, and emergency
managers without graduate education.
* The Branch Chief for FEMA's Human Capital Division said that the
Federal Coordinating Officers' participation in the executive
management training is a challenge because their professional
development must be paid for with disaster funds.
Post-Katrina Act § 624, Surge Capacity Force:
Requires the FEMA Administrator to prepare and submit to Congress a
plan to establish and implement a Surge Capacity Force for deployment
to disasters, including catastrophic incidents. Requires the plan to
include procedures for designation of staff from other DHS components
and executive agencies to serve on the Surge Capacity Force. Procedures
must be developed as soon as practicable. The plan must also ensure the
Surge Capacity Force includes a sufficient number of appropriately
credentialed individuals capable of deploying to disasters after being
activated, as well as full-time, highly trained, credentialed
individuals to lead and manage. Individuals in the Surge Capacity Force
are to be trained and deployed in accordance with the Stafford Act,
unless the FEMA Administrator reports to Congress that additional
statutory authorities are necessary.
Actions Taken:
* Disaster Reserve Workforce/Surge Capacity: The Director of FEMA's
Disaster Reserve Workforce explained that unlike in the military model,
FEMA's disaster reservists are the primary resource for disaster
response and recovery positions, filling 70-80 percent of all Joint
Field Office positions. FEMA has interpreted Surge Capacity Force to
include its Disaster Reserve Workforce of 5,000-6,000 reserve Disaster
Assistance Employees, who are full-time-staff and contract staff who
are organized in 23 cadres. If additional capacity is necessary,
another approximately 2,000 Disaster Assistance Employees are available
to perform immediate, nontechnical functions that require large numbers
of staff. Other sources FEMA has identified include local hires--
additional staff hired from the affected area to perform the same
functions as disaster reservists; contract support for activities that
require specialized skill sets and for general disaster assistance
functions; other full-time FEMA staff detailed to perform disaster
assistance work; and other resources--particularly employees from other
DHS components--detailed to perform disaster assistance work. For
example, the Director of FEMA's Disaster Reserve Workforce gave us
information regarding the deployment of Disaster Assistance Employees
and full-time FEMA employees for the summer of 2008. She told us that
between July and September 2008, FEMA had, on average, 4,067 Disaster
Assistance Employees at 22 Joint Field Office disaster locations,
compared to 1,364 full time FEMA staff working at those locations.§
624(a).
* Disaster Reserve Workforce/Surge Capacity Planning: FEMA contracted
Booz Allen Hamilton to perform a baseline assessment and preliminary
design for professionalizing the Disaster Reserve Workforce and its
supporting program management function, including FEMA's Surge Capacity
Force planning. Booz Allen Hamilton developed a preliminary design for
the Disaster Reserve Workforce, which includes an organizational
concept, workforce size and composition, concept of operations, and a
policy framework. One of Booz Allen Hamilton's recommendations was to
establish a central office for the development, management, and
deployment of the Disaster Reserve Workforce. The office, the Disaster
Reserve Workforce Division, was stood up on March 31, 2008. According
to the Director of the Disaster Reserve Workforce Division, the Branch
Chief responsible for Surge Capacity Force planning joined FEMA on June
22, 2008. The Director also told us that FEMA now has an interim Surge
Capacity Force Plan under internal review. § 624(a).
* DHS Employees Designated to Serve: The Interim Surge Capacity Force
Plan was announced in a meeting of the DHS Human Capital Council in
March 2008 and communicated to the heads of DHS components in a May
2008 memorandum from the FEMA Administrator. In the May 2008
memorandum, FEMA sent a listing of job titles and positions needed in
the Surge Capacity Force to all DHS Human Capital Officers and asked
them to identify approximately 900 employees throughout DHS for the
Surge Capacity Force. § 624(a)-(b),(g).
* Credentialing: The Director of the Disaster Reserve Workforce
Division reported that the Surge Capacity Force is being credentialed
by the National Preparedness Directorate's NIMS credentialing program,
which is the administrative process for validating the qualifications
of personnel, assessing their background, and authorizing their access
to incidents involving mutual aid between states.[Footnote 30] NIMS
credentialing guidelines are to provide a process for the Disaster
Reserve Workforce to receive physical "smartcards" for establishing
credentials for access to an incident. The Director of the Disaster
Reserve Workforce Division told us that FEMA's Security Office is
currently engaged in acquiring the enrollment stations and cards to
execute this activity agencywide over a period of time. The director
also told us that the division has a separate credentialing program
aimed at establishing more-substantive qualifications. According to the
director, the NIMS credentialing guidelines do not address the
knowledge, skills, and abilities, or core competencies required to meet
the qualification standards for FEMA job-titled positions that deliver
FEMA programs and services. Therefore, according to the director, the
Disaster Reserve Workforce Division, in partnership with FEMA's
Emergency Management Institute, recently began the process of
developing standardized credentialing plans, which will incorporate
existing position task books for the Disaster Assistance Employee
workforce (a total of 230 positions organized in 23 cadres). For
example, the External Affairs Officer position task book was revised in
April 2008. She said that these task books will provide the basis for
building the credentialing plans. § 624(c).
Areas to Be Addressed:
* Surge Capacity Plan: Despite the initial actions FEMA has taken to
assess its baseline capabilities and draft an interim Surge Capacity
Force Plan, according to the Director of the Disaster Workforce
Division, as of May 2008, FEMA had not yet provided Congress with a
plan for establishing and implementing a Surge Capacity Force. The
director stated that her goal is to submit a plan to implement surge
capacity force by summer 2009 with timelines and information on select-
-but not all--positions in the disaster reserve workforce. § 624(a).
* Employees Designated to Serve: Although the FEMA Administrator had
taken action to begin identifying DHS personnel to serve in the Surge
Capacity Force, as of May 2008, DHS has not designated members to the
Surge Capacity Force, according to the Director of the Disaster Reserve
Workforce Division. She told us the initial DHS Agency Surge Capacity
designation lists were submitted in June 2008. Upon review, the
Director of the Disaster Reserve Workforce Division said there were
inconsistencies with the different agencies' interpretation of
requirements for personnel, training, and skill sets. A Surge Capacity
Force Working Group met to review surge staffing requirements and to
develop a timeline for the development of processes and a Concept of
Operations Plan. Agency participants in the working group include FEMA,
the Transportation Security Administration, and U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services. The Director of the Disaster Reserve Workforce
Division told us that a final draft is expected to be complete by
December 2008, with a full plan for implementation expected by summer
2009. § 624(b), (g).
* Additional Authorities Necessary: According to officials in the
Disaster Reserve Workforce Division, FEMA has identified additional
authorities desired, which are designed to support recruiting for the
disaster reserve workforce. These include access to healthcare and
retirement benefits for disaster reservists; mandatory annual training
and drilling requirements for reserve members; authority for retirees
serving as disaster reservists to continue receiving their government
retirement benefits; and the ability to offer credit for disaster
reserve experience to be used in consideration for future full-time,
permanent FEMA employment. The Disaster Reserve Workforce Director told
us that FEMA submitted the legislative package to DHS for consideration
on July 9, 2008. The House Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure recently considered a bill that would allow all
temporary personnel performing Stafford Act services (of which disaster
reservists are a subset) to be eligible for federal employee health
benefits.[Footnote 36] § 624(a)(2).
* Sufficient Number of Credentialed and Trained Individuals: According
to officials in FEMA's Disaster Reserve Workforce Division, FEMA does
not yet have a standardized credentialing program in place for its
Disaster Reserve Workforce, but does have an effort under way to
develop one, as described above. FEMA plans to continue pilot testing
position task books in summer 2008. It expects to complete the
development of credentialing plans for all cadres and positions by
2010, depending on funding. Disaster Reserve Workforce Division
officials explained that development of the credentialing plans in
conjunction with the position task books will highlight gaps in the
training curriculum that will assist in prioritizing curriculum
development. FEMA also plans to hold training and briefings for the DHS
employees designated to serve in the Surge Capacity Force, but had not
implemented these as of May 2008. § 624(c)-(d).
Challenges FEMA and DHS Officials Identified:
* The Disaster Reserve Workforce Division is a nascent office, which
was not established until nearly 2 years after the initial surge
capacity plan was to be provided to Congress. Officials in the office
stated that before a division was established specifically for the
Disaster Reserve Workforce, disaster workforce and surge capacity
planning had to compete with other priorities and did not get the
attention it needed. Now, according to the director, the new office has
limited capabilities and resources. As of May 2008, in addition to a
small legacy staff, it had only two employees--the Director and a
Deputy Director for one of the three divisions the office planned to
establish. According to the Director, the division has since advertised
16 new positions and is conducting interviews, with several selections
and offers in progress.
* According to the Director of the Disaster Reserve Workforce Division,
the Surge Capacity Force Plan and full surge capability is a long-term
goal, which will take time to develop. She stated that Booz Allen
Hamilton estimated that it will take FEMA 5 years to fully implement
the eight recommendations that FEMA had chosen as priorities from the
baseline assessment.
For Further Reading:
Government Accountability Office. Comptroller General of the United
States. Presidential Signing Statements --Agency Implementation of Ten
Provisions of Law. B-309928. December 20, 2007.
U.S. Congress. Senate. Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs. Statement of Richard L. Skinner, Inspector General, U. S.
Department of Homeland Security. April 3, 2008.
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. "Rotational Assignments Program
Report to Congress." June 2008.
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Federal Emergency Management
Agency. "Combined Report: Use of Recruitment and Retention Bonuses:
Fiscal Year 2007 Report to Congress." December 2007.
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Federal Emergency Management
Agency. "Strategic Human Capital Plan 2008-2012: FEMA P-692." May 2008.
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Federal Emergency Management
Agency. "Quarterly Vacancy Report: Through 2ND Quarter Fiscal Year 2007
Report to Congress." August 2007.
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Federal Emergency Management
Agency. "Quarterly Vacancy Report: 4th Quarter Fiscal Year 2007 Report
to Congress." May 2008.
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Federal Emergency Management
Agency. "Quarterly Vacancy Report: 1st Quarter Fiscal Year 2008 Report
to Congress." May 2008.
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Federal Emergency Management
Agency. "Quarterly Vacancy Report: 2nd Quarter Fiscal Year 2008 Report
to Congress." May 2008.
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Naval Post-Graduate School. "The
Center for Homeland Defense and Security Master's Degree Program."
[hyperlink, http://www.chds.us/?masters/overview] (accessed on Sept. 5,
2008).
[End of section]
Enclosure XI: Applying Specific Expertise to Disaster Planning,
Response, and Recovery Activities:
Post-Katrina Act § 611 (Homeland Security Act § 511), National
Infrastructure Simulation and Analysis Center:
Requires the National Infrastructure Simulation and Analysis Center
(NISAC) to model, simulate, and analyze the systems and assets
constituting critical infrastructure, in order to enhance preparedness,
protection, response, recovery, and mitigation activities. Requires
each federal agency and department with critical infrastructure
responsibility under Homeland Security Presidential Directive-7 (HSPD-
7) to establish a formal relationship with the NISAC, which must
include an agreement on information sharing.
Actions Taken:
* NISAC Modeling, Simulation, and Analysis Support: The Deputy Director
of the Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) Infrastructure Analysis
and Strategy Division (IASD), who manages the NISAC, said that the
requirements of the Post-Katrina Act were reflected in the NISAC's
preexisting mission and therefore the Post-Katrina Act did not
substantially change any of the NISAC's work activities. The NISAC has
taken actions to simulate and analyze the systems and assets comprising
critical infrastructure in order to enhance preparedness, protection,
response, recovery, and mitigation activities, according to the IASD
Deputy Director. We identified 22 major simulation, modeling, and
analysis activities in 2008 and 26 major activities in 2007. For
example, as part of its support to DHS, the NISAC conducted an
infrastructure consequence analysis of a Category 3 hurricane making
landfall in Rhode Island for use in the Ardent Sentry Northern Edge
2007 exercise. § 511.
Areas to Be Addressed:
* Coordination: NISAC has not established any formal interagency
agreements, including an agreement regarding information sharing, with
federal agencies and departments that have critical infrastructure
responsibilities under HSPD-7. According to the IASD Deputy Director,
the National Infrastructure Protection Plan, which provides the
framework for the nation's efforts to protect critical infrastructure
and is signed by 15 federal departments and agencies, meets the intent
of the Post-Katrina Act's requirement on the establishment of formal
interagency agreements. The IASD Deputy Director said that structured
processes conducted under the National Infrastructure Protection Plan
framework, including the NISAC annual report and work plan, are the
primary mechanisms for coordinating with agencies given critical
infrastructure responsibilities under HSPD-7. § 511(b)(2).
Challenges DHS and FEMA Officials Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
Post-Katrina Act § 611 (Homeland Security Act § 513), Disability
Coordinator:
Requires the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Administrator
to appoint a Disability Coordinator who is to report directly to the
FEMA Administrator to ensure that the needs of individuals with
disabilities are addressed in emergency preparedness and disaster
relief and specifies responsibilities of the Disability Coordinator.
Actions Taken:
* Appointment: The FEMA Administrator appointed the Disability
Coordinator in July 2007. § 513(a).
* Reporting Relationship: FEMA officials told us in an e-mail shortly
before we published this document that, although the Disability
Coordinator is colocated with the Office of Equal Rights for
administrative support purposes, the position reports directly to the
Administrator. However, they did not provide documentation of the
reporting relationship with their e-mail. § 513(a).
* Consulting with Other Organizations: The Disability Coordinator said
that she consulted with three main organizations that represent the
interests and rights of individuals with disabilities in emergency
planning requirements and relief efforts in the event of a disaster.
The three organizations are the National Council on Disability (NCD),
the Inter-Agency Coordinating Council (ICC) on Preparedness and
Individuals with Disabilities, and the National Advisory Council (NAC).
In addition, the Disability Coordinator said that she has consulted
with several disability advocacy groups including the National
Association for the Blind, the National Association for the Deaf and
Hard of Hearing, and the American Association of Retired Persons. §
513(b)(2)-(3).
* Training Materials: As of May 2008, FEMA completed approximately 30
training sessions for emergency managers regarding how to help people
with disabilities, according to the Disability Coordinator. §
513(b)(5).
* Promoting and Ensuring the Accessibility of Information: The
Disability Coordinator said that FEMA's Web site is compliant with
section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act,[Footnote 37] as is the agency's
emergency related video programming. She also said that she works with
state and local governments and local cable networks during disaster
periods to help ensure that disaster information is accessible in
multiple formats. § 513(b)(6)-(7).
* Ensuring Rights Are Respected: According to the Disability
Coordinator, FEMA included, as part of its disability training sessions
to emergency-response providers, information to ensure that the rights
and wishes of individuals with disabilities regarding postevacuation
residency and relocation are respected. FEMA is also developing a
handbook for field use for federal, state, and local officials to
accommodate those with disabilities. § 513(b)(9).
* Ensuring the Needs of Individuals with Disabilities Are Included in
the National Preparedness System: The Disability Coordinator said that
she has provided input into components of the National Preparedness
System developed by FEMA and provided input into exercises conducted
under the National Exercise Program. § 513(b)(10).
Areas to be Addressed:
* Disseminating Best Practices: FEMA is still in the process of
developing and implementing best practices and model evacuation plans
for individuals with disabilities. The Disability Coordinator said that
as a best practice FEMA is developing "go kits" for people with
developmental impairments, the hearing impaired, and the blind, which
will be distributed in an emergency. The go kits will contain visual
and hearing devices. For example, the go kit for the hearing impaired
will include a teletypewriter, a keyboard with headphones, and a
clipboard with sound capabilities. The go kits will be stored in the
regions and will include a list of their contents and directions for
use. Another best practice, according to the Disability Coordinator, is
FEMA's development of a handbook for field use for federal, state, and
local officials to accommodate those with disabilities. FEMA is also in
the process of developing model evacuation plans for people with
disabilities. § 513(b)(4).
* Ensuring the Accessibility of Information: FEMA has not yet fully
developed and implemented alternative formats for alerts and warning
signals issued by the agency for people with disabilities, but
officials said that they are working with the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration to develop them. § 513(b)(7).
* Ensuring the Availability of Accessible Transportation: According to
the Disability Coordinator, FEMA has begun to work with state emergency
managers to help develop evacuation plans that include accessible
transportation options. This official also said that FEMA is working
with states to develop paratransit options as well as to coordinate the
use of accessible vans for hospitals and nursing homes. § 513(b)(8).
Challenges DHS and FEMA Officials Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
Post-Katrina Act § 689, Individuals with Disabilities:
Requires that the FEMA Administrator, in coordination with the NAC, the
NCD, the ICC on Preparedness and Individuals with Disabilities, and the
Disability Coordinator, develop guidelines to accommodate individuals
with disabilities.
Actions Taken:
* Initial Guidelines and Coordination: According to FEMA officials,
FEMA coordinated with the ICC on Preparedness and Individuals with
Disabilities and the NCD to publish a reference guide titled
"Accommodating Individuals with Disabilities in the Provisions of
Disaster Mass Care, Housing, and Human Services." The reference guide
describes existing legal requirements and standards relating to access
for people with disabilities, with a focus on equal access requirements
related to Emergency Support Function 6 (Disaster Mass Care, Housing,
and Human Services). The reference guide states that it is not intended
to satisfy all of the guideline requirements contained in section 689
of the Post-Katrina Act. FEMA officials said that they could not
coordinate with FEMA's Disability Coordinator during the guide's
development as she had yet to be hired. §689(a).
* Additional Interim Guidelines: In addition to the above reference
guide, an "Interim Emergency Management Planning Guide for Special
Needs Populations" was released for state and local emergency managers
and planners and is out for public comment. This interim guidance,
dated August 15, 2008, is available on FEMA's Web site at [hyperlink,
http://www.fema.gov/news/newsrelease.fema?id=45435]. The interim
guidance addresses some of the requirements contained in section 689
such as access to shelters and portable toilets and access to emergency
communications and public information. § 689(a).
Areas to be Addressed:
* Complete Guidelines and Coordination: Although FEMA's "Interim
Management Planning Guide for Special Needs Populations" addresses some
of the guideline requirements contained in section 689, it does not
address others, such as access to first-aid stations and mass-feeding
areas. Also, the interim guide does not reflect whether FEMA
coordinated with the NAC or the NCD in its development. § 689(a).
Challenges DHS and FEMA Officials Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
Post-Katrina Act § 689g (Stafford Act § 326), Designation of Small
State and Rural Advocate:
Requires that the President establish in FEMA a Small State and Rural
Advocate to advocate for fair treatment of small states and rural
communities in the provision of Stafford Act assistance, and this
section enumerates the duties of the advocate.
Actions Taken:
* Designation of Advocate: The FEMA Small State and Rural Advocate
assumed his position in August 2007. § 326(a).
* Participation in the Declaration Process: According to officials from
FEMA's National Preparedness Directorate, as of October 2008, the Small
State and Rural Advocate has reviewed more than 100 declaration
requests and appeals. § 326(c)(1).
* Reporting Requirement: FEMA submitted a report to Congress in
February 2007 detailing the extent to which disaster declaration
regulations meet the particular needs of states with populations of
less than 1,500,000 individuals and comply with statutory restrictions
on the use of arithmetical formulas and sliding scales based on income
or population, as required by the Post-Katrina Act. § 689g(b).
Areas to be Addressed:
* Assistance with Declaration Request Preparation: The Small State and
Rural Advocate stated that he has not assisted small population states
in the preparation of any requests for declarations. § 326(c)(2).
Challenges DHS and FEMA Officials Identified:
* According to the Small State and Rural Advocate, there is some
concern at FEMA over whether or not his role in reviewing declaration
requests might conflict with his responsibility to help small
population states prepare such requests.
For Further Reading:
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Federal Emergency Management
Agency. "Accommodating Individuals with Disabilities in the Provision
of Disaster Mass Care, Housing, and Human Services: Reference Guide."
[hyperlink, http://www.fema.gov/oer/reference/index.shtm] (accessed
Sept. 10,
2008).
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Federal Emergency Management
Agency and DHS Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties. "Interim
Emergency Management Planning Guide for Special Needs Populations,
Version 1.0." August 15, 2008.
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Federal Emergency Management
Agency. "Report to Congress: Small State and Rural Advocate Report on
Disaster Declaration Regulations." February 2008.
[End of section]
Enclosure XII: Implementing Controls to Prevent Waste, Fraud, and
Abuse:
Post-Katrina Act § 693, Oversight and Accountability of Federal
Disaster Expenditures:
Authorizes the FEMA Administrator to designate up to 1 percent of the
total amount of a mission assignment to be used by the recipient agency
to perform oversight activities.
Areas to Be Addressed:
* Oversight Tasking of Mission-Assigned Agencies: FEMA officials stated
that they have not exercised this authority. In addition, FEMA
officials said that the agency has not established a mechanism for
exercising this authority, such as modifying their mission assignment
form to allow for designating funds to task an agency to perform
oversight activities. § 693(a).
Challenges DHS and FEMA Officials Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
Post-Katrina Act § 696 (Stafford Act § 408), Fraud, Waste, and Abuse
Controls:
Requires the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Administrator
to ensure that all FEMA programs administering federal disaster-relief
assistance develop and maintain proper internal management controls to
prevent and detect fraud, waste, and abuse; to adapt FEMA databases to
include specific internal controls; and to ensure that the Inspector
General reviews FEMA databases for the existence and implementation of
the required internal controls. Also amends the Stafford Act to require
the development of a system, including an electronic database, to
counter improper payments in the provision of assistance to individuals
and households.
Actions Taken:
* Verification Procedures in the Individuals and Households Program
(IHP): According to FEMA, the agency established identity verification
processes, which include verifying that the applicant's social security
number is valid, matches the applicant's name, and does not belong to a
deceased individual. Further, FEMA reported that it has implemented
procedures to validate that the address an applicant reports as damaged
was the applicant's primary residence during the time of the disaster
and that the address is located within the disaster-affected area. This
validation is done by transmitting the damaged address to a service
that accesses several publicly available databases to confirm the
applicant-provided information, according to FEMA officials. §
408(i)(1).
* Actions to Minimize the Risk of Making Duplicative IHP Payments:
According to DHS's Fiscal Year 2007 Annual Financial Report, FEMA's
internal controls and processes to prevent and detect duplicate and
improper payments for the IHP needed improvement. The report listed
eight corrective actions scheduled to be completed by June 2008. FEMA
officials in the Disaster Assistance Directorate provided the following
information about five of the eight corrective actions that it
considers to be complete:
- Complete the expedited assistance policy: FEMA issued an interim
critical needs assessment policy, the new name for the expedited
assistance policy, in September 2008. FEMA's expedited assistance
program, instituted in response to Hurricanes Katrina and Rita,
authorized $2,000 in fast track assistance to eligible IHP applicants
to help with immediate, emergency needs for food, shelter, clothing,
and personal necessities. We reported in February 2006 that weak or
nonexistent internal controls in processing applications left the
government vulnerable to fraud and abuse, such as duplicative
payments.[Footnote 33] Under FEMA's new policy, a state must request,
and FEMA must approve, critical needs assistance based on an assessment
that the disaster has caused extended displacement and unusual
financial burdens on individuals and households. The new policy, among
other things, reduces the amount of assistance from $2,000 to $500 per
payment; limits the period of eligibility to 60 days; and requires
identity and occupancy verification. The policy also states that FEMA
will coordinate with agencies offering monetary assistance for critical
needs to prevent duplication of assistance.
- Put in place a contract for data verification and prepopulation of
verified data: According to officials in the Disaster Assistance
Directorate, FEMA implemented database modifications in July 2008 that
enabled it to prepopulate its individual assistance records with
verified applicant data. These officials said that this was
accomplished through a Systems Change Request to its National Emergency
Management Information System (NEMIS), which performs numerous
disaster-related activities, including providing disaster assistance
to individuals. According to the Disaster Assistance Directorate
officials, the prepopulation of data fields now occurs when the
applicant's social security number is entered in the registration
intake module, using data supplied by FEMA's data verification
contractor, including the applicant's damaged property address, mailing
address, and phone number.
- Develop IHP applicant recertification guidelines: FEMA amended its
recertification processing guidance, which sets forth FEMA's procedures
for processing applications for continued rental assistance, in August
2008. According to officials in FEMA's Disaster Assistance Directorate,
its National Processing Service Center staff have been trained to
implement the new procedures.[Footnote 34]
- Develop a process for approving policy and guidance: To implement
this corrective action, FEMA finalized a Rulemaking, Policy, and
Federal Register Notice Approval Procedural Manual in April 2008.
- Develop a process to ensure consistent application of all disaster-
specific policy: Officials from FEMA's Disaster Assistance Directorate
reported that the FEMA National Processing Service Centers have taken
the following actions to help ensure that employees are consistently
applying disaster-specific policy:
- After employees are trained on new policy and their corresponding
procedures, they are tested using an automated survey tool to verify
that they understand the new procedures. Real case examples are
included in the assessments so that the actual application of their
knowledge is verified prior to assigning employees to work cases.
- The National Processing Service Centers have established a weekly
video teleconference schedule with Applicant Services Managers and
Program Specialists to ensure that personnel understand all policy and
procedural changes.
- The National Processing Service Centers have established the National
Coordination Team Assistance Group, an in-house call group staffed by
IHP subject-matter experts who are available to answer questions from
front-line workers to help ensure that assistance applications are
processed correctly and consistently.
- The National Processing Service Center Quality Control has expanded
its function through an accelerated review of cases involving disaster-
specific or new procedures. Reviewing such cases on a near real-time
basis, the group's goal is to ensure caseworkers are applying
procedures consistently and to make recommendations for improving
training guidelines when problems are identified. § 408(i)(1)-(2).
* Procedures to Minimize and Collect Duplicate IHP Payments: FEMA
established a process to identify and collect duplicative IHP payments.
This process includes, among other things, FEMA's disaster assistance
database automatically checking specific data fields in every applicant
record for potentially duplicate applications, having a FEMA caseworker
and a supervisor review potentially duplicate applications to determine
if FEMA is entitled to collect a payment already made, and notifying
the applicant of FEMA's decision to collect a duplicate payment while
providing an appeal process for the applicant. § 408(i)(2)-(3), (5).
* Instructions Regarding the Proper Use of IHP Assistance and How to
Appeal Decisions: After the submission of an IHP application, FEMA
provides applicants with a copy of its application and a program guide,
Help after a Disaster: Applicant's Guide to the Individuals and
Households Program. Updated and reissued in July 2008, this guide
provides applicants with information regarding the proper use of IHP
payments. It also notifies applicants of FEMA's appeal process and the
steps an applicant should take to have FEMA review any assistance-
related decision such as requiring the applicant to state in writing
why he or she believes that FEMA's decision was incorrect. §
408(i)(4)-(5).
* Audits of Databases That Administer Federal Disaster Assistance:
Shortly before we published this document, FEMA officials told us that
a contract is about to be awarded to perform an internal audit of
FEMA's federal disaster relief assistance applications and databases.
They told us the contract will support the statutorily required review
by the Office of Inspector General, which is to determine if these
applications and databases include the proper level of internal
controls to prevent and detect fraud, waste, and abuse in FEMA's
disaster relief programs, but they did not provide documentation of
this contract. § 696(b).
Areas to Be Addressed:
* Database Integration to Highlight Ineligible Applications: According
to FEMA's Information Technology Report submitted to Congress in
September 2007 under section 640 of the Post-Katrina Act, FEMA uses
NEMIS to perform numerous disaster-related activities, including
providing disaster assistance to individuals and communities. Although
NEMIS interfaces with FEMA's financial accounting system through a
special module, FEMA has not yet taken action to ensure that applicant
information collected in NEMIS is integrated with disbursement and
payment records to determine ineligible applicants. § 696(a)(2)-(a)(4).
* Actions to Minimize the Risk of Making Duplicative IHP Payments: FEMA
officials in the Disaster Assistance Directorate provided the following
information about three of the eight corrective actions from DHS's
Fiscal Year 2007 Annual Financial Report that are not complete:
- Enhance training to assist FEMA personnel with the Lodging Expense
Reimbursement System: According to officials from FEMA's Disaster
Assistance Directorate, FEMA's National Processing Service Centers
initiated a recredentialing training plan for all of its Human Service
Specialists during fiscal year 2008. They stated that the curriculum
included additional training in processing Lodging Expense
Reimbursement. However, according to the Disaster Assistance
Directorate Officials, the training plan was interrupted on several
occasions due to other workload priorities and approximately 2/3 of the
training plan, including the Lodging Expense Reimbursements training,
was not completed. These officials said that National Processing
Service Center staff will receive training in Lodging Expense
Reimbursement prior to being assigned to work cases in the Lodging
Expense Reimbursement queue for Hurricanes Gustav and Ike.
- Award a contract to make available 6,000 call center agents:
According to officials from FEMA's Disaster Assistance Directorate,
FEMA reviewed the costs associated with a contract of this magnitude
and determined it was prohibitively expensive. They said that the
National Processing Service Centers are using other means to address
their surge staffing needs.
- Clarify and define the Separated Households Policy: According to
officials for FEMA's Disaster Assistance Directorate, this corrective
action is in progress. The officials told us that FEMA has developed a
draft policy to clarify the circumstances in which FEMA will authorize
separate applications and provide temporary housing assistance to more
than one disaster applicant from a single household. § 408(i)(2).
Challenges DHS and FEMA Officials Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
Post-Katrina Act § 698, Fraud Prevention Training Program:
Requires the FEMA Administrator to develop and implement a program to
provide training on the identification and prevention of waste, fraud,
and abuse of federal disaster relief assistance.
Areas to Be Addressed:
* Establishment of Program: FEMA officials said that while the agency
provides training to National Processing Service Center employees on
how to identify potentially fraudulent practices on the part of the
disaster assistance applicant, FEMA has yet to develop an overall
policy on waste, fraud, and abuse. Once this overall policy is
established, FEMA's Office of the Chief Counsel will have the lead for
developing a training program, according to FEMA officials. § 698.
Challenges DHS and FEMA Officials Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
For Further Reading:
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Financial Annual Report, Fiscal
Year 2007. Washington D.C.: November 15, 2007.
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Federal Emergency Management
Agency. Help After a Disaster: Applicant's Guide to the Individuals and
Households Program. [hyperlink,
http://www.fema.gov/assistance/process/guide.shtm] (accessed Sept. 10,
2008).
[End of section]
Enclosure XIII: Managing Recovery from Hurricanes Katrina and Rita in
the Gulf Coast Region:
Post-Katrina Act § 638, Hurricane Katrina and Hurricane Rita Recovery
Offices:
Requires the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Administrator
to establish recovery offices to provide all eligible federal
assistance to individuals and state, local, and tribal governments
affected by Hurricanes Katrina or Rita. Authorizes recovery offices in
each of the following states, Mississippi, Louisiana, Alabama, and
Texas, which shall terminate at the FEMA Administrator's discretion.
Actions Taken:
* Establishment of Recovery Offices: FEMA established Transitional
Recovery Offices (TRO) in Mississippi, Louisiana, Alabama, and Texas.
According to officials in FEMA's Gulf Coast Recovery Office, both the
Mississippi and Louisiana TROs have a main office and two area field
offices while the Alabama TRO is closed and remaining mission
requirements are being transitioned to FEMA's Atlanta regional office.
At the time of our work, FEMA officials in the Gulf Coast Recovery
Office said that the Texas TRO was not yet closed but was in the
process of transitioning the remaining mission requirements to the FEMA
regional office in Denton, Texas. § 638(a).
* Senior Leadership at Recovery Offices: The four TROs are led by a
Director with a supporting senior management team. § 638(b).
* Staff at Recovery Offices: FEMA officials in the Gulf Coast Recovery
Office stated that when the TROs began initial operations, FEMA relied
on temporary personnel, such as local hires and Disaster Assistance
Employees, to meet staffing needs. The TROs then transitioned from
these initial temporary personnel to personnel from the Cadre of
Response Employees who were staffed for appointments of 2 years,
according to FEMA officials. § 638(d)(1).
* Staffing Levels: FEMA officials in the Gulf Coast Recovery Office
stated that individual TROs are responsible for assessing their own
staffing needs. Officials from the TROs in Texas, Mississippi, and
Louisiana reported using different mechanisms to evaluate staffing
levels. For example, the Mississippi TRO officials reported reviewing
staffing periodically. The office conducted a review earlier in 2008 of
Individual Assistance staff to project the number of positions to be
released by October 2008, according to FEMA officials. Louisiana TRO
officials stated that they conducted a full vacancy analysis as well as
two internal and external hiring cycles in an attempt to completely
fill the identified vacancies. § 638(d)(2).
* Assistance Provided: According to officials in the Gulf Coast
Recovery Office, FEMA established the office following Hurricanes
Katrina and Rita to provide a single, unified point of contact for its
multistate recovery efforts in Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, and
Texas. A FEMA publication outlining TRO accomplishments in the 3 years
since their establishment reports the following Gulf Coast recovery
assistance:
- FEMA has provided more than $7.8 billion to individuals and families
through FEMA's Housing and Other Needs Assistance to address disaster-
related personal property replacement, transportation assistance,
healthcare, and other expenses related to moving and storage.
- More than 143,000 families were provided with temporary housing units
throughout the Gulf Coast, and FEMA has moved over 127,000 households
out of temporary housing units into long-term housing solutions.
- More than $11 billion has been obligated in Public-Assistance grants
for emergency work and permanent repairs for infrastructure, including
schools, hospitals, criminal justice facilities, and utilities.
- FEMA's Hazard Mitigation Grant Program has allocated approximately
$467 million. § 638(c).
* Performance Measures: Performance information for Public Assistance
Program activities is posted on the Gulf Coast Recovery Office's Web
site, [hyperlink,
http://www.fema.gov/hazard/hurricane/2005katrina/weekly.shtm],
and is updated weekly. The Post-Katrina Act requires two specific
performance measures--public assistance project worksheet completion
rates and public assistance reimbursement times. Although the latter
does not appear on the reports posted on the Web site and the former is
not clearly stated in those reports, FEMA officials reported using both
measures.
- Project Worksheet Completion Rates: The Web site posts reports
containing information on various public assistance efforts in Alabama,
Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas as well as Gulf-wide. According to
FEMA officials, the project worksheet completion rates are tracked on
these reports. The officials said that the Joint Field Office tracks
project worksheet completion rates daily by calculating the ratio of
completed worksheets to worksheets anticipated to be completed. The
reports show two project worksheet ratios. One ratio is based on
worksheets obligated (the point at which funds are to be available to
states) and the other ratio is for worksheets that have been entered
into FEMA's National Emergency Management Information System. However,
these officials did not explain the basis for these ratios (i.e., how
completion is defined or how the anticipated number of worksheets is
forecast).
- Public Assistance Reimbursement Times: According to officials in the
Gulf Coast Recovery Office, FEMA has established a standard of 48 hours
from the time the funds are approved in FEMA's system until the funds
are made available to the states through the Department of Health and
Human Services payment management system. Although a measure of
reimbursement times does not appear in the reports on the Web site,
these officials said that FEMA's Office of Chief Financial Officer
tracks public assistance funds that do not meet the 48 hour standard
and refers them to the FEMA finance center for resolution. § 638(e).
Areas to Be Addressed:
* Public Assistance Closeout Incentives: Officials in FEMA's Disaster
Assistance Directorate said that there is nothing that the agency can
do to provide incentives for the closeout of public assistance projects
without additional statutory authority to provide funds. However, FEMA
officials commented that good management practices can expedite the
closeout process. § 638(f).
Challenges DHS and FEMA Officials Identified:
* Agency officials did not identify any challenges for this section.
For Further Reading:
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Federal Emergency Management
Agency. "Gulf Coast Recovery Office Public Assistance Weekly Updates."
[hyperlink,
http://www.fema.gov/hazard/hurricane/2005katrina/weekly.shtm] (accessed
on Sept. 5, 2008).
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Federal Emergency Management
Agency. "3 Years Later: Recovery Continues along the Gulf Coast."
[hyperlink,
http://www.fema.gov/hazard/hurricane/2005katrina/3years.shtm] (accessed
on Sept. 5, 2008).
[End of section]
Enclosure XIV: Crosswalk between Post-Katrina Act Provisions &
Enclosures:
Section[Footnote 40]: § 601;
Provision Title: Short Title;
Location in Enclosures: Not Specifically Addressed--Operative
Terms[Footnote 41].
Section[Footnote 40]: § 602;
Provision Title: Definitions;
Location in Enclosures: Not Specifically Addressed--Operative Terms.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 611 (Homeland Security Act (HSA) § 501);
Provision Title: Definitions;
Location in Enclosures: Not Specifically Addressed--Operative Terms.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 611 (HSA § 503);
Provision Title: Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA);
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure II: Implementing Organizational
Structures, Roles, and Authorities to Prepare for, Respond to, and
Recover from Disasters.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 611 (HSA § 504);
Provision Title: Authority and Responsibilities;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure II: Implementing Organizational
Structures, Roles, and Authorities to Prepare for, Respond to, and
Recover from Disasters.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 611 (HSA § 505);
Provision Title: Functions Transferred;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure II: Implementing Organizational
Structures, Roles, and Authorities to Prepare for, Respond to, and
Recover from Disasters.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 611 (HSA § 506);
Provision Title: Preserving FEMA;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure II: Implementing Organizational
Structures, Roles, and Authorities to Prepare for, Respond to, and
Recover from Disasters.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 611 (HSA § 507);
Provision Title: Regional Offices;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure VI: Supporting Regional Preparedness
and Cooperation.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 611 (HSA § 508);
Provision Title: National Advisory Council;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure II: Implementing Organizational
Structures, Roles, and Authorities to Prepare for, Respond to, and
Recover from Disasters.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 611 (HSA § 509);
Provision Title: National Integration Center;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure II: Implementing Organizational
Structures, Roles, and Authorities to Prepare for, Respond to, and
Recover from Disasters.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 611 (HSA § 510);
Provision Title: Credentialing and Typing;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure X: Ensuring a Well-Trained,
Professional Workforce to Prepare for, Respond to, and Recover from
Disasters.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 611 (HSA § 511);
Provision Title: National Infrastructure Simulation & Analysis Center;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure XI: Applying Specific Expertise to
Disaster Planning, Response, and Recovery Activities.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 611 (HSA § 512);
Provision Title: Evacuation Plans & Exercises;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure V: Implementing the Components of the
National Preparedness System and Other Preparedness Activities.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 611 (HSA § 513);
Provision Title: Disability Coordinator;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure XI: Applying Specific Expertise to
Disaster Planning, Response, and Recovery Activities.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 611 (HSA § 514);
Provision Title: Department and Agency Officials;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure II: Implementing Organizational
Structures, Roles, and Authorities to Prepare for, Respond to, and
Recover from Disasters.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 611 (HSA § 515);
Provision Title: National Operations Center;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure II: Implementing Organizational
Structures, Roles, and Authorities to Prepare for, Respond to, and
Recover from Disasters.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 611 (HSA § 516);
Provision Title: Chief Medical Officer;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure II: Implementing Organizational
Structures, Roles, and Authorities to Prepare for, Respond to, and
Recover from Disasters.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 612;
Provision Title: Technical and Conforming Amendments;
Location in Enclosures: Not Specifically Addressed--Operative Terms.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 613;
Provision Title: National Weather Service;
Location in Enclosures: Not Specifically Addressed--Operative Terms.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 614;
Provision Title: Effective Date;
Location in Enclosures: Not Specifically Addressed--Operative Terms.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 621 (5 USC § 10101);
Provision Title: Definitions;
Location in Enclosures: Not Specifically Addressed--Operative Terms.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 621 (5 USC § 10102);
Provision Title: Strategic human capital plan;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure X: Ensuring a Well-Trained,
Professional Workforce to Prepare for, Respond to, and Recover from
Disasters.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 621 (5 USC § 10103);
Provision Title: Career paths;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure X: Ensuring a Well-Trained,
Professional Workforce to Prepare for, Respond to, and Recover from
Disasters.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 621 (5 USC § 10104);
Provision Title: Recruitment bonuses;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure X: Ensuring a Well-Trained,
Professional Workforce to Prepare for, Respond to, and Recover from
Disasters.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 621 (5 USC § 10105);
Provision Title: Retention bonuses;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure X: Ensuring a Well-Trained,
Professional Workforce to Prepare for, Respond to, and Recover from
Disasters.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 621 (5 USC § 10106);
Provision Title: Quarterly report on vacancy rate in employee
positions;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure X: Ensuring a Well-Trained,
Professional Workforce to Prepare for, Respond to, and Recover from
Disasters.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 622 (HSA § 844);
Provision Title: Homeland Security Rotation Program;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure X: Ensuring a Well-Trained,
Professional Workforce to Prepare for, Respond to, and Recover from
Disasters.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 623 (HSA § 845);
Provision Title: Homeland Security Education Program;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure X: Ensuring a Well-Trained,
Professional Workforce to Prepare for, Respond to, and Recover from
Disasters.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 624;
Provision Title: Surge Capacity Force;
Enclosure X:
Location in Enclosures: Ensuring a Well-Trained, Professional Workforce
to Prepare for, Respond to, and Recover from Disasters.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 631 (Stafford § 613);
Provision Title: State Catastrophic Incident Annex;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure V: Implementing the Components of the
National Preparedness System and Other Preparedness Activities.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 632;
Provision Title: Evacuation Preparedness Technical Assistance;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure V: Implementing the Components of the
National Preparedness System and Other Preparedness Activities.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 633 (Stafford § 303);
Provision Title: Emergency Support and Response Teams;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure V: Implementing the Components of the
National Preparedness System and Other Preparedness Activities.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 634;
Provision Title: Urban Search and Rescue Response System;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure V: Implementing the Components of the
National Preparedness System and Other Preparedness Activities.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 635;
Provision Title: Metropolitan Medical Response Grant System;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure V: Implementing the Components of the
National Preparedness System and Other Preparedness Activities.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 636;
Provision Title: Logistics;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure VII: Improving Timely Delivery of
Goods and Services in Disaster Events.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 637;
Provision Title: Prepositioned Equipment Program;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure VII: Improving Timely Delivery of
Goods and Services in Disaster Events.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 638;
Provision Title: Hurricane Katrina and Hurricane Rita Recovery Offices;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure XIII: Managing Recovery from
Hurricanes Katrina and Rita in the Gulf Coast Region.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 639;
Provision Title: Basic Life Supporting First Aid and Education;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure IV: Providing Assistance to Disaster-
Affected Areas and Populations.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 640;
Provision Title: Improvements to Information Technology Systems;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure IX: Improving Information Technology
Systems to Support Compatibility, Accessibility, and Tracking.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 640a;
Provision Title: Disclosure of Certain Information to Law Enforcement
Agencies;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure IV: Providing Assistance to Disaster-
Affected Areas and Populations.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 641;
Provision Title: Definitions;
Location in Enclosures: Not Specifically Addressed--Operative Terms.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 642;
Provision Title: National Preparedness;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure V: Implementing the Components of the
National Preparedness System and Other Preparedness Activities.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 643;
Provision Title: National Preparedness Goal;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure V: Implementing the Components of the
National Preparedness System and Other Preparedness Activities.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 644;
Provision Title: Establishment of National Preparedness System;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure V: Implementing the Components of the
National Preparedness System and Other Preparedness Activities.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 645;
Provision Title: National Planning Scenarios;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure V: Implementing the Components of the
National Preparedness System and Other Preparedness Activities.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 646;
Provision Title: Target Capabilities and Preparedness Priorities;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure V: Implementing the Components of the
National Preparedness System and Other Preparedness Activities.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 647;
Provision Title: Equipment and Training Standards;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure V: Implementing the Components of the
National Preparedness System and Other Preparedness Activities.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 648;
Provision Title: Training and Exercises;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure V: Implementing the Components of the
National Preparedness System and Other Preparedness Activities.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 649;
Provision Title: Comprehensive Assessment System;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure V: Implementing the Components of the
National Preparedness System and Other Preparedness Activities.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 650;
Provision Title: Remedial Action Management Program;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure V: Implementing the Components of the
National Preparedness System and Other Preparedness Activities.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 651;
Provision Title: Federal Response Capability Inventory;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure V: Implementing the Components of the
National Preparedness System and Other Preparedness Activities.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 652;
Provision Title: Reporting Requirements;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure V: Implementing the Components of the
National Preparedness System and Other Preparedness Activities.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 653;
Provision Title: Federal Preparedness;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure V: Implementing the Components of the
National Preparedness System and Other Preparedness Activities.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 654;
Provision Title: Use of Existing Resources;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure V: Implementing the Components of the
National Preparedness System and Other Preparedness Activities.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 661;
Provision Title: Emergency Management Assistance Compact Grants;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure VI: Supporting Regional Preparedness
and Cooperation.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 662;
Provision Title: Emergency Management Performance Grants;
Location in Enclosures: Not Specifically Addressed--Operative Terms.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 663;
Provision Title: Transfer of Noble Training Center;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure V: Implementing the Components of the
National Preparedness System and Other Preparedness Activities.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 664;
Provision Title: National Exercise Simulation Center;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure V: Implementing the Components of the
National Preparedness System and Other Preparedness Activities.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 671;
Provision Title: Short Title;
Location in Enclosures: Not Specifically Addressed--Operative Terms.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 671 (HSA § 1801);
Provision Title: Office of Emergency Communications;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure III: Supporting and Enhancing
Emergency Communications.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 671 (HSA § 1802);
Provision Title: National Emergency Communications Plan;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure V: Implementing the Components of the
National Preparedness System and Other Preparedness Activities.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 671 (HSA § 1803);
Provision Title: Assessments and Reports;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure III: Supporting and Enhancing
Emergency Communications.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 671 (HSA § 1804);
Provision Title: Coordination of Department Emergency Communications
Grant Programs;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure III: Supporting and Enhancing
Emergency Communications.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 671 (HSA § 1805);
Provision Title: Regional Emergency Communications Coordination;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure VI: Supporting Regional Preparedness
and Cooperation.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 671 (HSA § 1806);
Provision Title: Emergency Communications Preparedness Center;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure III: Supporting and Enhancing
Emergency Communications.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 671 (HSA § 1807);
Provision Title: Urban and Other High Risk Area Communications
Capabilities;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure VI: Supporting Regional Preparedness
and Cooperation.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 671 (HSA § 1808);
Provision Title: Definition;
Location in Enclosures: Not Specifically Addressed--Operative Terms.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 672 (HSA § 314);
Provision Title: Office for Interoperability and Compatibility;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure III: Supporting and Enhancing
Emergency Communications.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 673 (HSA § 315);
Provision Title: Emergency Communications Interoperability Research and
Development;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure III: Supporting and Enhancing
Emergency Communications.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 674;
Provision Title: 911 and E911 Services Report;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure III: Supporting and Enhancing
Emergency Communications.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 675;
Provision Title: Savings Clause;
Location in Enclosures: Not Specifically Addressed--Operative Terms.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 681 (Stafford §§ 402, 502);
Provision Title: General Federal Assistance;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure VII: Improving Timely Delivery of
Goods and Services in Disaster Events.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 682;
Provision Title: National Disaster Recovery Strategy;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure V: Implementing the Components of the
National Preparedness System and Other Preparedness Activities.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 683;
Provision Title: National Disaster Housing Strategy;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure V: Implementing the Components of the
National Preparedness System and Other Preparedness Activities.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 684 (Stafford § 404(a));
Provision Title: Hazard Mitigation Grant Formula;
Location in Enclosures: Not Specifically Addressed--Operative Terms.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 685 (Stafford § 408(c)(4));
Provision Title: Housing Assistance;
Location in Enclosures: Not Specifically Addressed--Operative Terms.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 686 (Stafford § 408(c));
Provision Title: Maximum Amount Under Individual Assistance Programs;
Location in Enclosures: Not Specifically Addressed--Operative Terms.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 687 (Stafford § 302);
Provision Title: Coordinating Officers;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure II: Implementing Organizational
Structures, Roles, and Authorities to Prepare for, Respond to, and
Recover from Disasters.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 688 (Stafford § 102);
Provision Title: Definitions;
Location in Enclosures: Not Specifically Addressed--Operative Terms.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 689;
Provision Title: Individuals With Disabilities;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure XI: Applying Specific Expertise to
Disaster Planning, Response, and Recovery Activities.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 689a (Stafford § 308(a));
Provision Title: Nondiscrimination in Disaster Assistance;
Location in Enclosures: Not Specifically Addressed--Operative Terms.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 689b;
Provision Title: Reunification;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure IV: Providing Assistance to Disaster-
Affected Areas and Populations.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 689c;
Provision Title: National Emergency Family Registry and Locator System;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure IV: Providing Assistance to Disaster-
Affected Areas and Populations.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 689d (Stafford; § 408(c)(1)(A));
Provision Title: Federal Assistance to Individuals and Households;
Location in Enclosures: Not Specifically Addressed--Operative Terms.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 689e (Stafford § 616);
Provision Title: Disaster Related Information Services;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure IV: Providing Assistance to Disaster-
Affected Areas and Populations.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 689f (Stafford § 425);
Provision Title: Transportation Assistance to Individuals and
Households;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure IV: Providing Assistance to Disaster-
Affected Areas and Populations.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 689f (Stafford § 426);
Provision Title: Case Management Services;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure IV: Providing Assistance to Disaster-
Affected Areas and Populations.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 689g (Stafford § 326);
Provision Title: Designation of Small State and Rural Advocate;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure XI: Applying Specific Expertise to
Disaster Planning, Response, and Recovery Activities.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 689h (Stafford § 406(a)(3)(B));
Provision Title: Repair, Restoration, and Replacement of Damaged
Private Nonprofit Educational Facilities;
Location in Enclosures: Not Specifically Addressed--Operative Terms.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 689i;
Provision Title: Individuals and Households Pilot Program;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure IV: Providing Assistance to Disaster-
Affected Areas and Populations.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 689j;
Provision Title: Public Assistance Pilot Program;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure IV: Providing Assistance to Disaster-
Affected Areas and Populations.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 689k;
Provision Title: Disposal of Unused Temporary Housing Units;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure IV: Providing Assistance to Disaster-
Affected Areas and Populations.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 691;
Provision Title: Advance Contracting;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure VIII: Changing Contracting Practices
to Enhance Preparedness and Strengthen Accountability.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 692;
Provision Title: Limitations on Tiering of Subcontractors;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure VIII: Changing Contracting Practices
to Enhance Preparedness and Strengthen Accountability.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 693;
Provision Title: Oversight and Accountability of Federal Disaster
Expenditures;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure XII: Implementing Controls to Prevent
Waste, Fraud, and Abuse.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 694 (Stafford § 307);
Provision Title: Use of Local Firms and Individuals;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure VIII: Changing Contracting Practices
to Enhance Preparedness and Strengthen Accountability.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 695;
Provision Title: Limitation on Length of Certain Noncompetitive
Contracts;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure VIII: Changing Contracting Practices
to Enhance Preparedness and Strengthen Accountability.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 696;
Provision Title: Fraud, Waste and Abuse Controls;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure XII: Implementing Controls to Prevent
Waste, Fraud, and Abuse.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 697;
Provision Title: Registry of Disaster Response Contractors;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure VIII: Changing Contracting Practices
to Enhance Preparedness and Strengthen Accountability.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 698;
Provision Title: Fraud Prevention Training Program;
Location in Enclosures: Enclosure XII: Implementing Controls to Prevent
Waste, Fraud, and Abuse.
Section[Footnote 40]: § 699;
Provision Title: Authorization of Appropriations;
Location in Enclosures: Not Specifically Addressed--Operative Terms.
Source: GAO Analysis.
[End of table]
[End of section]
Enclosure XV: Comments from FEMA:
FEMA:
U.S. Department of Homeland Security:
Washington, DC 20472:
November 14, 2008:
Mr. William O. Jenkins:
Director Homeland Security and Justice:
Government Accountability Office:
Washington, D.C. 20548:
Dear Mr. Jenkins:
Thank you for providing the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and
specifically the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) the
opportunity to review and comment on the draft Government
Accountability Office (GAO) report, GAO-09-59R, Actions to Implement
the Post-Katrina Act (PKEMRA).
PKEMRA contained over two hundred and fifty distinct requirements. As
the GAO has noted in its draft report, DHS, and FEMA in particular, has
been working to implement these requirements, and has completed or made
substantial progress on virtually all provisions.
In this engagement, GAO sought to catalog what DHS had accomplished by
August 1, 2008 in targeted sections of PKEMRA. While DHS and GAO
collaborated in assembling a substantial amount of information, this
report only briefly describes the substantive improvements in the wake
of Hurricane Katrina. Time was not available for a more thorough review
and substantive report.
Recent experiences, particularly in Hurricanes Gustav and Ike, show the
positive result of FEMA and DHS improvements. Gustav and Ike have also
highlighted areas where work remains to be done at all levels of
government, particularly with disaster housing. All of these activities
related to Gustav and Ike took place after August 1, 2008, and are
therefore not covered in this report.
Below is an overview of improvements and a discussion of how these
improvements have affected recent disaster response operations.
Overview of Improvements
Earlier this year, FEMA released the National Response Framework (NRF).
The NRF provides a clear picture of the resources and assets available
through the Federal government and clarifies the agencies and programs
engaged in disaster response and their role in support of state and
local officials.
FEMA has worked with states to identify gaps and areas where they will
most need support, recognizing that one size does not fit all and that
any response will be tailored to an individual state's needs.
Additionally, FEMA has developed teams that actively exercise and
interface with states and local governments in advance of disaster
events and can be pre-staged in a notice event, or stand ready to be
deployed to the disaster area, arriving on the ground within hours of a
storm or other disaster striking. These teams provide real-time
situational awareness and visibility on issues and serve as an initial
point of contact for state officials to communicate their need for
Federal resources to FEMA.
FEMA has improved its ability to deliver assistance. This is reflected
in alliances with logistics partners within the Federal family and with
the private sector, clarified guidance to states on emergency life
sustaining needs, and a strengthened ability to manage the logistics
pipeline and get needed supplies and resources to a disaster site more
quickly and efficiently.
Additionally, FEMA is focused on providing assistance in an easily
accessible and coordinated manner through simple and effective delivery
mechanisms. FEMA expanded its capability to register those in need of
aid and to have mobile registration centers that can be on hand to help
those without access to phones or computers. At the same time, FEMA
strengthened its ability to detect and limit waste, fraud, and abuse of
its assistance programs. FEMA continues to work with Federal, state,
local, and voluntary partners to build a robust system for evacuation,
sheltering, and housing, including our collaboration with the American
Red Cross to implement the National Shelter System. FEMA established a
National Emergency Family Registry and Locator System and a National
Emergency Child Locator Center to help those displaced find their loved
ones. FEMA also instituted a new policy to help those with pets safely
evacuate a disaster area.
FEMA recognizes the need to have a comprehensive disaster housing
framework, which can serve as a cornerstone for disaster recovery.
PKEMRA called for a National Disaster Housing Strategy (NDHS) and
provided FEMA with the opportunity to describe how the Nation provides
housing to those affected by disasters. More importantly, it charts a
new direction to better understand and meet the housing needs of
disaster victims and communities. The Strategy captures lessons learned
from Hurricane Katrina and subsequent disasters, embraces the larger
issues of disaster victims beyond simply providing a structure, and
seeks innovative and creative housing options. It elevates issues of
safety, security and access to those with disabilities, emphasizes
again and again the value of planning, and differentiates the
catastrophe above all other disasters. For the first time in any single
document, it addresses all forms of disaster housing and suggests that
these issues merit full time, national attention. On July 23, 2008,
FEMA published the draft NDHS for public comment and has been working
closely with key stakeholders to finalize seven annexes to the NDHS
that address specific issues in PKEMRA. FEMA is revising the Strategy
now based on those comments and expects to release the final Strategy
and annexes this December.
Discussion of How these Improvements Affected Disaster Response
Operations:
Beginning with the Midwest floods of May 2008, through the 2008
Hurricane Season, DHS and FEMA have responded to thirty-one major
disaster declarations affecting 23 states and territories. The most
notable disasters were Hurricanes Gustav and Ike. These storms, both
projected at one time in their lifespan to be Category III or stronger
storms at landfall, both had the capacity to impose catastrophic damage
simultaneously to multiple states along the Gulf Coast. These storms
were the most strenuous test of national, state, local and individual
preparedness since Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. The response, and thus
far the recovery to these storms provides evidence of increased
preparedness, decisiveness by elected and appointed officials at every
level of government, as well as by citizens who elected to evacuate in
record numbers. Below are specific examples of improved or expanded
response capabilities:
* In the response to Hurricane Gustav, nine Urban Search and Rescue
(US&R) Task Forces were deployed to support Texas and Louisiana and
eight Task Forces were deployed to support Georgia, Florida, Alabama,
and Mississippi.
* For Hurricane Ike, nine Task Forces were deployed to Texas and six to
Louisiana. The US&R Task Forces supported the states in critical search
and rescue operations.
* During these disasters, the new FEMA Operational Planners:
- Provided improved planning capability in the areas of current and
future planning;
- Facilitated extensive evacuation coordination/planning between the
Regions and the states;
- Synchronized interagency operational planning with the DHS Incident
Management Planning Team, U.S. Northern Command, and other Departments
and Agencies; Supported responses to the Midwest Floods by projecting
population impacts and needs before the flood wave struck;
- Provided current and future operational planning analyses to inform
decision makers by focusing more closely on performance metrics; and
Developed and implemented innovative planning strategies to address
issues such as the Regional Planning Strategy used to respond to
Hurricanes Gustav and Hanna concurrently.
* For Hurricane Gustav, FEMA and Federal, state, and local partners
executed the Gulf Coast evacuation plan, developed over the past two
years in coordination with the State of Louisiana, and evacuated more
than 2 million people in 48 hours to multiple receiving states using
multi-modal evacuation sources including air, train, and bus.
* Greater emphasis has been placed on the Mission Assignment (MA)
process to include development of Pre-Scripted Mission Assignments
(PSMAs), a mechanism used to facilitate rapid response. FEMA has
increased the number of PSMAs in place to 236 with 33 agencies. This
support ranges from heavy-lift helicopters from DoD, to generators from
the USACE, to Disaster Medical Assistance Teams from HHS, to Emergency
Road Clearing Teams from the U.S. Forest Service. The expanded catalog
of PSMAs was put to good use during Gustav and Ike.
* FEMA Mobile Emergency Response Support System (MERS) assets continued
to provide communications support to states/locals, as well as our
response teams and other interagency response teams. For example,
during Hurricanes Gustav and Ike, MERS:
- Provided mobile emergency communications infrastructure to the Mayor
of Galveston to support continuity of local government.
- Supported maintenance and repair of communications equipment for
local first responders on Galveston Island.
- Repaired a main repeater at the Houston Reliance Center to sustain
communications capabilities for the Texas Highway Patrol.
- Supported Texas Task Force Ike with land mobile radio communications
to link the Task Force with the Interagency Working Group.
- Provided command and control support to government of Houma,
Louisiana.
- Supported communications capabilities for the Louisiana State Police
by providing a 700 MHz radio system.
- Supported Terrebonne Parish in Louisiana with a 800 MHz radio system
tower providing communications connection for the Parish.
* In October 2008, there were 3,837 FEMA reservists deployed in support
of disaster response and recovery throughout the United States. In the
Gulf Coast and other hurricane affected areas, there are 1,831
reservists serving in response to the tremendous need.
* In FY 08, FEMA competed an estimated 80% of its procurement dollars
thereby exceeding its annual competitive obligations goal by 4
percentage points. In addition, FEMA has awarded an estimated $393
million to small businesses so far this fiscal year.
* Our efforts and improvements in service delivery of FEMA's recovery
programs on behalf of disaster victims include:
- Housing Inspections - Prior to declaration, housing inspectors are
mobilized; they arrive in the affected areas immediately after the
declaration and inspections began immediately following the disasters.
Registration Intake - Special Needs scenarios were added to FEMA's
registration intake script beginning in 2008. The Special Needs
questions are designed to obtain information from applicants about any
loss of support required for mobility, sight, hearing or taking care of
themselves or members of their household as a result of the disaster.
The information about applicants' special needs is transmitted to the
JFOs for appropriate follow-up.
- National Processing Servicing Center (NPSC) Operations - The NPSC
have the capability to expand operations to support 24/7 staffing
immediately upon a declaration.
- Joint Housing Solutions Group and the Development of Comprehensive
Housing Plan - FEMA's Joint Housing Solutions Group partnered with
Federal, state and local governments, and voluntary agencies, to
develop a comprehensive housing plan that includes identifying the most
heavily impacted areas, on-the-spot registration of shelter
populations, analyzing shelter and mass care operations, transitioning
applicants to temporary housing, individual case management for
applicants with major damage to their primary residences, identifying
available rental resources, assessing and assisting special need
populations, and working with local voluntary agencies to identify
additional assistance resources available to residents.
* National Emergency Family Registry and Locator System (NEFRLS) and
the National Emergency Child Locator Center (NECLC) These systems are
activated immediately following disaster declarations, facilitating the
reunification of displaced family members. These services help local
and tribal governments and law enforcement agencies track and locate
children who have become separated from their parents or guardians.
* Mass Care Deployment to State Operations Center- In advance of
disaster declarations, FEMA has deployed a mass care staff member to
the State Operations Center to promote situational awareness and
enhance coordination with the American Red Cross and reporting of
shelter statistics. Additionally, FEMA deployed mass care and donations
management specialists in support of state and local sheltering
operations, implementation of the National Shelter System, donations
management, and delivery of mass care services.
* To provide technical assistance to the JFO, FEMA deployed the FEMA
Disabilities Coordinator to different disasters this year. The
Disabilities Coordinator has been invaluable advising mass care as well
as the Disaster Mobile Home Program (DHOP) regarding unique issues and
concerns facing those disaster victims with special needs.
* All affected states utilized the web-based volunteer and donations
management application that was developed by Aidmatrix Foundation. This
new resource tool was built to support state emergency management and
FEMA's voluntary agency partners. The Aidmatrix system was very
instrumental in helping the donations group acquire and disburse items.
* In April 2007, as part of the FEMA's reorganization, the Logistics
Branch was elevated to Directorate level within the Agency. The
Logistics Management Directorate (LMD) is FEMA's major program office
responsible for policy, guidance, standards, execution and governance
of logistics support, services and operations. Since that time, LMD has
strengthened its business practices by enhancing its relationships with
logistics partners for a more coordinated logistics response operation.
Examples include:
- In September 2007, LMD established a Distribution Management Strategy
Working Group, comprised of its Federal, private and non-governmental
organizations logistics partners, to conduct a comprehensive analysis
and develop a comprehensive distribution and supply chain management
strategy. Partners in this group include GSA, DOD (USNORTHCOM)/DLA,
HHS, USACE, USDA USFS, and Mass Care (ESF6). The Resource Management
Group, a sub-working group, has been established to assist in
resourcing disaster requests for Logistics supplies and services.
- LMD has established hundreds of mission-essential standby contracts
and Inter-agency Agreements (IAAs) to enable more timely response.
Summary:
DHS and FEMA continue to implement the remaining PKEMRA provisions, and
apply lessons learned from this summer's hurricane season to all of
disaster related activities. We look forward to continuing our
cooperation with the GAO as we continue to improve the service DHS and
FEMA offer to our country.
Sincerely,
Signed by:
Marko Bourne:
Director, Office of Policy and Program Analysis:
[End of section]
Enclosure XVI: Contact and Acknowledgements:
Contact:
William Jenkins, (202) 512-8957 or jenkinswo@gao.gov:
Acknowledgements:
In addition to the contact named above, Leyla Kazaz, Assistant
Director; and Kathryn Godfrey, Analyst-in-Charge, managed this
assignment. Patrick Bernard, Gilbert Kim, David Lysy, and Rebecca Makar
made significant contributions to the work. Christine Davis and Janet
Temko also made significant contributions to the report by providing
extensive legal support and a number of related contributions. David
Alexander assisted with design and methodology. Lara Kaskie contributed
communications expertise. Other contributors to the work include: Joel
Aldape, Jack Bagnulo, Carrisa Bryant, Tony DeFrank, Christopher
Keisling, Brian Lipman, P.J. Lusk, Deborah Sebastian, and Candice
Wright.
[End of section]
Related GAO Products:
Emergency Management: Observations on DHS‘s Preparedness for
Catastrophic Disasters. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-868T]. Washington, D.C.: June 11,
2008.
National Response Framework: FEMA Needs Policies and Procedures to
Better Integrate Non-Federal Stakeholders in the Revision Process.
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-768]. Washington, D.C.:
June 11, 2008.
Homeland Security: DHS Improved its Risk-Based Grant Programs‘
Allocation and Management Methods, but Measuring Programs‘ Impact on
National Capabilities Remains a Challenge. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-488T]. Washington, D.C.: March 11,
2008.
National Disaster Response: FEMA Should Take Action to Improve Capacity
and Coordination between Government and Voluntary Sectors. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-369]. Washington, D.C.: February 27,
2008.
Hurricane Katrina: Ineffective FEMA Oversight of Housing Maintenance
Contracts in Mississippi Resulted in Millions of Dollars of Waste and
Potential Fraud. [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-106].
Washington, D.C.: November 16, 2007.
Information Technology: DHS‘s Human Capital Plan Is Largely Consistent
with Relevant Guidance, but Improvements and Implementation Steps Are
Still Needed. [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-425].
Washington, D.C.: September 10, 2007.
Disaster Housing: Implementation of FEMA‘s Alternative Housing Pilot
Program Provides Lessons for Improving Future Competitions. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-1143R]. Washington, D.C.: August 31,
2007.
Homeland Security: Observations on DHS and FEMA Efforts to Prepare for
and Respond to Major and Catastrophic Disasters and Address Related
Recommendations and Legislation. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-1142T]. Washington, D.C.: July 31,
2007.
Emergency Management Assistance Compact: Enhancing EMAC‘s Collaborative
and Administrative Capacity Should Improve National Disaster Response.
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-854]. Washington, D.C.:
June 29, 2007.
Preliminary Information on Rebuilding Efforts in the Gulf Coast.
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-809R]. Washington, D.C.:
June 29, 2007.
Homeland Security: Guidance from Operations Directorate Will Enhance
Collaboration among Departmental Operations Centers. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-683T]. Washington, D.C.: June 20,
2007.
Emergency Management: Most School Districts Have Developed Emergency
Management Plans, but Would Benefit from Additional Federal Guidance.
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-609]. Washington, D.C.:
June 12, 2007.
Homeland Security: Observations on DHS and FEMA Efforts to Prepare for
and Respond to Major and Catastrophic Disasters and Address Related
Recommendations and Legislation. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-835T]. Washington, D.C.: May 15,
2007.
Child Welfare: Additional Federal Action Could Help States Address
Challenges in Providing Services to Children and Families. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-850T]. Washington, D.C.: May 15,
2007.
Homeland Security: Management and Programmatic Challenges Facing the
Department of Homeland Security. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-833T]. Washington, D.C.: May 10,
2007.
Gulf Coast Rebuilding: Preliminary Observations on Progress to Date and
Challenges for the Future. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-574T]. Washington, D.C.: April 12,
2007.
Department of Homeland Security: Progress Made in Implementation of
Management Functions, but More Work Remains. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-646T]. Washington, D.C.: April 9,
2008.
First Responders: Much Work Remains to Improve Communications
Interoperability. [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-301].
Washington, D.C.: April 2, 2007.
Emergency Preparedness: Current Emergency Alert System Has Limitations,
and Development of a New Integrated System Will Be Challenging.
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-411]. Washington, D.C.:
March 30, 2007.
Disaster Preparedness: Better Planning Would Improve OSHA‘s Efforts to
Protect Workers‘ Safety and Health in Disasters. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-193]. Washington, D.C.: March 28,
2007.
Public Health and Hospital Emergency Preparedness Programs: Evolution
of Performance Measurement Systems to Measure Progress. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-485R]. Washington, D.C.: March 23,
2007.
Coastal Barrier Resources System: Status of Development That Has
Occurred and Financial Assistance Provided by Federal Agencies.
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-356]. Washington, D.C.:
March 19, 2007.
Hurricanes Katrina and Rita Disaster Relief: Continued Findings of
Fraud, Waste, and Abuse. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-300]. Washington, D.C.: March 15,
2007.
Homeland Security: Preparing for and Responding to Disasters.
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-395T]. Washington, D.C.:
March 9, 2007.
Hurricane Katrina: Agency Contracting Data Should Be More Complete
Regarding Subcontracting Opportunities for Small Businesses.
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-205]. Washington, D.C.:
March 1, 2007.
Hurricane Katrina: Allocation and Use of $2 Billion for Medicaid and
Other Health Care Needs. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-67]. Washington, D.C.: February 28,
2007.
Disaster Assistance: Better Planning Needed for Housing Victims of
Catastrophic Disasters. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-88]. Washington, D.C.: February 28,
2007.
Highway Emergency Relief: Reexamination Needed to Address Fiscal
Imbalance and Long-term Sustainability. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-245]. Washington, D.C.: February 23,
2007.
Small Business Administration: Additional Steps Needed to Enhance
Agency Preparedness for Future Disasters. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-114]. Washington, D.C.: February 14,
2007.
Small Business Administration: Response to the Gulf Coast Hurricanes
Highlights Need for Enhanced Disaster Preparedness. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-484T]. Washington, D.C.: February
14, 2007.
Hurricanes Katrina and Rita: Federal Actions Could Enhance Preparedness
of Certain State-Administered Federal Support Programs. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-219]. Washington, D.C.: February 7,
2007.
Homeland Security Grants: Observations on Process DHS Used to Allocate
Funds to Selected Urban Areas. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-381R]. Washington, D.C.: February 7,
2007.
Homeland Security: Management and Programmatic Challenges Facing the
Department of Homeland Security. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-452T]. Washington, D.C.: February 7,
2007.
Homeland Security: Applying Risk Management Principles to Guide Federal
Investments. [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-386T].
Washington, D.C.: February 7, 2007.
Hurricanes Katrina and Rita Disaster Relief: Prevention Is the Key to
Minimizing Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Recovery Efforts. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-418T]. Washington, D.C.: January 29,
2007.
Reserve Forces: Actions Needed to Identify National Guard Domestic
Equipment Requirements and Readiness. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-60]. Washington, D.C.: January 26,
2007.
Budget Issues: FEMA Needs Adequate Data, Plans, and Systems to
Effectively Manage Resources for Day-to-Day Operations. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-139]. Washington, D.C.: January 19,
2007.
Transportation-Disadvantaged Populations: Actions Needed to Clarify
Responsibilities and Increase Preparedness for Evacuations. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-44]. Washington, D.C.: December 22,
2006.
Hurricanes Katrina and Rita: Continued Findings of Fraud, Waste, and
Abuse. [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-252T].
Washington, D.C.: December 6, 2006.
Suggested Areas for Oversight for the 110th Congress. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-235R]. Washington, D.C.: November
17, 2006.
Hurricanes Katrina and Rita: Unprecedented Challenges Exposed the
Individuals and Households Program to Fraud and Abuse; Actions Needed
to Reduce Such Problems in Future. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-06-1013]. Washington, D.C.: September
27, 2006.
Catastrophic Disasters: Enhanced Leadership, Capabilities, and
Accountability Controls Will Improve the Effectiveness of the Nation‘s
Preparedness, Response, and Recovery System. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-06-618]. Washington, D.C.: September 6,
2006.
Disaster Relief: Governmentwide Framework Needed to Collect and
Consolidate Information to Report on Billions in Federal Funding for
the 2005 Gulf Coast Hurricanes. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-06-834]. Washington, D.C.: September 6,
2006.
Child Welfare: Federal Action Needed to Ensure States Have Plans to
Safeguard Children in the Child Welfare System Displaced by Disasters.
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-06-944]. Washington, D.C.:
July 28, 2006.
Small Business Administration: Actions Needed to Provide More Timely
Disaster Assistance. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-06-860]. Washington, D.C.: July 28,
2006.
Disaster Preparedness: Limitations in Federal Evacuation Assistance for
Health Facilities Should Be Addressed. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-06-826]. Washington, D.C.: July 20,
2006.
Individual Disaster Assistance Programs: Framework for Fraud
Prevention, Detection, and Prosecution. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-06-954T]. Washington, D.C.: July 12,
2006.
Expedited Assistance for Victims of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita: FEMA‘s
Control Weaknesses Exposed the Government to Significant Fraud and
Abuse. [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-06-655]. Washington,
D.C.: June 16, 2006.
Hurricanes Katrina and Rita: Improper and Potentially Fraudulent
Individual Assistance Payments Estimated to Be between $600 Million and
$1.4 Billion. [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-06-844T].
Washington, D.C.: June 14, 2006.
Hurricanes Katrina and Rita: Coordination between FEMA and the Red
Cross Should Be Improved for the 2006 Hurricane Season. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-06-712]. Washington, D.C.: June 8,
2006.
Disaster Preparedness: Preliminary Observations on the Evacuation of
Vulnerable Populations due to Hurricanes and Other Disasters.
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-06-790T]. Washington, D.C.:
May 18, 2006.
Lessons Learned for Protecting and Educating Children after the Gulf
Coast Hurricanes. [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-06-680R].
Washington, D.C.: May 11, 2006.
Federal Emergency Management Agency: Factors for Future Success and
Issues to Consider for Organizational Placement. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-06-746T]. Washington, D.C.: May 9,
2006.
Hurricane Katrina: Planning for and Management of Federal Disaster
Recovery Contracts. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-06-622T]. Washington, D.C.: April 10,
2006.
Agency Management of Contractors Responding to Hurricanes Katrina and
Rita. [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-06-461R]. Washington,
D.C.: March 15, 2006.
Hurricane Katrina: GAO‘s Preliminary Observations Regarding
Preparedness, Response, and Recovery. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-06-442T]. Washington, D.C.: March 8,
2006.
Emergency Preparedness and Response: Some Issues and Challenges
Associated with Major Emergency Incidents. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-06-467T]. Washington, D.C.: February
23, 2006.
Disaster Preparedness: Preliminary Observations on the Evacuation of
Hospitals and Nursing Homes Due to Hurricanes. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-06-443R]. Washington, D.C.: February
16, 2006.
Expedited Assistance for Victims of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita: FEMA‘s
Control Weaknesses Exposed the Government to Significant Fraud and
Abuse. [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-06-403T].
Washington, D.C.: February 13, 2006.
Statement by Comptroller General David M. Walker on GAO‘s Preliminary
Observations Regarding Preparedness and Response to Hurricanes Katrina
and Rita. [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-06-365R].
Washington, D.C.: February 1, 2006.
Homeland Security: DHS‘ Efforts to Enhance First Responders‘ All-
Hazards Capabilities Continue to Evolve. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-05-652]. Washington, D.C.: July 11,
2005.
Continuity of Operations: Agency Plans Have Improved, but Better
Oversight Could Assist Agencies in Preparing for Emergencies.
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-05-577]. Washington, D.C.:
April 28, 2005.
Project SAFECOM: Key Cross-Agency Emergency Communications Effort
Requires Stronger Collaboration. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-04-494]. Washington, D.C.: April 16,
2004.
[End of section]
Footnotes:
[1] Pub. L. No. 107-296, 116 Stat. 2135 (2002).
[2] The Post-Katrina Act was enacted as Title VI of the Department of
Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2007, Pub. L. No. 109-295, 120
Stat. 1355 (2006). The provisions of the Post-Katrina Act became
effective upon enactment, October 4, 2006, with the exception of
certain organizational changes related to FEMA, most of which took
effect on March 31, 2007.
[3] Pub. L. No. 107-296, 116 Stat. 2135 (2002).
[4] Pub. L. No. 93-288, 88 Stat. 143 (1974).
[5] In limited instances, we have reported actions taken after August
1, 2008. We collaborated with FEMA to ensure the accuracy of
information until days before the report was finalized in November
2008. When FEMA provided us with updates on activities that occurred
after August 1, 2008 but would cause us to change or remove an area to
be addressed, we included that information.
[6] The Post-Katrina Act predated the NRF and referred to the NRF's
predecessor, the NRP, which was then the name of the document that
served as the nation's comprehensive framework for the management of
domestic incidents where federal involvement was necessary. Because the
Post-Katrina Act encompasses any successor plan to the NRP, it applies
to the NRF just as it did the NRP. See Post-Katrina Act, § 602(13).
Therefore, this enclosure will use the term NRF, rather than NRP, in
discussing any relevant Post-Katrina Act provisions and the status of
their implementation, unless otherwise appropriate.
[7] The NAC was not established in time for the council to have its
intended advisory role in the development of the NRF that was issued in
January 2008. See GAO, National Response Framework: FEMA Needs Policies
and Procedures to Better Integrate Non-Federal Stakeholders in the
Revision Process, [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-768]
(Washington, D.C.: June 11, 2008).
[8] See GAO, Homeland Security: DHS Risk-Based Grant Methodology Is
Reasonable, But Current Version's Measure of Vulnerability is Limited,
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-852] (Washington, D.C.:
June 27, 2008).
[9] We have recommended that FEMA develop policies and procedures for
future revisions of the NRF, including how it will involve government
and nongovernmental stakeholders, in particular the NAC, in future
revisions. See [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-768].
[10] DHS's appropriations acts for fiscal years 2008 and 2009 have
included the same prohibition on funding the PFO position for any
Stafford Act event. The prohibition states that, "none of the funds
provided by this or previous appropriations Acts shall be used to fund
any position designated as a Principal Federal Official" for any
Stafford Act declared disasters or emergencies. See Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2008, Pub. L. No. 110-161, Div. E, Title V, § 541,
121 Stat. 1844, 2079 (2007); Consolidated Security, Disaster
Assistance, and Continuing Appropriations Act, 2009, Pub. L. No. 110-
329, Div. D, § 526, 122 Stat. 3574 (2008). GAO will address the
implications of this funding prohibition in future work.
[116] Section 671 of the Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act
amends the Homeland Security Act of 2002 by adding a new Title XVIII,
Emergency Communications, §§ 1801-08.
[12] Pub. L. No. 108-458, § 7303, 118 Stat. 3638, 3843-44 (2004).
[13] OIC is located within DHS's Science and Technology Directorate.
[14] Established by Presidential Memorandum on August 21, 1963, the
National Communications System was created to be a single unified
communications system to serve the President, Department of Defense,
diplomatic and intelligence activities, and civilian leaders. The
National Communications System mandate included linking, improving, and
extending the communications facilities and components of various
federal agencies, focusing on interconnectivity and survivability. NCS
membership currently stands at 24 federal department and agency members
and is managed by the DHS Under Secretary for National Protection and
Programs.
[15] Emergency Support Function 2 provides a structure for coordinating
federal actions to assist in the restoration of public communications
infrastructure, public safety communications systems and first
responder networks.
[16] Under section 1801(c)(12) of the amended Homeland Security Act,
OEC is responsible for reviewing interoperable emergency communication
plans with the DHS Assistant Secretary for Grants and Training. As a
result of the Post-Katrina Act, the Office of Grants and Training
transferred to FEMA, and FEMA's Grant Programs Directorate now
administers preparedness grants.
[17] Officials from DHS's National Protection and Programs Directorate
noted, for example, that sections 503(b)(2)(G) and 504(a)(7) of the
Homeland Security Act, as amended by the Post-Katrina Act, assign
responsibilities to the FEMA Administrator that are very similar to
section 1801(c)(6), which delineates the responsibilities of the
Director for Emergency Communications and section 1807(a), which
contains requirements for the Secretary of Homeland Security.
[18] The Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act (IRPTA) of
2004, Pub. L. No. 108-458, § 7303, 118 Stat. 3638, 3843-44 (2004).
[19] 5 U.S.C. § 552a.
[20] "The Establishment of the National Emergency Family Registry and
Locator System," FY 2007 Report to Congress. Published December 2007.
[21] Section 671 of the Post-Katrina Act is titled the "21st Century
Emergency Communications Act of 2006." It amends the Homeland Security
Act of 2002 by adding at the end a new title XVIII, Emergency
Communications.
[22] The 9/11 Commission Act requires the NECP to set a date, including
interim benchmarks as necessary, by which federal and nonfederal
government entities and emergency-response providers expect to achieve
a baseline level of interoperability. See Pub. L. No. 110-53, § 301,
121 Stat. 266, 300 (2007). The NECP sets phased interoperability goals
with expected completion dates from 2010 to 2013 for different
jurisdictions.
[23] The Post-Katrina Act pre-dated the NRF and refers to the NRF's
predecessor, the National Response Plan (NRP). When the Post-Katrina
Act was enacted in October 2006, the NRP was the name of the document
that served as the nation's comprehensive framework for the management
of domestic incidents where federal involvement was necessary. The NRP
was subsequently revised and reissued in January 2008 under a new name,
the National Response Framework. Because the Post-Katrina Act
encompasses any successor plan to the NRP, it applies to the NRF just
as it did the NRP. See Post-Katrina Act, § 602(13). Therefore, this
enclosure will use the term NRF, rather than NRP, in discussing any
relevant Post-Katrina Act provisions and the status of their
implementation, unless otherwise appropriate.
[24] EMAC is an interstate mutual aid agreement that allows states to
assist one another in responding to disasters. In June 2007, we
recommended, with FEMA concurring, that FEMA look for ways to build
EMAC's administrative capacity, such as cooperative agreements, grants,
and training initiatives, to better develop the nation's disaster
response capabilities. See GAO, Emergency Management Assistance
Compact: Enhancing EMAC's Collaborative and Administrative Capacity
Should Improve National Disaster Response, [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-854] (Washington, D.C.: June 29,
2007).
[25] Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2009, Pub. L. No. 110-417, § 866, 122 Stat. 4356 (2008).
[26] 72 Fed. Reg. 63,084 (Nov. 7, 2007).
[27] 73 Fed. Reg. 53,995 (Sept. 17, 2008).
[28] Pub. L. No. 110-417, 122 Stat. 4356 (2008).
[29] Before this provision was enacted, the FAR Councils had published
a similar proposed rule to amend FAR § 6.302-2 by restricting the
performance period to no more than 1 year for noncompetitive contracts
awarded on the basis of unusual and compelling urgency. See 73 Fed.
Reg. 5,784 (Jan. 31, 2008).
[30] Section 8(a) small businesses are so called because their business
development program derives from section 8(a) of the Small Business
Act, 15 U.S.C. § 637(a).
[31] The Small Business Administration is currently reassessing its
role in certifying SDBs. 73 Fed. Reg. 54,881 (Sept. 23, 2008).
[32] EMAC is an interstate mutual aid agreement that allows states to
assist one another in responding to disasters. In June 2007, we
recommended, with FEMA concurring, that FEMA look for ways to build
EMAC's administrative capacity, such as cooperative agreements, grants,
and training initiatives, to better develop the nation's disaster
response capabilities.
[33] Resource typing is the categorization and description of response
resources that are commonly exchanged in disasters through mutual aid
agreements. Standard resource-typing definitions help responders
request and deploy the resources they need through the use of common
terminology, and give emergency responders the information they need to
make sure they request and receive the appropriate resources during an
emergency or disaster.
[34] GAO, Presidential Signing Statements--Agency Implementation of Ten
Provisions of Law, B-309928, Dec. 20, 2007.
[35] As noted earlier in this enclosure, DHS published the NIMS Draft
Guideline for the Credentialing of Personnel in August 2008 in response
to section 510 of the Homeland Security Act, as amended by the Post-
Katrina Act.
[36] H.R. 6658, 110th Cong. § 103 (2008).
[37] In general, under section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973,
as amended, federal agencies must ensure that their electronic and
information technology allows for information and data to be accessible
to individuals with disabilities. 29 U.S.C. § 794d.
[38] See GAO, Expedited Assistance for Victims of Hurricanes Katrina
and Rita: FEMA's Control Weaknesses Exposed the Government to
Significant Fraud and Abuse, [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-06-403T] (Washington, D.C.: Feb. 13,
2008).
[39] FEMA's National Processing Service Centers provide centralized
disaster application service to FEMA customers and help coordinate with
other assistance programs. The centers are to provide an automated
"teleregistration" service--a toll-free phone bank through which
disaster victims apply for IHP assistance and through which their
applications are processed and their questions answered.
[40] This crosswalk includes citations to each section of the Post-
Katrina Act and identifies the enclosure to this letter in which we
discuss a given section. In some instances, a section of the Post-
Katrina Act amends another statute, principally the Homeland Security
Act of 2002 (HSA) or the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and
Emergency Assistance Act (Stafford Act). In such instances, we include
both the Post-Katrina Act section and, parenthetically, the section of
the amended statute, for example the HSA or the Stafford Act.
[41] ’Operative Terms“ include such things as effective dates,
definitional provisions, savings clauses, coverage changes,
authorizations for appropriations, and technical and conforming
amendments of the Post-Katrina Act. Because the provisions in this
category are of a technical legal nature, we will not be able to
address their implementation as free-standing provisions. Although we
do not present stand-alone materials with respect to ’operative terms,“
we may refer to them as we address related provisions in other
categories.
[End of section]
GAO's Mission:
The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and
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 GAO's Web site [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]. Each
weekday, GAO posts newly released reports, testimony, and
correspondence on its Web site. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly
posted products every afternoon, go to [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]
and select "E-mail Updates."
Order by Phone:
The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO‘s actual cost of
production and distribution and depends on the number of pages in the
publication and whether the publication is printed in color or black and
white. Pricing and ordering information is posted on GAO‘s Web site,
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm].
Place orders by calling (202) 512-6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or
TDD (202) 512-2537.
Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card,
MasterCard, Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional
information.
To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs:
Contact:
Web site: [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm]:
E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov:
Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470:
Congressional Relations:
Ralph Dawn, Managing Director, dawnr@gao.gov:
(202) 512-4400:
U.S. Government Accountability Office:
441 G Street NW, Room 7125:
Washington, D.C. 20548:
Public Affairs:
Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov:
(202) 512-4800:
U.S. Government Accountability Office:
441 G Street NW, Room 7149:
Washington, D.C. 20548:
