Emergency Preparedness
FEMA Faces Challenges Integrating Community Preparedness Programs into Its Strategic Approach Gao ID: GAO-10-193 January 29, 2010Individuals can reduce their need for first responder assistance by preparing for a disaster. By law, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) in the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is to develop a National Preparedness System (NPS) that includes community preparedness programs. These programs account for less than 0.5 percent of FEMA's budget. They include the Citizen Corps Program (CCP) and partner programs, e.g., Fire Corps, which provide volunteers to assist first responders. FEMA's Ready Campaign promotes preparedness through mass media. GAO was asked to review federal efforts to promote community preparedness. GAO was asked to address (1) challenges, if any, FEMA faces in measuring the performance of CCP, its partner programs, and the Ready Campaign, and (2) actions, if any, FEMA has taken to develop a strategy to encompass how these programs are to operate within the context of the NPS. GAO analyzed documents on preparedness plans and strategies and compared reported performance data with observations during 12 site visits, selected primarily on the basis of major disasters. While not projectable, the results add insight.
FEMA faces challenges measuring performance for CCP, its partner programs, and the Ready Campaign because (1) it relies on states to verify data for local program units and (2) it is unable to control the distribution of the Ready Campaign messages or measure whether the messages are changing the behavior of individuals. GAO's past work showed the importance of ensuring that program data are of sufficient quality to document performance and support decision making. FEMA includes the number of local volunteer organizations registered nationwide as its principal performance measure for community preparedness, but does not verify that registration data are accurate. For example, 5 of the 17 registered Citizen Corps councils GAO contacted were not active as councils. FEMA relies on state officials to verify the accuracy of the data, and does not have staff or processes for this purpose. FEMA officials agreed that the data are inaccurate, and have plans to improve the registration process, but this process is not designed to ensure accurate data because states will continue to be responsible for verifying the accuracy of data. FEMA counts requests for literature, Web site hits, and the number of television and radio announcements made to gauge performance of the Ready Campaign, but it does not control when information is accessed or viewed. Also, changes in behavior can be the result of a variety of factors, including campaigns sponsored by other organizations. GAO's past work stated that agencies should measure performance based on accurate, clear, and reliable data that are clearly linked to program goals, but also recognized that programs like the Ready Campaign may need to rely on substitute measures that it uses such as Web site hits. GAO recognizes that FEMA is challenged measuring the performance of CCP, partner programs, and the Ready Campaign, but examining the feasibility of approaches to verify data on CCP and its partner programs could position FEMA to begin to (1) explore why programs that no longer exist were disbanded and (2) develop possible strategies for reconstituting local programs or developing new ones. FEMA's challenges in measuring the performance of community preparedness programs are compounded because it has not developed a strategy to show how its community preparedness programs and the Ready Campaign are to operate within the context of the NPS. In April and October 2009, GAO reported that FEMA's National Preparedness Directorate (NPD), responsible for community preparedness, had not developed a strategic plan; rather it used an operating plan, which lacked key elements of an effective national strategy, such as how to gauge progress. GAO recommended that NPD develop a strategic plan that contains these key elements. FEMA agreed and reported that it is taking actions to strengthen strategic planning. While officials said an NPD strategic plan and a community preparedness strategy are being developed, NPD has not developed timelines with milestone dates for completing these strategies. By doing so, consistent with standard management practices for implementing programs, FEMA would be better positioned to show progress and provide insights into how these plans can be used as building blocks for the national preparedness strategy.
RecommendationsOur recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director: Team: Phone:GAO-10-193, Emergency Preparedness: FEMA Faces Challenges Integrating Community Preparedness Programs into Its Strategic Approach
This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-10-193
entitled 'Emergency Preparedness: FEMA Faces Challenges Integrating
Community Preparedness Programs into Its Strategic Approach' which was
released on February 26, 2010.
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.
Report to Congressional Requesters:
United States Government Accountability Office:
GAO:
January 2010:
Emergency Preparedness:
FEMA Faces Challenges Integrating Community Preparedness Programs into
Its Strategic Approach:
GAO-10-193:
GAO Highlights:
Highlights of GAO-10-193, a report to congressional requesters.
Why GAO Did This Study:
Individuals can reduce their need for first responder assistance by
preparing for a disaster. By law, the Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) in the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is to
develop a National Preparedness System (NPS) that includes community
preparedness programs. These programs account for less than 0.5
percent of FEMA‘s budget. They include the Citizen Corps Program (CCP)
and partner programs, e.g., Fire Corps, which provide volunteers to
assist first responders. FEMA‘s Ready Campaign promotes preparedness
through mass media. GAO was asked to review federal efforts to promote
community preparedness. GAO was asked to address (1) challenges, if
any, FEMA faces in measuring the performance of CCP, its partner
programs, and the Ready Campaign, and (2) actions, if any, FEMA has
taken to develop a strategy to encompass how these programs are to
operate within the context of the NPS. GAO analyzed documents on
preparedness plans and strategies and compared reported performance
data with observations during 12 site visits, selected primarily on
the basis of major disasters. While not projectable, the results add
insight.
What GAO Found:
FEMA faces challenges measuring performance for CCP, its partner
programs, and the Ready Campaign because (1) it relies on states to
verify data for local program units and (2) it is unable to control
the distribution of the Ready Campaign messages or measure whether the
messages are changing the behavior of individuals. GAO‘s past work
showed the importance of ensuring that program data are of sufficient
quality to document performance and support decision making. FEMA
includes the number of local volunteer organizations registered
nationwide as its principal performance measure for community
preparedness, but does not verify that registration data are accurate.
For example, 5 of the 17 registered Citizen Corps councils GAO
contacted were not active as councils. FEMA relies on state officials
to verify the accuracy of the data, and does not have staff or
processes for this purpose. FEMA officials agreed that the data are
inaccurate, and have plans to improve the registration process, but
this process is not designed to ensure accurate data because states
will continue to be responsible for verifying the accuracy of data.
FEMA counts requests for literature, Web site hits, and the number of
television and radio announcements made to gauge performance of the
Ready Campaign, but it does not control when information is accessed
or viewed. Also, changes in behavior can be the result of a variety of
factors, including campaigns sponsored by other organizations. GAO‘s
past work stated that agencies should measure performance based on
accurate, clear, and reliable data that are clearly linked to program
goals, but also recognized that programs like the Ready Campaign may
need to rely on substitute measures that it uses such as Web site
hits. GAO recognizes that FEMA is challenged measuring the performance
of CCP, partner programs, and the Ready Campaign, but examining the
feasibility of approaches to verify data on CCP and its partner
programs could position FEMA to begin to (1) explore why programs that
no longer exist were disbanded and (2) develop possible strategies for
reconstituting local programs or developing new ones.
FEMA‘s challenges in measuring the performance of community
preparedness programs are compounded because it has not developed a
strategy to show how its community preparedness programs and the Ready
Campaign are to operate within the context of the NPS. In April and
October 2009, GAO reported that FEMA‘s National Preparedness
Directorate (NPD), responsible for community preparedness, had not
developed a strategic plan; rather it used an operating plan, which
lacked key elements of an effective national strategy, such as how to
gauge progress. GAO recommended that NPD develop a strategic plan that
contains these key elements. FEMA agreed and reported that it is
taking actions to strengthen strategic planning. While officials said
an NPD strategic plan and a community preparedness strategy are being
developed, NPD has not developed timelines with milestone dates for
completing these strategies. By doing so, consistent with standard
management practices for implementing programs, FEMA would be better
positioned to show progress and provide insights into how these plans
can be used as building blocks for the national preparedness strategy.
What GAO Recommends:
GAO recommends that FEMA examine ways to verify local CCP and partner
programs‘ data, and develop timelines and milestones for completing
preparedness strategies. DHS concurred with these recommendations.
View [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-10-193] or key
components. For more information, contact William O. Jenkins, Jr. at
(202) 512-8777 or jenkinswo@gao.gov.
[End of section]
Contents:
Letter:
Background:
FEMA Faces Challenges Measuring the Performance of Its Community
Preparedness Efforts and the Ready Campaign:
FEMA Has Not Developed a Strategy Encompassing How Citizen Corps, Its
Partner Programs, and the Ready Campaign Are to Operate within the
Context of the National Preparedness System:
Conclusions:
Agency Comments:
Appendix I: Homeland Security Grant Program Funding for Community
Preparedness, 2004 through 2008:
Appendix II: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments:
Table:
Table 1: Homeland Security Grant Program Funding for Community
Preparedness Projects 2004 through 2008:
Figure:
Figure 1: Value of Media Donated in 2008 to Distribute Ready Campaign
Message:
Abbreviations:
Ad Council: National Advertising Council:
CCP: Citizen Corps Program:
CERT: Community Emergency Response Team:
DHS: Department of Homeland Security:
FEMA: Federal Emergency Management Agency:
HSPD-8: Homeland Security Presidential Directive 8:
MRC: Medical Reserve Corps:
NPD: National Preparedness Directorate:
Post-Katrina Act: Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act of 2006:
PSA: Public Service Announcement:
[End of section]
United States Government Accountability Office:
Washington, DC 20548:
January 29, 2010:
Congressional Requesters:
The public plays an important role in national emergency preparedness.
[Footnote 1] By preparing their families and property before an event,
individuals can often reduce a disaster's impact on them and their
need for first responder assistance, particularly in the first 72
hours following a disaster. For example, having at least a 72-hour
supply of food and drinking water on hand can both sustain the
individual and family in a disaster's aftermath and reduce the
immediate demands for food and water delivered by first responders
whose priority may be search and rescue. They can also potentially
support first responders as trained volunteers, since the average
person will likely be the first on the scene of a disaster. However,
research shows that Americans could be better prepared for disasters,
particularly based on two key indicators--the degree to which people
report having disaster supplies set aside and having a household
emergency plan.[Footnote 2] According to Citizen Corps national
surveys for 2003 and 2007, about half (50 and 53 percent,
respectively) of U.S. households had disaster supplies in their homes,
and fewer had supplies set aside in their car or workplaces.[Footnote
3] Those who responded that they are personally prepared may have
taken some of the actions recommended, such as having water set aside
but not having extra batteries for their flashlights. In 2003, 58
percent, and in 2007, 42 percent, of survey respondents reported
having a household emergency plan. Although it is unrealistic to
expect first responders to assist everyone in a disaster, 37 percent
of those surveyed in 2007 said that the primary reason they were
unprepared was because they believed emergency personnel would help
them in the event of a disaster. Also, the 2003 and 2007 Citizen Corps
surveys reported that 62 and 57 percent of respondents, respectively,
said that they expected to rely on emergency responders in the first
72 hours following a disaster.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) encourages public
preparedness through the Community Preparedness Division's Citizen
Corps program, which is designed to bring together government and
community leaders to involve citizens in all-hazards emergency
preparedness and resilience, and the Ready Campaign, which makes
literature and mass media content available to promote preparedness to
individuals, families, and businesses.[Footnote 4] Citizen Corps is
designed to promote collaboration between local government and
community leaders via local Citizen Corps Councils. Individual
councils are to promote preparedness activities and to encourage
volunteering with federally sponsored programs that support first
responders, referred to as Citizen Corps partner programs. According
to FEMA officials, individual Council activities may include outreach
and localized preparedness education, training, and exercises. Citizen
Corps promotes five partner programs, two of which are funded by FEMA--
the Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) and Fire Corps.[Footnote
5] According to FEMA officials, Citizen Corps also encourages Councils
to work with the 27 national affiliate organizations with which FEMA
has official agreements, including the American Red Cross, National
Safety Council, Meals on Wheels, Civil Air Patrol, and the American
Association of Community Colleges. The operating budgets for community
preparedness programs currently represent less than one-half of 1
percent of FEMA's total budget. In fiscal year 2009, FEMA's overall
budget was about $7.9 billion, of which about $5.8 million was
dedicated to operating community preparedness programs and $2.1
million was for the Ready Campaign.
FEMA's Citizen Corps and partner program officials encourage state,
local, regional, and tribal governments and private and nonprofit
community-based organizations to establish and sustain local Citizen
Corps Councils and partner programs, partly through federal funding
for local efforts. Local Citizen Corps Councils, CERTs, and Fire Corps
all are considered "grass roots" organizations that provide volunteer
opportunities in their respective communities. Citizen Corps Councils
and CERT programs are registered and approved online and are
potentially eligible to apply for federal grant funding through the
state to support their programs.[Footnote 6] According to Department
of Homeland Security (DHS) data, approximately $269 million in FEMA
homeland security grants (including grants for Citizen Corps Councils,
CERT, and Fire Corps) were awarded for community preparedness projects
from fiscal years 2004 through 2008. In fiscal year 2008, funding for
community preparedness grants represented about 1.9 percent of the
total FEMA grant funding. Specifically, in fiscal year 2008,
approximately $56 million went to community preparedness projects, out
of more than $3 billion awarded in DHS grants to strengthen
prevention, protection, response, and recovery capabilities at all
levels of government. Appendix I provides additional information on
DHS grants awarded for community preparedness purposes from fiscal
year 2004 through fiscal year 2008.
In April 2009 we issued a report that discussed, among other things,
the National Preparedness System--a continuous cycle of (1)
establishing policy and doctrine, (2) planning and allocating
resources, (3) conducting training and exercises to gather lessons
learned, and (4) assessing and reporting on the training and exercises
to evaluate preparedness, including identifying any gaps in
capabilities.[Footnote 7] Assessments and reports resulting from the
National Preparedness System are to be used to inform decision makers
on what improvements are needed and how to target finite resources to
improve preparedness for disasters.[Footnote 8] Our report recognized
that developing and integrating the elements of the National
Preparedness System is a challenge for FEMA, and more specifically the
National Preparedness Directorate (NPD), the FEMA component
responsible for carrying out the key elements of the National
Preparedness System, in coordination with other federal, state, local,
tribal, nonprofit, and private sector organizations. We reported that
the size and complexity of the nation's preparedness activities and
the number of organizations involved--both public and private--pose a
significant challenge to FEMA as it leads the nation's efforts to
develop and sustain a National Preparedness System. We further stated
that, to develop an effective system, FEMA is to coordinate and
partner with a broad range of stakeholders. As part of the nation's
preparedness system, the status of citizen and community preparedness
can affect the demands on first responders in the immediate aftermath
of a disaster.
In this context, you requested that we review FEMA efforts to promote
community preparedness. On October 1, 2009, we testified before the
Subcommittee on Emergency Communications, Preparedness, and Response,
House Committee on Homeland Security, to provide our preliminary
observations.[Footnote 9] This report supplements our testimony and
provides the final results of our work to address (1) what challenges,
if any, FEMA faces in measuring the performance of Citizen Corps, its
partner programs, and the Ready Campaign, and (2) what actions, if
any, FEMA has taken to develop a strategy to encompass how Citizen
Corps, its partner programs, and the Ready Campaign are to operate
within the context of the National Preparedness System.
To address what challenges, if any, FEMA faces in measuring the
performance of Citizen Corps, its partner programs, and the Ready
Campaign, we reviewed applicable laws, guidance, and reports on
community preparedness. We also interviewed FEMA officials, including
officials representing Citizen Corps, CERT, Fire Corps, and the Ready
Campaign at DHS headquarters in Washington D.C. to gain an
understanding of these programs and how they operate. In addition, we
analyzed Citizen Corps documents, including Citizen Corps and CERT
registration guidance, and data on the number of registered Citizen
Corps Councils and partner programs to determine how FEMA measures the
performance of its programs. We reviewed documents pertinent to the
collection of these data and discussed the processes FEMA has in place
to ensure the accuracy of the registration data. We had questions
about the reliability of these data, as discussed later in this
report. We also interviewed officials at selected registered Citizen
Corps Councils and partner programs during our site visits to 12
selected locations in five states--California, Florida, Nevada,
Oklahoma, and Texas--and verified whether local registered units were
active. We selected four of these states because they had the highest
number of major disaster declarations since 1953. We also visited
Nevada to observe a full-scale exercise with CERT participation and
interviewed selected officials in Nevada. In total, we conducted 41
interviews covering 53 organizations in the 5 states.[Footnote 10] The
results from our interviews in the 5 states are not generalizable, but
provide insights into the operations of local Citizen Corps and
partner programs. Once we completed our site visits, we compared
FEMA's performance measures for Citizen Corps and its partner programs
with criteria from our past work on best practices for measuring
performance.[Footnote 11] We also used the performance measurement
criteria discussed in our past work to assess the Ready Campaign's
efforts to measure its performance. Finally, we analyzed data from the
2008 Ready Campaign national tracking survey and National Advertising
Council's (Ad Council) 2008 data on media time donated to the Ready
Campaign. To determine the reliability of the Ready Campaign's
tracking survey and donated media data, we reviewed documents and
interviewed Ready Campaign officials and Ad Council officials to
discuss their process for ensuring data accuracy. We determined that
the tracking survey and donated media data were sufficiently reliable
for purposes of this report.
To address what actions, if any, FEMA has taken to develop a strategy
to encompass how Citizen Corps, its partner programs, and the Ready
Campaign are to operate within the context of the National
Preparedness System, we reviewed pertinent laws, guidance, and reports
on strategic planning. We also reviewed and analyzed DHS's and FEMA's
strategic plans for fiscal years 2008 through 2013, and the National
Preparedness Directorate's 2009 operating plan and compared these
documents with criteria in our past work that discusses the six
characteristics of an effective national strategy.[Footnote 12] In
addition, we interviewed cognizant FEMA officials in Washington, D.C.,
to discuss their efforts to develop a strategy for integrating Citizen
Corps, its partner programs, and the Ready Campaign into the National
Preparedness System.
We conducted this performance audit from February 2008 to January 2010
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.
Background:
Responsibility for helping to prepare members of the community for all
hazards is shared by federal, state, local, and tribal entities, and
nongovernmental organizations. At the federal level, FEMA is
responsible for developing national strategies, policies, and
guidelines related to emergency preparedness, response, and recovery.
To achieve the goals of a national strategy, however, requires a close
relationship with nonfederal partners, based on the premise that
resilient communities--those that can quickly recover from a disaster--
begin with prepared individuals and depend on the leadership and
engagement of local government and other community members. According
to DHS, emergency management agencies at the jurisdiction level are to
develop preparedness plans for their localities that are consistent
with plans at the state and federal levels. States submit requests for
federal Homeland Security funding for state, local, and regional
projects, including projects related to community preparedness.
FEMA is required under the Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform
Act of 2006 (Post-Katrina Act)[Footnote 13] to establish a National
Preparedness System to ensure that the nation has the ability to
prepare for and respond to disasters of all types, whether natural or
man-made, including terrorist attacks. The Community Preparedness
Division is responsible for leading activities related to community
preparedness, including management of the Citizen Corps program.
According to fiscal year 2008 Homeland Security Grant Program
guidance, the program is to bring together community and government
leaders, including first responders, nonprofit organizations, and
other community stakeholders as a Citizen Corps Council to collaborate
in involving community members in emergency preparedness, planning,
mitigation, response, and recovery. Councils and partner programs
register online to be included in the national program registries. The
Community Preparedness Division also supports the efforts of non-DHS
federal "partner programs," such as the Department of Health and Human
Services' Medical Reserve Corps, which promote preparedness and the
use of volunteers to support first responders.[Footnote 14] The CERT
program's mission is to educate and train people in basic disaster
preparedness and response skills, such as fire safety, light search
and rescue, and disaster medical operations, using a nationally
developed, standardized training curriculum. Trained individuals can
be recruited to participate on neighborhood, business, or government
teams to assist first responders. According to FEMA officials,
training is conducted by local government, typically the fire or
police department, which also organizes and supports teams of the
trained volunteers in neighborhoods, the workplace, and high schools.
The mission of the Fire Corps program is to increase the capacity of
fire and emergency medical service departments through the use of
volunteers in nonoperational roles and activities, including
administrative, public outreach, fire safety, and emergency
preparedness education.
FEMA is also responsible for a related program, the Ready Campaign,
which works in partnership with the Ad Council, an organization that
creates public service announcements (PSA), with the goals of raising
public awareness about the need for emergency preparedness, motivating
individuals to take steps toward preparedness, and ultimately
increasing the level of national preparedness. The program makes
preparedness information available to the public through its English
and Spanish Web sites (www.ready.gov and www.listo.gov), through
printed material that can be ordered from the program or via toll-free
phone lines, and through PSAs.[Footnote 15] The Ready Campaign message
calls for individuals, families, and businesses to (1) get emergency
supply kits, (2) make emergency plans, and (3) stay informed about
emergencies and appropriate responses to those emergencies.
FEMA Faces Challenges Measuring the Performance of Its Community
Preparedness Efforts and the Ready Campaign:
FEMA faces challenges in measuring the performance of local community
preparedness efforts because it lacks accurate information on those
efforts. FEMA is also confronted with challenges in measuring
performance for the Ready Campaign because the Ready Campaign is not
positioned to control the placement of its preparedness messages or
measure whether its message is changing the behavior of individuals.
FEMA Faces Challenges Measuring Performance of Community Preparedness
Efforts Because It Lacks Accurate Information on Local Programs:
According to FEMA officials, FEMA promotes citizen preparedness and
volunteerism by encouraging collaboration and the creation of
community Citizen Corps, CERT, and Fire Corps programs. FEMA includes
the number of Citizen Corps Councils, CERTs, and Fire Corps
established across the country as its principal performance measure
for community preparedness. However, FEMA faces challenges ensuring
that the information needed to measure the number of established,
active units is accurate. In our past work we reported on the
importance of ensuring that program data are of sufficient quality to
document performance and support decision making.[Footnote 16] FEMA
programs report the number of local units registered nationwide as a
principal performance measure, but FEMA does not verify that the
registration data for Citizen Corps Councils, CERT, or Fire Corps
volunteer organizations are accurate. Our work showed that the number
of active units reported may differ from the number that actually
exists. For example, as of September 2009 we found the following.
* Citizen Corps reported having 2,409 registered Citizen Corps
Councils nationwide that encompass jurisdictions where approximately
79 percent of the U.S. population resides. However, of the 17
organizations registered as councils that we contacted during our site
visits, 12 were active and 5 were not active as councils.
* The CERT program reported having 3,354 registered CERTs. Of the 12
registered CERTs we visited, 11 reported that they were actively
engaged in CERT activities, such as drills and emergency preparedness
outreach, or had assisted in an emergency or disaster. The 12th
registered CERT was no longer active.
State officials in two of the four states we visited also said that
the data on the number of registered programs might not be accurate.
[Footnote 17] A state official responsible for the Citizen Corps
Council and CERT programs in one state estimated that as little as 20
percent of the registered councils were active, and the state
subsequently removed more than half of its 40 councils from the
national Web site. Officials in another state said that the database
is not accurate and they have begun to send e-mails to or call local
councils to verify the accuracy of registrations in their state. These
officials said that they plan to follow up with those councils that do
not respond, but they were uncertain what they planned to do if the
councils were no longer active. These results raise questions about
the accuracy of FEMA's data on the number of councils across the
nation, and the accuracy of FEMA's measure that registered councils
cover 79 percent of the population nationwide.
Although changes in the number of active local programs can be
expected based on factors, including changes in government leadership,
voluntary participation by civic leaders, and financial support, a
FEMA official responsible for the Citizen Corps program acknowledged
that the current program registration lists need to be verified to
determine whether they are accurate. The official said that FEMA has
plans for improving the accuracy of the data as part of a new online
registration process for Citizen Corps Councils and CERTs in 2010,
which would involve reregistering local programs with the goal of
reactivating inactive programs, although it is likely that some
inactive programs would be removed from FEMA's registries.[Footnote
18] However, it is possible that registration data could continue to
be inaccurate because, according to a FEMA official, the Citizen Corps
program does not have the authority to require all local units to
update information, particularly councils or CERTs that do not receive
federal funding. Furthermore, FEMA officials explained that the
Homeland Security Grant Program guidance designates state officials as
responsible for approving initial council and CERT registrations and
ensuring that the data are updated as needed and said that under the
new registration process, state officials will continue to be
responsible for ensuring that data are updated as needed.[Footnote 19]
A Citizen Corps official told us that the Community Preparedness
Division does not monitor whether states are regularly updating local
unit registration information as they do not have the staff or
processes in place to monitor states' efforts and the Division would
look to regional staff to work with state officials. The official said
that FEMA is considering the possibility of providing contract support
to states that request assistance in contacting local programs as part
of the re-registration effort.
A key FEMA official told us that they recently drafted a new strategic
approach and are considering developing and using outcome measures
that are focused on the achievements of Citizen Corps programs as well
as the number of programs, as is currently measured. Outcome measures
are important because a registered program being active is only a
first step in measuring whether local programs are meeting intended
program goals. However, our review of the draft showed that it does
not state what actions FEMA intends to take to ensure that
registrations are accurate and remain up-to-date. Therefore, FEMA does
not have reasonable assurance that its data about the number of
registrations for local Citizen Corps programs are accurate, which may
affect its ability to measure the results of those programs. By
developing an approach to ensure the accuracy of local Citizen Corps
program data, FEMA managers and others would be better positioned to
understand why Citizen Corps programs that no longer exist were
disbanded, possible strategies for reconstituting or creating new
programs, and a foundation for developing outcome measures that gauge
whether local programs are achieving goals associated with enhancing
community preparedness.
The Ready Campaign Faces Challenges Measuring Performance Because It
Is Not Positioned to Control the Distribution of Its Preparedness
Message and Measure Whether Its Message Affects Individual Behavior:
Currently, the Ready Campaign measures its performance based on
measures such as materials distributed or PSAs shown. For example,
according to a DHS official, in fiscal year 2008 the Ready Campaign
had:
* more than 99 million "hits" on its Web site,
* more than 12 million pieces of Ready Campaign literature requested
or downloaded, and:
* 43,660 calls to the toll-free numbers.
The Ready Campaign relies on these measures because it faces two
different challenges in determining whether its efforts are
influencing individuals to be more prepared. First, the Ready Campaign
is not positioned to control when or where its preparedness message is
viewed. Second, the Ready Campaign is not positioned to measure
whether its message is changing the behavior of individuals.
With regard to the Ready Campaign's ability to control the
distribution of its message, our past work has shown that it is
important for agencies to measure their performance based on clear and
reliable data that are linked to program goals, but also recognizes
that agencies whose programs rely on others to deliver services, like
the Ready Campaign, may need to use substitute measures--such as
counts of Web site hits and the number of television announcements--
which are not linked to outcomes.[Footnote 20] According to FEMA's
Acting Director for the Ready Campaign, the program budget of $2.5
million for 2010 limits the extent to which they could produce
advertisements and purchase commercial space for their placement. The
PSAs developed by the Ad Council cannot be used for purchased media
placement; rather, the Ready Campaign relies on donations of various
sources of media.[Footnote 21] As a result, the Ready Campaign does
not control what, when, or where Ready Campaign materials are placed
when the media are donated. For example, what PSA is shown and the
slots (e.g., a specific channel at a specific time) that are donated
by television, radio, and other media companies are not under the
Ready Campaign's control, and these are not always prime viewing or
listening spots. On the basis of a review of Ad Council data, the
Ready Campaign's PSAs in 2008 were aired about 5 percent or less of
the time by English language and Spanish language television stations
during prime time (8:00 p.m. to 10:59 p.m.), and about 25 percent of
the PSAs were aired from 1:00 a.m. to 4:00 a.m. Similarly, about 47
percent of English language radio and about 27 percent of Spanish
language radio spots were aired from midnight to 6:00 a.m. FEMA
officials said because new material is more appealing to PSA
directors, they expect better placement with the new PSAs released in
September 2009. In November 2009, a FEMA official told us that the new
PSAs had been released, but information was not yet available to show
whether the new material had received better placement.
Just as the Ready Campaign has no control over the time PSAs are
aired, it does not control the type of media (e.g., radio, television)
donated. Based on Ad Council data on the dollar value of media donated
to show Ready Campaign materials (the value of the donated media is
generally based on what it would cost the Ready Campaign if the media
space were purchased), much of the value from donated media is based
on space donated in the phone book yellow pages. Figure 1 shows the
value of various types of media donated to the Ready Campaign to
distribute its message during 2008.
Figure 1: Value of Media Donated in 2008 to Distribute Ready Campaign
Message:
[Refer to PDF for image: pie-chart]
Yellow pages: $22.8 million (50%);
English radio: $8.1 million (17%);
Outdoor and transit: $7.4 million (16%);
Spanish radio: $2.0 million (4%);
Interactive media: $1.7 million (4%);
Cable television: $1.5 million (3%);
Broadcast television: $1.5 million (3%);
Other media: $1.6 million (3%).
Source: GAO analysis of Ad Council data.
[End of figure]
The Ready Campaign also faces a challenge determining the extent to
which it contributes to individuals taking action to become more
prepared--the program's goal. Measuring the Ready Campaign's progress
toward its goal is problematic because it can be difficult to isolate
the specific effect of exposure to Ready Campaign materials on an
individual's level of emergency preparedness. Research indicates that
there may be a number of factors that are involved in an individual
taking action to become prepared, such as his or her beliefs
concerning vulnerability to disaster, geographic location, or income.
[Footnote 22] One factor in establishing whether the Ready Campaign is
changing behavior requires first determining the extent to which the
Ready Campaign's message has been received by the general population.
The Ad Council conducts an annual survey to determine public awareness
of the Ready Campaign, among other things. For example, the Ad
Council's 2008 survey found the following:
* When asked if they had heard of a Web site called Ready.gov that
provides information about steps to take to prepare in the event of a
natural disaster or terrorist attack, 21 percent of those surveyed
said that they were aware of the Ready.gov Web site.
* When asked a similar question about television, radio, and print
PSAs, 37 percent of those surveyed said that they have seen or heard
at least one Ready Campaign PSA.
Another factor is isolating the Ready Campaign's message from other
preparedness messages that individuals might have received. The Ad
Council's 2008 survey found that 30 percent of those surveyed
identified the American Red Cross as the primary source of emergency
preparedness information; 11 percent identified the Ad Council.
While the Ad Council survey may give a general indication as to the
population's familiarity with the Ready Campaign, it does not provide
a measure of preparedness actions taken based on the Ready Campaign's
promotion; that is, a clear link from the program to achieving program
goals. The Ad Council reported that those who were aware of the Ready
Campaign's advertising were significantly more likely than those who
had not seen it to say that they had taken steps to prepare for
disaster, but acknowledged that the Ready Campaign could not claim
full credit for the differences. Further, as previous Citizen Corps
surveys showed, the degree to which individuals are prepared may be
less than indicated because preparedness drops substantially when more
detailed questions about specific supplies are asked.[Footnote 23]
FEMA Has Not Developed a Strategy Encompassing How Citizen Corps, Its
Partner Programs, and the Ready Campaign Are to Operate within the
Context of the National Preparedness System:
While DHS's and FEMA's strategic plans have incorporated efforts to
promote community preparedness, FEMA has not developed a strategy
encompassing how Citizen Corps, its partner programs, and the Ready
Campaign are to operate within the context of the National
Preparedness System. An objective in DHS's Strategic Plan for fiscal
years 2008 through 2013 to "ensure preparedness" envisions empowering
Americans to take individual and community actions before and after
disasters strike. Similarly, FEMA's Strategic Plan for fiscal years
2008 through 2013 envisions a strategy to "Lead the Nation's efforts
for greater personal and community responsibility for preparedness
through public education and awareness, and community engagement and
planning, including outreach to vulnerable populations." FEMA's
Strategic Plan delegates to the agency's components the responsibility
for developing their own strategic plans, which are to include goals,
objectives, and strategies, but does not establish a time frame for
completion of the component plans. FEMA's Strategic Plan states that
the components' strategic plans are to focus on identifying outcomes
and measuring performance.
NPD has not clearly articulated goals for FEMA's community
preparedness programs or developed a strategy to show how Citizen
Corps, its partner programs, and the Ready Campaign are to achieve
those goals within the context of the National Preparedness System. In
our past work, we reported that desirable characteristics of an
effective national strategy include articulating the strategy's
purpose and goals; followed by subordinate objectives and specific
activities to achieve results; and defining organizational roles,
responsibilities, and coordination, including a discussion of
resources needed to reach strategy goals.[Footnote 24] In April 2009,
we reported that NPD had not developed a strategic plan that defined
program roles and responsibilities, integration and coordination
processes, and goals and performance measures for its programs.
[Footnote 25] We reported that instead of a strategic plan, NPD
officials stated that they used an annual operating plan and Post-
Katrina Act provisions to guide NPD's efforts. The operating plan
identifies NPD goals and NPD subcomponents responsible for carrying
out segments of the operating plan, including eight objectives
identified for the division under NPD's goal to "enhance the
preparedness of individuals, families, and special needs populations
through awareness planning and training." NPD's objectives for meeting
this goal did not describe desired outcomes.
In late September 2009, NPD provided us a spreadsheet that was linked
to the NPD operating plan which outlined more detailed information on
NPD's goals and objectives, such as supporting objectives, the
responsible NPD division, and projected completion dates.[Footnote 26]
However the spreadsheet lacked details about key issues, and did not
include all of the elements of an effective national strategy. For
example, one of NPD's operating plan objectives--called a supporting
goal in FEMA's spreadsheet--for the Community Preparedness Division is
to increase "the number of functions that CERTs will be able to
perform effectively during emergency response," but neither the plan
nor the spreadsheet provide details, such as the functions CERTs
currently perform, what additional functions they could perform, and
what it means to be effective. The spreadsheet elaborates on this
supporting goal with a "supporting objective" to "develop 12 new CERT
supplemental training modules that promote advanced individual and
team skills" and a completion date of September 30, 2009. FEMA
officials said that 6 of the 12 modules were completed as of September
30, 2009, and that the spreadsheet should have identified the effort
as ongoing because developing the planning modules was to be completed
over a 4-year period ending in 2011.[Footnote 27] The operating plan,
spreadsheet, and FEMA officials provided no time frame for when the
training is expected to be implemented at the local level to increase
the function of individual CERTs, nor did they discuss performance
measures and targets for gauging changes in the effectiveness of
CERTs, or how local training will be coordinated or delivered. NPD's
operating plan and spreadsheet also did not include other key elements
of an effective national strategy, such as how NPD will measure
progress in meeting defined goals and objectives and the potential
costs and types of investments needed to implement community
preparedness programs. As a result, NPD is unable to provide a picture
of priorities or how adjustments might be made in view of resource
constraints.
In our April 2009 report, we recommended that NPD take a more
strategic approach to implementing the National Preparedness System to
include the development of a strategic plan that contains such key
elements as goals, objectives, and how progress in achieving them will
be measured. DHS concurred with our recommendation and stated that it
is making progress in this area and in fully implementing the
recommendation. NPD officials stated in September 2009 that DHS, FEMA,
and NPD, in coordination with national security staff, were discussing
the development of a preparedness and implementation strategy within
the context of Homeland Security Presidential Directive 8 (National
Preparedness) (HSPD-8).[Footnote 28] They said that community and
individual preparedness were key elements of those discussions. At
that time, NPD officials did not state when the strategy would be
completed; thus, it is not clear to what extent the strategy will
integrate Citizen Corps, its partner programs, and the Ready Campaign.
NPD officials stated that work is under way on revising the target
capabilities, which are to include specific outcomes, measures, and
resources for the Community Preparedness and Participation capability.
They said that they expect to issue a draft for public comment in the
second quarter of fiscal year 2010. Also, in testimony before the
Subcommittee on Emergency Communications, Preparedness and Response,
Committee on Homeland Security, on October 1, 2009, the NPD Deputy
Administrator said that, in recognition of the preliminary
observations raised in our testimony, NPD is reformulating the NPD
operating plan as a strategic plan. He said that once complete, the
strategic plan is intended to integrate Community Preparedness,
specifically the efforts of Citizen Corps, its partner programs and
affiliates, and the Ready Campaign. However, he said he was not
prepared to provide a time frame as to when the strategic plan would
be completed. The NPD Deputy Administrator agreed to consult with the
Subcommittee staff and other stakeholders as NPD develops the draft
strategic plan.
The FEMA official leading the development of the NPD strategic plan
told us that NPD had begun to develop a strategic plan, but it had not
developed a timeline with milestone dates for completing it because
NPD is waiting to coordinate the plan's development with the revision
of HSPD-8 and the Quadrennial Homeland Security Review.[Footnote 29]
He said NPD would be better able to establish a timeline and
milestones for completing the NPD strategic plan once these other
documents were revised; but he was uncertain about when these
documents would be completed.[Footnote 30] He also stated that NPD had
developed a draft strategic approach for community preparedness in
response to a request by the Chairman of the Subcommittee on Emergency
Communications, Preparedness and Response, Committee on Homeland
Security, during the October 1, 2009 hearing. He said that NPD intends
to use this strategic approach as a vehicle for discussing community
preparedness within the context of NPD's overall strategy. He told us
that, as with the draft strategic plan, NPD had not established a
timeline with milestone dates for completing the Community
Preparedness strategy.
On December 2, 2009, FEMA provided a copy of the draft community
preparedness strategic approach that it prepared for the Subcommittee.
FEMA's draft represents an important first step because it partially
satisfies the elements of an effective national strategy.
Specifically, the draft strategic approach broadly discusses why FEMA
produced it, the process by which it was developed, and FEMA's overall
community preparedness vision. The draft also outlines goals and
subordinate goals and discusses the outcomes FEMA expects in achieving
them. However, the draft strategic approach lacks key elements of an
effective national strategy because, among other things, it does not
discuss how progress will be measured in achieving these goals; the
roles and responsibilities of the organizations responsible for
implementing the strategy, and mechanisms for coordinating their
efforts; and the cost of implementation, including the source and
types of resources needed and where those investments and resources
should be targeted. FEMA's draft did not identify a timeline and
milestones for completing the strategy.
The Ready Campaign is also working to develop its strategic direction.
According to the FEMA Director of External Affairs, the Ready
Campaign's strategy is being revised to reflect the transition of the
program from DHS's Office of Public Affairs to FEMA's Office of
External Affairs, and the new FEMA Director's approach to
preparedness. Program officials said that the Ready Campaign will have
increased access to staff and resources and is to be guided by a FEMA-
wide strategic plan for external communications.[Footnote 31] As of
September 2009, the plan was still being developed and no date had
been set for completion. The Ready Campaign Director said in November
2009 that the plan is not expected to be done before the end of the
year, but was not aware of a timeline and milestones for its
completion. The Director also said that the Ready Campaign was
included in the draft community preparedness strategy.
We recognize that HSPD-8 and the Quadrennial Homeland Security Review
are instrumental in articulating the overall national preparedness
strategy and FEMA's strategic approach, and that NPD's plan and
community preparedness strategies, including the Ready Campaign, are
components of efforts to revise these initiatives. Standard practices
for project management established by the Project Management Institute
state that managing a project involves, among other things, developing
a timeline with milestone dates to identify points throughout the
project to reassess efforts under way to determine whether project
changes are necessary.[Footnote 32] By developing plans with timelines
and milestones for completing the NPD and community preparedness
strategies, FEMA will be better positioned to provide a more complete
picture of NPD's approach for developing and completing these
documents. They also would provide FEMA managers and other decision
makers with insights into (1) NPD's overall progress in completing
these strategies, (2) a basis for determining what, if any, additional
actions need to be taken, and (3) the extent to which these strategies
can be used as building blocks for the national preparedness strategy
and FEMA's strategic approach.
Conclusions:
Hurricane Katrina was one of the most devastating natural disasters in
our nation's history and will have long-standing effects for years. By
their nature, catastrophic events involve casualties, damage, or
disruption that will likely overwhelm state and local responders.
Americans who are prepared as individuals for disasters, and as
trained volunteers, can help to mitigate the impact of disasters in
their local communities, yet the previous FEMA surveys indicate that
many Americans are still not prepared. The majority of those
responding to the surveys said they plan to rely on assistance from
first responders during a major disaster.
While FEMA identifies community preparedness as an important part of
its national preparedness strategy, FEMA lacks accurate performance
information on its community preparedness programs that would enable
it to determine whether these programs are operating in the
communities in which they have been established. We recognize that
FEMA's Citizen Corps Program and partner programs have relatively
small budgets and staff, and that program officials are aware of
inaccuracies in the data and are considering options to improve
information on local programs, such as re-registering existing
programs. However, it is unclear whether these measures will be enough
to provide FEMA the assurance it needs that local programs that are
registered continue to operate. By having accurate data, FEMA managers
and other decision makers would be better positioned to measure
progress establishing and maintaining these programs nationwide and in
local communities. This would also provide FEMA managers the basis for
exploring (1) why programs that no longer exist were disbanded, and
(2) possible strategies for reconstituting local programs or
developing new ones. Accurate data would also provide a foundation for
developing outcome measures that gauge whether local programs are
achieving goals associated with enhancing community preparedness.
Challenges in measuring the performance of these programs stem in part
from FEMA lacking an overall strategy for achieving community
preparedness or defining how these efforts align with the larger
National Preparedness System, particularly how Citizen Corps, its
partner programs, and the Ready Campaign fit within the strategy.
Defining program roles, responsibilities, and coordination mechanisms;
identifying performance measures to gauge results; and ensuring the
resources needed to achieve program goals would be part of an
effective strategy. FEMA has agreed such a strategy is needed and has
started to develop strategies for NPD and Community Preparedness,
including the Ready Campaign, but has no timeframes or milestone dates
for developing and completing them. By having a plan with time frames
and milestone dates for completing the NPD strategic plan and its
community preparedness strategy, FEMA managers and other decision
makers would be better equipped to track NPD's progress. Moreover,
they would have a basis to determine what, if any, additional actions
are needed to enhance NPD's overall preparedness strategy and
community preparedness and insights into the extent to which these
plans can be used as building blocks for the national preparedness
strategy and FEMA's strategic approach.
Recommendations for Executive Action:
To better ensure that national community preparedness efforts are
effective and completed in a timely fashion, we recommend that the
Administrator of FEMA take the following two actions:
* examine the feasibility of developing various approaches for
ensuring the accuracy of registration data of local Citizen Corps
Councils and partner programs, and:
* develop plans including timelines and milestone dates for completing
and implementing (1) NPD's strategic plan and (2) its Community
Preparedness Strategic Approach, including details on how Citizen
Corps, partner programs, and the Ready Campaign are to operate within
the context of the National Preparedness System.
Agency Comments:
We requested comments on a draft of this report from the Secretary of
Homeland Security. The department declined to provide official written
comments to include in our report. However, in an e-mail received
January 19, 2010, the DHS liaison stated that DHS concurred with our
recommendations. FEMA provided written technical comments, which were
incorporated into the report as appropriate.
As agreed with your office, unless you publicly announce its contents
earlier, we plan no further distribution of this report until 30 days
after its issue date. At that time, we will send copies of this report
to the Secretary of Homeland Security, appropriate congressional
committees, and other interested parties. In addition, the report will
be available at no charge on the GAO Web site at [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov].
If you or your staff have any further questions about this report,
please contact me at (202) 512-8777 or email at jenkinswo@gao.gov.
Contact points for our Offices of Congressional Relations and Public
Affairs may be found on the last page of this report. Key contributors
to this report are listed in appendix II.
Signed by:
William O. Jenkins, Jr.
Director, Homeland Security and Justice Issues:
List of Requesters:
The Honorable Bennie G. Thompson:
Chairman:
Committee on Homeland Security:
House of Representatives:
The Honorable Henry Cuellar:
Chairman:
Subcommittee on Border, Maritime and Global Counterterrorism:
Committee on Homeland Security:
House of Representatives:
The Honorable Laura A. Richardson:
Chairwoman:
Subcommittee on Emergency Communications, Preparedness, and Response
Committee on Homeland Security:
House of Representatives:
The Honorable Sheila Jackson-Lee:
Chairwoman:
Subcommittee on Transportation Security and Infrastructure Protection
Committee on Homeland Security:
House of Representatives:
[End of section]
Appendix I: Homeland Security Grant Program Funding for Community
Preparedness, 2004 through 2008:
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) support for local community
preparedness activities is provided through Homeland Security grants,
specifically the Citizen Corps grant program, but community
preparedness activities are also eligible for support under other
Homeland Security grants. Citizen Corps grants are awarded to states
based on a formula of 0.75 percent of the total year's grant
allocation to each state (including the District of Columbia and
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico) and 0.25 percent of the total allocation
for each U.S. Territory, with the balance of funding being distributed
on a population basis.
For other DHS homeland security grants, states prepare a request for
funding, which can include support for the state's community
preparedness efforts, as allowed under the guidance for a particular
grant. For example, the 2009 Homeland Security Grant Program guidance
lists "conducting public education and outreach campaigns, including
promoting individual, family and business emergency preparedness" as
an allowable cost for State Homeland Security Grants. Grant funding
can be used to support Citizen Corps, Citizen Corps partner programs,
or other state community preparedness priorities. The Federal
Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) grant reporting database does not
categorize grants in a way that allows identification of the amount of
funding going to a particular community preparedness program, such as
a Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) or Fire Corps.
Table 1 summarizes the approximately $269 million in DHS grants that
were identified by grantees as supporting community preparedness
projects from 2004 through 2008. Our selection of projects for
inclusion in this summary relied on DHS data on grantees who
identified their project as one of three predefined project types that
are, according to FEMA officials, relevant for community preparedness,
or were projects funded with a Citizen Corps Program grant. Not all
grantees may have used these project-type descriptions, so the amount
below is an approximation. We worked with grant officials to identify
the most appropriate grant selection criteria. To determine the
reliability of these DHS grant data, we reviewed pertinent DHS
documents, such as the Grant Reporting Tool User's Manual and
interviewed DHS officials about their process for compiling these
data. We determined that the grant data we used were sufficiently
reliable for purposes of this report.
Table 1: Homeland Security Grant Program Funding for Community
Preparedness Projects 2004 through 2008:
Year: 2004;
Citizen Corps: $33,955,176;
Urban Area Security: Initiative (UASI)[A]: $8,306,020;
State Homeland Security Grant: $7,735,800;
Emergency Management Performance Grant: [Empty];
Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention Program: $1,093,911;
Other Homeland Security Grants[B]: [Empty];
Total: $51,090,907.
Year: 2005;
Citizen Corps: $13,485,705;
Urban Area Security: Initiative (UASI)[A]: $8,687,292;
State Homeland Security Grant: $11,775,517;
Emergency Management Performance Grant: $595,825;
Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention Program: $248,988;
Other Homeland Security Grants[B]: $414,329;
Total: $35,207,655.
Year: 2006;
Citizen Corps: $19,205,985;
Urban Area Security: Initiative (UASI)[A]: $16,345,381;
State Homeland Security Grant: $15,074,053;
Emergency Management Performance Grant: $6,545,092;
Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention Program: $969,561;
Other Homeland Security Grants[B]: $2,028,071;
Total: $60,168,142.
Year: 2007;
Citizen Corps: $14,549,998;
Urban Area Security: Initiative (UASI)[A]: $23,608,893;
State Homeland Security Grant: $15,754,809;
Emergency Management Performance Grant: $1,026,336;
Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention Program: $6,705,907;
Other Homeland Security Grants[B]: $4,895,079;
Total: $66,541,022.
Year: 2008;
Citizen Corps: $14,572,500;
Urban Area Security: Initiative (UASI)[A]: $13,498,514;
State Homeland Security Grant: $16,640,267;
Emergency Management Performance Grant: $8,620,774;
Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention Program: 0;
Other Homeland Security Grants[B]: $2,645,852;
Total: $55,977,906.
Year: Total;
Citizen Corps: $95,769,364;
Urban Area Security: Initiative (UASI)[A]: $70,446,099;
State Homeland Security Grant: $66,980,446;
Emergency Management Performance Grant: $16,788,026;
Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention Program: $9,018,367;
Other Homeland Security Grants[B]: $9,983,331;
Total: $268,985,634.
Source: GAO analysis of FEMA Grant Reporting Data for 2004 through
2008.
Note: Homeland Security Grant projects were included in this summary
that met at least one of the following four criteria: indicated the
project was to establish or enhance (1) citizen or volunteer
initiatives, (2) citizen awareness of emergency preparedness,
prevention, and response measures, (3) Citizen Corps Councils, or 4)
was supported by the Citizen Corps Program grant. For years with a
zero value, a particular grant may not have been part of the Homeland
Security Grant package (e.g. the Emergency Management Performance
Grant was not part of 2004 grants, and the Law Enforcement Terrorism
Prevention Grant in 2008 was not available for community preparedness
purposes).
[A] Includes UASI and UASI transit and non-profit grants.
[B] Includes grants for Transit Security programs, Metropolitan
Medical Response System, Buffer Zone Protection, Intercity Passenger
Rail Security, Interoperable Emergency Communications, Non-Profit
Security, and Regional Catastrophic Preparedness.
[End of table]
[End of section]
Appendix II: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments:
GAO Contact:
William O. Jenkins, Jr., (202) 512-8777 or jenkinswo@gao.gov:
Staff Acknowledgments:
In addition to the contact named above, John Mortin, Assistant
Director, and Monica Kelly, Analyst-in-Charge, managed this
assignment. Carla Brown, Qahira El'Amin, Lara Kaskie, Amanda Miller,
Cristina Ruggiero-Mendoza, and Janet Temko made significant
contributions to the report.
[End of section]
Footnotes:
[1] Individuals, the public, and community are used interchangeably in
this report when discussing preparedness for nongovernmental community
members. The terms encompass both citizens and noncitizens. Community
nonprofit and private businesses are part of community preparedness,
but were not within the scope of our work.
[2] Federal Emergency Management Agency, Citizen Preparedness Review:
A Review of Citizen Preparedness Research, Fall Update (Washington
D.C.: 2007).
[3] DHS, 2003 Citizen Corps Survey of U.S. Households: Final Survey
Report, (Washington, D.C.: 2003), and FEMA, Personal Preparedness in
America: Findings From the (2007) Citizen Corps National Survey
(Washington, D.C.: June 2009). FEMA conducted national household
surveys in 2003, 2007, and 2009. We included 2009 survey results in
our October 1, 2009, testimony providing preliminary observations on
FEMA's efforts to promote community preparedness (see GAO, Emergency
Management: Preliminary Observations on FEMA's Community Preparedness
Programs Related to the National Preparedness System, GAO-10-105T
(Washington, D.C.: Oct. 1, 2009). Subsequently, FEMA officials
notified us on October 30, 2009, that they omitted California in their
original 2009 national survey sample. FEMA officials have corrected
their estimates for 2009 based on data collected from large California
urban areas. However, the new estimate may not be reflective of the
national population. Our October 1, 2009 testimony also
mischaracterized one aspect of FEMA's 2009 survey data. Specifically,
we stated that 56 percent of the respondents said that they did not
have an emergency supply kit when, in fact, FEMA's data showed that 56
percent of the respondents had kits. In December 2009, we revised GAO-
10-105T to replace data from FEMA's 2009 survey with data from the
Citizen Corps 2007 National Survey and to correct our error regarding
respondents' possession of emergency supply kits. We did not include
the results of FEMA's 2009 survey in the revised version of the
testimony or in this report because of the corrections made by FEMA.
However, FEMA's 2009 survey results are similar to results reported in
the earlier surveys, indicating that Americans could be better
prepared.
[4] According to FEMA officials, FEMA also encourages public
preparedness through speaking engagements, the media, and social
networking tools that were beyond the scope of our review. Regarding
the Ready Campaign, we focused on its efforts for individual and
family preparedness. The Ready Campaign's Business and Kid Campaign
were not within the scope of our review.
[5] The Fire Corps program is administered by the National Volunteer
Fire Council for FEMA. The Department of Health and Human Service's
Office of the Surgeon General within the Office of Public Health and
Science administers a third partner program, the Medical Reserve Corps
(MRC). Also, the Department of Justice sponsors two other partner
programs--Volunteers in Police Service and Neighborhood Watch.
[6] Under FEMA's Homeland Security Grant Program, states, territories,
urban areas, and transportation authorities are eligible for FEMA
grants to bolster national preparedness capabilities and protect
critical infrastructure. These grants can be used to establish and
sustain Citizen Corps Councils; purchase equipment for CERTs, Fire
Corps, and other partner programs; and support planning or training
efforts. Local community preparedness organizations can also receive
funding from state, local, or tribal governments or private and
nonprofit community-based preparedness organizations.
[7] GAO, National Preparedness: FEMA Has Made Progress, but Needs to
Complete and Integrate Planning, Exercise, and Assessment Efforts,
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-09-369] (Washington, D.C.:
Apr. 30, 2009).
[8] A key part of the system involves the development of quantifiable
standards and metrics--called target capabilities, defined as the
level of capability needed to prevent, respond to, and recover from
natural and man-made disasters--that can be used to assess existing
capability levels compared with target capability levels.
[9] [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-10-105T].
[10] This included 17 Citizen Corps Councils, 12 CERTs, 5 Fire Corps
programs, and officials representing 19 other preparedness and
emergency management organizations, such as local emergency managers
and state officials in four of the five states we visited.
[11] [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-09-369]; GAO, Results-
Oriented Management: Strengthening Key Practices at FEMA and Interior
Could Promote Greater Use of Performance Information, [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-09-676] (Washington, D.C.: Aug. 17,
2009); Influenza Pandemic: Gaps in Pandemic Planning and Preparedness
Need to Be Addressed, [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-09-909T] (Washington, D.C.: July 29,
2009); Information Sharing Environment: Definition of the Results to
Be Achieved in Improving Terrorism-Related Information Sharing Is
Needed to Guide Implementation and Assess Progress [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-492] (Washington, D.C.: June 25,
2008); Combating Terrorism: Evaluation of Selected Characteristics in
National Strategies Related to Terrorism, [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-04-408T] (Washington, D.C.: Feb. 3,
2004); Tax Administration: IRS Needs to Further Refine Its Tax Filing
Season Performance Measures, [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-03-143] (Washington, D.C.: Nov. 22,
2002); Agency Performance Plans: Examples of Practices That Can
Improve Usefulness to Decisionmakers [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO/GGD/AIMD-99-69] (Washington, D.C.:
Feb. 26, 1999); Performance Plans: Selected Approaches for
Verification and Validation of Agency Performance Information,
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO/GGD-99-139] (Washington,
D.C.: July 30, 1999); Agencies' Annual Performance Plans Under the
Results Act: An Assessment Guide to Facilitate Congressional
Decisionmaking, [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO/GGD/AIMD-
10.1.18] (Washington, D.C.: February 1998); and Executive Guide:
Effectively Implementing the Government Performance and Results Act,
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO/GGD-96-118] (Washington,
D.C.: June 1, 1996).
[12] [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-04-408T] and
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-09-369].
[13] 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, 1394-1463 (2006).
[14] Citizen Corps also works with affiliates--nonprofits and federal
departments which offer communities resources to help advance Citizen
Corps goals, such as the American Red Cross, and U.S. Department of
Education.
[15] See [hyperlink, http://www.ready.gov/america/about/psa.html] for
an example of a Ready Campaign PSA.
[16] [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-03-143] and
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO/GGD-99-139].
[17] We interviewed state officials in four of the five states we
visited--California, Florida, Oklahoma, and Texas. We did not
interview state officials in Nevada. Our Nevada site visit interviews
were related to observing exercises with CERT participation.
[18] FEMA is not responsible for the registration of local Fire Corps
units. According to the Fire Corps program Acting Director at the
National Volunteer Fire Council, a state advocacy program initiated in
2007 may help identify inactive Fire Corps programs as well as promote
the program. As of September 2009, there were 53 advocates in 31
states.
[19] The Community Preparedness Division Director said that the
division proposed changes to the grant guidance that would explicitly
require states to maintain the accuracy of the list as part of the
grant agreement. However, because the final guidance has not been
issued it is unknown whether these proposals have been included.
[20] [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO/GGD/AIMD-99-69].
[21] The Acting Director said that because the Ad Council PSAs are
created and distributed as public services, they cannot be used for
commercial placement as part of their agreement with the Ad Council.
[22] FEMA, Citizen Preparedness Review: A Review of Citizen
Preparedness Research (Fall 2007).
[23] Similarly, public knowledge of the Ready Campaign may be less
than indicated, based on the 2007 Citizen Corps survey. For example,
the 2007 survey asked respondents about familiarity with federal
preparedness programs and estimated that 16 percent of respondents had
heard about Ready.gov. However when asked to describe the program,
only 2 percent of respondents reported that they had a firm
understanding of the program.
[24] [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-04-408T] and
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-09-369].
[25] [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-09-369].
[26] NPD provided the spreadsheet on September 29, 2009, 2 days before
we testified on our preliminary observations on FEMA's efforts to
promote community preparedness. [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-10-105T]; Oct. 1, 2009. As a result,
we did not have time to assess the document and include our review of
it in our statement.
[27] In November 2009, FEMA officials told us that the spreadsheet
should have stated that the supporting objective was ongoing, with
three modules due each of the 4 years beginning in 2008 and ending in
2011.
[28] Homeland Security Presidential Directive 8--National Preparedness
(Dec. 17, 2003). In December 2003, the President issued guidance that
called on the Secretary of Homeland Security to carry out and
coordinate preparedness activities with public, private, and nonprofit
organizations involved in such activities.
[29] The Quadrennial Homeland Security Review, according to the DHS
Web site, is a congressionally mandated, top-to-bottom review by the
Secretary of Homeland Security to guide the department for the next 4
years and inform the nation's homeland security policies, programs,
and missions. The requirement to conduct the Quadrennial Homeland
Security Review is contained in section 2401 of the Implementing
Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007, Pub. L. No. 110-
53, 121 Stat. 266, 543-46.
[30] The DHS Web site indicates that the Secretary was to provide her
conclusions from the quadrennial review to Congress in a final report
by December 31, 2009.
[31] FEMA officials said that two additional staff positions for the
Ready Campaign are expected to be filled by March 2010.
[32] The Project Management Institute, The Standard for Program
Management.
[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:
