FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY
The
President's Proposal:
-
Provides $3.5 billion for new equipment and training to enhance state
and local preparedness against terrorist attacks;
-
Improves federal assistance for
credible and cost-effective disaster prevention strategies by
-
Provides the agency with over
$1.8 billion in base resources to pay for disaster relief efforts;
-
Reforms the National Flood Insurance
Program to improve financial performance and transfer greater financial responsibility
to individuals who build in flood prone areas; and
-
Transfers the agency’s
Emergency Food and Shelter program to the Department of Housing and Urban
Development to consolidate services to the homeless.
|
Federal Emergency Management
Agency
Joe M. Allbaugh, Director
www.fema.gov
202–646–4600
Number of Employee:
5,009
2002 Spending: $5.8 billion
Field Offices: Atlanta; Boston; Bothell, WA; Chicago;
Denton, TX; Denver; Kansas City, MO; New York; Philadelphia; and San Francisco.
|
When a disaster goes beyond state or local capacity to respond, the
President often declares an emergency or a disaster. The Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) then responds with disaster support while coordinating
the assistance of up to 27 other agencies and volunteer organizations. FEMA
helps the nation prepare for and reduce the impact of natural and technological
hazards, such as Y2K-related critical computer failures. FEMA also responds
to the aftermath of terrorism, such as the destruction wrought by the incidents
of September 11th. FEMA helps people protect themselves,
their homes, and their communities from hazards that can lead to emergencies
or disasters. FEMA also manages a number of important national security activities
to ensure that the government is ready to meet its responsibilities in all
situations.
Status Report on Select Programs
The Administration is reviewing programs throughout the government
to identify strong and weak performers. Often, as in the case of FEMA, the
budget seeks to redirect funds from lesser performing programs—or programs
with unknown performance—to higher priority or more effective programs.
Program | Assessment | Explanation |
Terrorism-related
Programs |
Effective |
Well established working
relationships with first responders, including firefighters, police, and emergency
medical technicians, foster well-targeted assistance.
|
Disaster Response
and Relief Programs |
Effective |
Effectively responds to
meet the needs of victims and communities after disasters; better performance
measures are needed.
|
Flood Insurance
Program |
Moderately
Effective |
Processes flood damage claims quickly; however,
many at-risk homes and businesses are not insured.
|
Disaster Mitigation |
Ineffective |
Formula funding
and lack of rigorous cost-benefit criteria for funded projects limit program’s
effectiveness; better performance measures are needed.
|
Flood Map Program |
Ineffective |
Inadequate funding
hinders program; maps are needed to assist rebuilding after disasters and
to steer future development away from floodplains.
|
Enhance State and Local Terrorism Preparedness
The President recognized the need to increase our nation’s preparedness
for terrorist attacks even before the events of September 11, 2001. On May
8, 2001, he directed FEMA to establish an Office
of National Preparedness (ONP). The President wants FEMA to work closely
with state and local governments to ensure their planning, training, and equipment
needs are addressed, and with other agencies to ensure that the response
to weapons of mass destruction threats is well-organized. As demonstrated
during the response to September 11th when more
than 300 police and firefighters lost their lives, first responders bear a
unique burden. All Americans are grateful for their service and FEMA will
continue to work in support of their efforts.
Urban Search and Rescue Team uses canine at the World Trade Center site.
 |
The budget provides
FEMA $3.6 billion to address these new priorities, an increase of $3.2 billion
over 2002. Most of this funding will be used for terrorism-related equipment
for states and localities, as well as training grants for first responders,
including firefighters, police, and emergency medical technicians. While state
and local jurisdictions will have discretion to tailor the assistance to meet
local needs, it is anticipated that more than one-third of the funds will
be used to improve communications. It is further assumed that an additional
one-third will be used to equip state and local first responders and that
the remainder will be used for training, planning, technical assistance and
administration. More than 11,000 emergency response personnel could be equipped
and trained in 2003. The funding also would allow FEMA to provide grants
to states to train 400,000 citizen volunteers for Community Emergency Response
Teams, which provide assistance and support to first responders following
terrorism incidents and other emergencies. The First Responder state/local
preparedness grant program would consolidate several existing programs, including
a first responder grant previously funded within the Department of Justice
(funded at $635 million in 2002). As part of the consolidation, FEMA will
take over the functions of Justice’s Office of Domestic Preparedness.
The First Responder program also would encompass the recently created FEMA
Fire Investment and Response Enhancement (FIRE) grant program (funded at $360
million in 2002).
Today, numerous departments
and agencies have programs to deal with the consequences of a potential use
of a chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear weapon in the United States.
Many of these programs offer training, planning, and assistance to state
and local governments. But to maximize their effectiveness, these efforts
need to be seamlessly integrated, harmonious, and comprehensive.
President George W. Bush May 8,
2001 |
The budget also provides $50 million for FEMA’s Office of National
Preparedness to work with states and localities on terrorism preparedness,
as well as to administer the first responder grant program. In November 2001,
FEMA completed work with each of the states and territories to develop plans
for terrorism preparedness training and equipment for chemical and biological
threats in 2002. These plans are being used to help allocate first responder
grant assistance provided in the 2002 Emergency Supplemental Appropriations
Act.
Improve Assistance for Credible and Cost-Effective Disaster Prevention
Strategies
... [M]itigation works.
The Seattle-Tacoma area did not suffer significant losses [following the February
28, 2001, earthquake] because 20 to 30 years ago local leaders invested in
its future by passing building codes and issuing municipal bonds that implemented
solid protective measures.
FEMA Director Allbaugh Congressional testimony, May 16, 2001 |
Much of the devastation caused by disasters can be minimized through
well-designed mitigation programs. For example, properties in flood-prone
areas can be elevated or moved. Homes and businesses can be braced for better
protection against earthquakes. And, storm shutters and other features can
be added to buildings to reduce wind damage. Having a significant, dedicated
stream of funds for these programs is critical to FEMA’s efforts to
protect individuals and communities from future disasters.
Flooding stands out as the single most pervasive disaster hazard facing
the nation. It causes an estimated $6 billion in property damage annually.
FEMA spends approximately 57 percent of its disaster relief resources alleviating
flood damage. Yet much of this after-the-fact spending can be avoided with
some up-front planning.
In the past, many of the nation’s efforts to avert flood disasters
have focused on structural changes to waterways—for example, building
dams and levies. Focusing flood reduction efforts on identifying the areas
at risk for flooding and steering development away from those areas can be
a less costly long-term approach to mitigation.
Modernizing the nation’s flood maps is critical to that effort.
Many of the nation’s Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) are out of date
and inaccurate—63 percent of maps are more than 10 years old. A third
of maps are more than 15 years old. About 2,700 communities are not mapped
at all. New and updated FIRMs can provide crucial guidance for future building,
development, and flood mitigation efforts—determining how and where
individuals, private developers, and local governments build. In 2003, FEMA
will invest $350 million to modernize flood maps. FEMA also will digitize
its maps and make them available over the Internet.
Effectiveness of Mitigation
Programs
From 1993 to 2000, 45 percent of projects
funded from FEMA’s Hazard Mitigation Grant Program were either minimally
cost effective or not cost effective at all. FEMA
data provided to the Congress in 2000 |
FEMA also will dedicate $300 million to a new competitive grant for
predisaster mitigation. This new program will replace the formula-based Hazard
Mitigation Grant Program currently funded through the Disaster Relief Fund.
The new program will operate independently of the disaster relief programs,
assuring that funding remains stable from year to year and is not subject
to spikes in disaster activity. Awarding grants on a competitive basis will
ensure that the most worthwhile, cost-beneficial projects receive funding.
Disaster Relief
When major disasters strike, FEMA provides disaster assistance to meet
emergency needs of families and individuals, and to help pay for the rebuilding
and repair of critical community infrastructure. In 2001, FEMA responded
to 50 major disasters and 15 emergencies, as well as funding continuing needs
from previous disasters. Major disasters in 2001 included the September 11th attacks,
Tropical Storm Allison, and the Seattle-Tacoma earthquake.
The Administration has set a goal of meeting the needs of disaster victims
for shelter, food, and water within 12 hours after the President declares
a major disaster. FEMA has automated its core disaster information processing
systems to improve its response time for disasters.
The budget provides for a program level of $2.9 billion for FEMA disaster
relief—a level consistent with the five-year average of obligations.
To fund the program, the budget provides $1.8 billion in new budget authority
and commits to an intensive review of unspent balances beginning with the
1994 California Northridge earthquake that is expected to result in $1.1 billion
in grant recoveries over a two-year period. Unspent balances often result
from mitigation and other projects that appeared to be needed in the aftermath
of a disaster but were not pursued after public review or further examination.
The five-year average is a reasonable benchmark for the resources FEMA
will need to respond to disasters. It is not always possible, however, to
anticipate extraordinary events such as the incidents of September 11th.
Proposed
Reforms |
-
Phase out taxpayer subsidies of second homes and vacation
properties.
-
Require that mortgage borrowers insure the full replacement
value of their properties.
-
End state taxation of flood insurance policies.
-
Include the cost of expected coastal erosion losses in premiums
for policies issued in coastal areas.
|
Reforms for the National Flood Insurance Program
The National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) faces major financial challenges.
In some years, the program has expenses greater than its revenue from insurance
premiums, preventing it from building long-term reserves to handle the costs
of flood insurance claims. A large portion of policyholders—29 percent—pay
only a portion of the cost of their premiums, with the Treasury subsidizing
the rest. By law, FEMA is prohibited from charging full premiums for properties
built before adoption of NFIP building standards by local communities. A
small number of these older properties are poorly situated and are repeatedly
flooded, accounting for a significant share of the program’s losses.
In contrast, FEMA charges true actuarial rates for newer properties and requires
that new construction comply with floodplain management guidelines.
The budget proposes several reforms to improve financial performance
and transfer greater financial liability to individuals building in flood
prone areas, as shown in the accompanying box.
In 2001, FEMA paid out $1.5 billion to settle flood insurance claims.
The Administration seeks to aid the recovery of individuals, businesses, and
communities after floods by increasing the number of flood insurance policies
in force. FEMA will increase the number of policies in force by five percent
in 2003—to 5.1 million policies.
Transfer the Emergency Food and Shelter Program
The Emergency Food and Shelter Program was created in 1983 to help meet
the needs of hungry and homeless people throughout the United States by providing
funds for emergency food and shelter. Funds are used to support homeless shelters
and other organizations that provide assistance for those who are homeless,
facing eviction, or in need of food assistance. FEMA has not demonstrated
the effectiveness of this program and has no expertise in managing programs
for the homeless. The budget proposes to transfer this program to the Department
of Housing and Urban Development—permitting better coordination of services
for the homeless.
Strengthening Management
Charged with managing the response to major disasters, as well as coordinating
consequence management for terrorism events, FEMA effectively coordinates
direct assistance—principally cash grants—as well as the relief
activities of other agencies and volunteer organizations. Generally, FEMA
performs well in getting resources to stricken communities and disaster victims
quickly. The agency performs less well in its oversight role to ensure the
effective use of such assistance. Further, the agency suffers from an inability
to clearly measure program performance, or to link resources to performance
information. FEMA has begun to address the President’s Management Agenda,
but has a poor starting point in all key areas.
Initiative | 2001 Status |
HumanCapital—FEMA lacks a strategy for linking human
capital to fiscal resources and agency goals. FEMA needs to develop a workforce-restructuring
plan that addresses how the agency will attract and retain personnel with
the skills to perform core agency functions including program oversight and
analysis. FEMA needs to address managing a fluctuating cadre of temporary
staff that performs front-line disaster assistance functions. FEMA also should
develop a strategy for redirecting supervisory positions to citizen service
delivery. FEMA must produce an interim workforce restructuring report by
mid-2002 that will address many of these issues. | • |
CompetitiveSourcing—FEMA has not produced a plan for meeting
the Administration’s short- and long-term competitive-sourcing goals.
FEMA must develop a new competitive sourcing and management plan, then complete
public-private competitions or direct conversions on 15 percent of the jobs
on its list of positions that are commercial in nature by the end of 2003. | • |
FinancialManagement—Despite the fact that FEMA has received
audit opinions for three years that the financial statements as a whole are
in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles, the agency has
had repeated material weaknesses in its financial management system, which
does not comply with standards. FEMA’s financial management system
is unable to generate timely and reliable financial statements. In addition,
FEMA needs to improve its disaster cost projections, oversight of state administration
of public assistance and mitigation grants, and monitoring of unspent funds.
FEMA will develop an implementation plan for system improvements and develop
improved disaster cost projections by mid-2002. | • |
E-Government—Although FEMA has documented processes
for outlining its systems and capital planning investment needs, FEMA has
not provided adequate justification or documentation of its information technology
(IT) projects to OMB and the Congress. Traditionally, little oversight has
been given to FEMA’s IT spending, and FEMA reallocated funds from its
various accounts to pay for projects. This led to ineffective and costly
IT projects, such as the agency’s core information tracking system,
NEMIS, or National Emergency Management Information System, which cost $67
million. The system has a history of crashing during disaster response operations
and cannot be easily adapted to program design changes. | • |
Budget/PerformanceIntegration—FEMA lags other agencies in integrating
budget and performance information. FEMA needs to develop performance measures
that better capture the relative effectiveness of its programs. The agency
should link program activities to strategic goals, and clearly articulate
output and outcome goals for use in subsequent budgets. | • |
Federal Emergency Management Agency (In millions of dollars)
| 2001
Actual | Estimate |
2002 | 2003 |
| | | |
Spending: | | | |
Discretionary Budget Authority: | | | |
Salaries and Expenses | 224 | 245 | 249 |
Disaster Relief Fund | 1,597 | 2,113 | 1,821 |
Emergency Management Planning and Assistance | 372 | 431 | 3,750 |
Pre-disaster Mitigation Grant Program | — | — | 300 |
Emergency Food and Shelter: | | | |
Existing Law | 140 | 140 | 153 |
Legislative Proposal (Transfer to HUD) | — | — | -153 |
Flood Map Modernization Fund | 18 | 32 | 300 |
All other programs | 97 | 109 | 143 |
Subtotal, Discretionary budget authority adjusted 1 | 2,448 | 3,070 | 6,563 |
Remove contingent adjustments | -13 | -12 | -13 |
Total, Discretionary budget authority | 2,435 | 3,058 | 6,550 |
| | | |
Emergency Response Fund, Budgetary Resources: | | | |
Salaries and Expenses | — | 25 | — |
Disaster Relief Fund | 2,000 | 4,357 | — |
Emergency Management Planning and Assistance | — | 220 | — |
Total, Emergency Response Fund, Budgetary resources | 2,000 | 4,602 | — |
| | | |
Mandatory Outlays: | | | |
National Flood Insurance Program: | | | |
Existing Law | 172 | -296 | -317 |
Legislative Proposals | — | — | -43 |
Total, Mandatory outlays | 172 | -296 | -360 |
| | | |
Credit activity: | | | |
Direct Loan Disbursements: | | | |
Disaster Assistance Direct Loan Programs | 31 | 25 | 25 |
Total, Direct loan disbursements | 31 | 25 | 25 |
|
1 Adjusted to include the full share of accruing
employee pensions and annuitants health benefits. For more information, see
Chapter 14, "Preview Report," in Analytical Perspectives. |
|