Detailed Information on the
Federal Emergency Management Agency: Disaster Recovery Assessment

Perform an assessment of program using performance metrics and independent analysis to identify areas for improvement and develop methodologies to improve program performance.

Develop processes to ensure program is functioning in a manner consistent with current legislation and appropriations policy.

The agency is developing additional baseline information on costs of delivering assistance, to be used to inform future performance measurement.

The agency is collecting quarterly information and will be able to update the assessment to reflect performance measurement information.

Measure: Percentage completion (cumulative) of a catastrophic disaster recovery plan (focused solely on preliminary houseing strategy development)

Explanation:FEMA is developing a catastrophic disaster recovery plan that includes components such as emergency disaster housing and debris removal.

Measure: Percent of customers satisfied with Individual Assistance Recovery assistance

Explanation:Customers are surveyed regularly after disasters to examine their satisfaction levels.

Measure: Percentage reduction in Individual Assistance program delivery cost

Explanation:The unit cost of IA disaster assistance is being determined.

Measure: Percentage reduction in Individual Assistance processing cycle time

Explanation:The Individual Assistance processing cycle time is being determined.

Measure: Percent of customers satisfied with Public Assistance Recovery assistance

Explanation:Customers are surveyed regularly after disasters to examine their satisfaction levels.

Is the program purpose clear?

Explanation: The Recovery Program's purpose is clearly defined as ensuring that individuals affected by disasters of all sizes, including catastrophic and terrorist events, are able to return to normal function with minimal suffering and disruption of services. The disaster assistance is provided to individuals as well as to general communities, though supporting the provision of community services such as utilities. The Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act is the primary defining legislation.

Evidence: Both the Stafford Act and FEMA regulations provide for the types of assistance provided by FEMA.

Does the program address a specific and existing problem, interest or need?

Explanation: FEMA's Recovery Program is specifically designed to provide specific assistance for identified disaster needs. For example, IHP is specifically designed to be an emergency supplemental program, when individuals impacted by major disasters and/or emergencies lack other resources to meet the need. Implementation of IHP is contingent upon the President's declaration of a major disaster or emergency for an identified incident. For PA, The program funds the reconstruction of public facilities and facilities of certain non-profits damaged or destroyed by natural and man-made disasters, as well as debris removal and certain emergency operations.

Evidence: In FY 2003, there were 52 Presidentially declared major disaster with Individual Assistance (IA) designations, which includes IHP. Under IHP, FEMA awarded $681 million to address housing and other than housing needs of 544,343 applicants. For PA, FEMA provides $1.5 billion to 6,500 applicants for 29,300 projects each year.

Is the program designed so that it is not redundant or duplicative of any other Federal, state, local or private effort?

Explanation: The nature of disaster relief and recovery assistance is such that resources routinely are applied from a variety of sources in helping individuals and communities recover. While many authorities for disaster relief and assistance are concentrated in the Stafford Act, administered by FEMA, a wide variety of other federal agencies and authorities come into play. In addition, insurance and assistance from non-governmental organizations play a significant role in relief and recovery efforts. All of FEMA's recovery programs are carefully designed such that there is a sequence of delivery of assistance that integrates in the appropriate order the assistance available from other sources, such as insurance or other federal agency programs, before assistance is made available for FEMA recovery programs.

Evidence: Section 408 and 312 of the Stafford Act, FEMA's Federal Register Notice: January 23, 2002 (Volume 67, Number 15), Disaster Assistance; Federal Assisstance to Individuals and Househods; Proposed Rule and 44 CFR 206.110(h). FMAGP is derived from Section 420 of the Stafford Act. 44 CFR Part 204.

Is the program design free of major flaws that would limit the program's effectiveness or efficiency?

Explanation: While the implementation of the Recovery program may be free of major design flaws, the trigger for use of the program is flawed. The program may be used in states after a Presidential declaration is declared. While this program is on the discretionary side of the budget, once a declaration is made, states, individuals and families are eligible for a number of categories of assistance.

Evidence: Stafford Act

Is the program effectively targeted, so that resources will reach intended beneficiaries and/or otherwise address the program's purpose directly?

Explanation: In general, the Recovery Program is effectively targeted to provide supplemental assistance to State/local governments when an event is beyond their capabilities and resources. IHP only provides emergency supplemental housing and other assistance in the designated area of Presidentially-declared events. FMAGP is effectively targeted to State and local governments that incur costs for eligible wildland firefighting activities, as the only entities eligible for assistance. The PA Program is designed to ensure that State/local resources are not overtaxed following disasters and that a source of funding is available to finance debris removal, certain emergency operations, and public infrastructure rebuilding. Yet, the PA Program is not optimally designed because (1) the basic qualification criterion ($1.11 of impact per capita) sets a low hurdle, so some localities may receive aid even when it is within their means to respond without assistance and (2) localities with uninsured public facilities remain eligible for assistance--a disincentive to adequately insure against disaster hazards.

Evidence: Through the registration/inspection processes, IHP verifies that applicants are in fact the intended beneficiaries through various screening criteria, including means testing for the Small Business Administration disaster home loan program. The evaluations ensure assistance is only provided to individuals and households who lack other resources to meet their disaster related housing or other needs. FEMA's IG (I-02-99) reports that "the $1 per capita does not reflect a State's economic health and its ability to raise public revenues to cover the cost of a disaster." FEMA's IG suggests using an alternative indicator, such as 'Total Taxable Resources' ". . .[that] would ensure that States with a weaker fiscal condition are treated fairly while States with a stronger fiscal condition become more accountable for their disaster welfare." The preamble to the Stafford Act, Sec. 101, directs FEMA to encourage ``individuals, States, and local governments to protect themselves by obtaining insurance coverage to supplement or replace governmental assistance.''

Does the program have a limited number of specific long-term performance measures that focus on outcomes and meaningfully reflect the purpose of the program?

Explanation: FEMA's Planning, Programming and Budgeting System (PPBS) establishes program goals, milestones, and a limited number of performance measures that focus on identified priorities. For example, to develop a catastrophic disaster recovery plan that is built on a scalable recovery capability within IHP and PA to address all-hazards (of all sizes) in support of the National Response Plan. FEMA also set performance measures that target customer satisfaction within the IHP and PA Programs and established measures that target reductions in program delivery costs and application processing cycle time.

Evidence: FY 2004-2009 Multi-Year Sub-Program Element Worksheets

Does the program have ambitious targets and timeframes for its long-term measures?

Explanation: The PPBS process establishes targets and timeframes (milestones) for performance measures over a five-year planning period. The established targets and milestones are separated by fiscal year, building upon each other to accomplish long-term program goals, contingent upon appropriate funding levels. For example, the IA Program established targets and milestones that will build to a 25 percent reduction in IA processing cycle time by FY10.

Evidence: FY 2006-2010 Program Planning and Budget document (available upon request).

Does the program have a limited number of specific annual performance measures that can demonstrate progress toward achieving the program's long-term goals?

Explanation: FEMA established specific annual performance measures that program managers utilize to evaluate/demonstrate progress toward achieving long-term program goals. These goals are evaluated and adjusted as warranted to reflect current budgetary conditions or changing priorities. For example, FEMA identified customer satisfaction goals for both the IHP and PA Programs and internal performance measures for the PA program that address FEMA's timeliness in obligating assistance. (However, FEMA does not measure the speed with which States liquidate funds--actually spend the money--obligated to them by FEMA.)

Evidence: FY 2006-2010 Program Planning and Budget document. FEMA internal performance measures include: obligate 50% of funding for each disaster within 90 days of declaration; obligate 80% of funding for each disaster within 180 days of declaration; and close 90% of disasters within two years of declaration. Program Evaluation and Customer Satisfaction Survey, FY 2001 Annual Report, March 2002.

Does the program have baselines and ambitious targets for its annual measures?

Explanation: In many cases, the PPBS process identifies baselines and ambitious targets for annual performance measures. However, the newness of certain types of assistance we provide (IHP and FMAGP) has limited our ability to develop ambitious targets until we can develop baseline information on our performance. For example, the IHP assistance has been utilized for only an 18-month period. Thus, historical data is limited so we are only beginning to develop management baselines for the program. This is also true for FMAGP, where we lack a complete dataset that would enable us to develop a baseline.

Evidence: FY 2006-2010 Program Planning and Budget document.

Do all partners (including grantees, sub-grantees, contractors, cost-sharing partners, and other government partners) commit to and work toward the annual and/or long-term goals of the program?

Explanation: FEMA's partners are commited to our long-term goals and we utilize different means of ensuring their commitment. For example, IHP partners, such as the State, are required to include performance measures in their operational plans, including those that ensure that assistance is meeting the identified needs, compliance with Federal and State statutes, and congruence with IHP's long-term performance goals. For FMAGP, the long-term and annual performance measures are new. Thus, we are exploring ways to implement performance requirements, and are looking at several vehicles to accomplish this task, including inclusion of performance requirements in the FEMA-State Agreement or State Administrative Plan for FMAGP. For PA, FEMA helps States select projects, develop cost estimates, and establish scopes of work, though the administration of PA grants is essentially a State responsibility, with oversight and guidance provided by FEMA. The States are responsible for administering FEMA grants funds, including all subgrants made by States for disaster response and recovery operations.

Evidence: FY 2006-2010 Program Planning and Budget document. Section 408 of the Stafford Act.44 CFR 206.110-120. PA Program Description (October 1998). The PA Program is based on a partnership of FEMA, State and local officials. FEMA's role has changed from inspection and enforcement to customer service and assistance. FEMA provides information about the program in various media both before and after a disaster strikes, and technical assistance in the development of damage descriptions and cost estimates after the disaster.

Are independent evaluations of sufficient scope and quality conducted on a regular basis or as needed to support program improvements and evaluate effectiveness and relevance to the problem, interest, or need?

Explanation: For PA, FEMA IG and GAO reports provide independent program review and evaluation of PA Program effectiveness. The IG performs audits of every major disaster and publishes findings in semi annual reports. However, to date, no independent evaluations of the effectiveness of IHP or FMAGP assistance has been conducted because these are newer programs. IHP has been utilized for only 18-month period; as such, historical data to determine if the program is effective and achieving results is limited to internal customer satisfaction surveys. The FMAGP is still relatively new and we do yet have a complete dataset upon which to base an independent evaluation. Once we have one or two years of complete data, we will explore the costs and benefits of conducting an independent evaluation.

Evidence: OIG Audit Reports and Quarterly Reports. Also, the IG's annual Management Challenges letter to the FEMA Director.

Are Budget requests explicitly tied to accomplishment of the annual and long-term performance goals, and are the resource needs presented in a complete and transparent manner in the program's budget?

Explanation: The PPBS approach requires explicit linkage between FEMA's budget requests and the accomplishment of annual and long-term performance goals, specifically tying the resources needed to specific individual goals. As an example, the IHP's administrative (fixed) costs are explicitly linked to both annual and long-term performance goals. The costs are an element of the overall budget submissions for the Individual Assistance programs. However, while FEMA's PPBS process specifically breaks out the various types of assistance within th the Recovery program, this same level of detail is not included in the Budget. The Budget request is derived from using the five year average of costs to the Disaster Relief Fund, which is made up in large part of the Recovery program, but is not exclusive to that program.

Evidence: FY 2006-2010 Program Planning and Budget document. FY 2004-2009 Mulit-Year Sub-Program Element Worksheets. For PA, FEMA Justification of Estimates, FY 2004.

Has the program taken meaningful steps to correct its strategic planning deficiencies?

Explanation: The Recovery program has implemented a new five-year planning process in conjunction with the development of the DHS' Five-Year Homeland Security Plan (FYHSP). This PPBS process significantly improves FEMA's ability to conduct strategic planning. To ensure that FEMA accomplishes its strategic goals, quarterly performance reviews are conducted to ensure that performance remains on track to meet annual and longer-term strategic goals. FMAGP and the PPBS system are still too new to determine what strategic planning deficiencies exist. As the program matures and complete datasets of information become available to us, we will begin to identify those areas of strength and those in need of improvement, including strategic planning deficiencies.

Evidence: FY 2006-2010 Program Planning and Budget document. FY 2004-2009 Mulit-Year Sub-Program Element Worksheet. For PA, reference Section III: Program Management below.

Does the agency regularly collect timely and credible performance information, including information from key program partners, and use it to manage the program and improve performance?

Explanation: As part of the PPBS process, FEMA collects performance information on a quarterly basis that is reviewed by program managers as part of the quarterly performance reviews. Managers are required to color code their progress in meeting performance measures and to explain any shortfalls in performance. Identified solutions for the performance shortfalls are a required part of the quarterly reviews. Key program partners report on their performance. For example, IHP requires reporting from its partners in contracts or as part of their administrative plan. These program reports include, but are not limited to: number and dollar amount of applications approved, amounts of assistance disbursed; number of inspections performed and number of appeals received. Program managers use these reports to manage IHP and improve the program's performance. For the PA Program, reporting is required, though not always timely.

Evidence: Section 408(f)(1)(A) of the Stafford Act, 44 CFR206.120 (a) and OMB Collection No. 1660-0018. For PA, the FEMA IG reports that in audits of 11 out of 13 of grantees, required reports were not always filed or were not filed in a timely manner.

Are Federal managers and program partners (including grantees, sub-grantees, contractors, cost-sharing partners, and other government partners) held accountable for cost, schedule and performance results?

Explanation:  

Evidence: FEMA's Inspection Services Contract. For FMAGP, FEMA performance evaluations. 44 CFR Part 204. For PA, IG audits of FEMA's management of disaster grants for 17 States.

Are funds (Federal and partners') obligated in a timely manner and spent for the intended purpose?

Explanation: IHP utilizes FEMA's financial management system, the Integrated Financial Management Information System (IFMIS) for all funding and dsbursement activities. IHP obligates the Federal share of grants to the State using the basic standard in accordance with Treasury regulations at 31 CFR part 205. In addition, IHP encourages it partners, through contracts and administrative plans, to obligate and spend funds appropriately. FMAGP is primarily a reimbursement program. As such, FMAGP is based on actual costs, not estimated costs, and does not carry unliquidated funds. Approved program funds are obligated consistently and drawn down and expended by the Grantees in accordance with Federal law and regulation. We are provided with annual financial reports as well as final financial reports and the findings of any single audit applicable to FMAGP. For PA, FEMA's IG reports that funds are obligated in a timely manner at the Federal level, though the OIG has not performed any audits on how quickly FEMA partners are obligating PA funds.

Evidence: FEMA's Financial Acquisition Management Division Annual Performance & Accountability Reports and 44 CFR part 13. For FMAGP, NEMIS. IFMIS. SF 272s. For PA, IG audits of FEMA's management of FEMA disaster grants for 17 States.

Does the program have procedures (e.g. competitive sourcing/cost comparisons, IT improvements, appropriate incentives) to measure and achieve efficiencies and cost effectiveness in program execution?

Explanation: IHP makes use of the competitive sourcing/cost comparisons guidance provided by FEMA's Financial Acquisistion Management Division (FAMD). The disaster contracting aspects outlined by FEMA's Accounting Division is the basis for all IHP contract support costs. From a management perspective, FMAGP is working to develop procedures to improve the internal operation and administration of FMAGP, such as identifying the requirements for a web-based declaration module. Since they share the cost of a PA grant (typically 25%), States or their subgrantees have an incentive to achieve efficiencies and cost savings. Furthermore, FEMA competitively bids its Technical Assistance Contracts, and FEMA requires subgrantees to competitively bid repair and replacement work and verify work was done and costs were reasonable. FEMA publishes guides, cost codes, published policies, and digests for grantees.

Evidence: FEMA's Financial Acquisition Management Division Annual Performance & Accountability Reports. For FMAGP, Identification of declaration requirements for a web-based system. For PA, competitive procedures are required in all program documents. Cost share arrangements and program documentation are available.

Does the program collaborate and coordinate effectively with related programs?

Explanation: Following disasters, FEMA coordinates the Federal Government's recovery efforts by utilizing partnerships among local and State governments, voluntary organizations, non-profit organizations, and other Federal agencies to coordinate the sequence of federal disaster assistance. This coordination and collaboration allows FEMA to ensure that disaster assistance and recovery efforts are not duplicated and that disaster victims are made award of all possible disaster aid. FEMA also collaborates internally. For example, FMAGP collaborates and coordinates effectively with other related programs, such as the Public Assistance Program, which is designated under a Presidential Major Disaster or Emergency declaration when a fire or fires results in significant loss of life and/or property.

Evidence: 44 CFR 206.191 highlights coordination requirements. In addition, FEMA coordinates closely with various national voluntary organizations and non-profit organizations active in disasters. For PA, to ensure applicants receive appropriate federal assistance following major disaster declarations FEMA maintains memorandums of agreement with EPA, HUD, SBA and USACE. Examples of cooperative agreements include the September 1998 MOA with EPA (hazardous materials), the March 2001 MOA with HUD (public housing authorities), and the 1986 MOA with USACE (flood control works and debris removal operations).

Does the program use strong financial management practices?

Explanation: FEMA demonstrates strong financial management practices through using the agency's financial management systems (IFMIS, SMARTLINK, NEMIS) which allow submitting allocations and process obligations from which States draw down and expend approved funds, and through contract management and oversight. For example, IHP monitors contracts and grants and provides technical assistance on financial reporting requirements to program contractors and grantees, and encourages partners, through contracts and adminstrative plans, to utilize financial mangement practices comparable to FEMA's. The PA Program utilizes (1) a lengthy review process for all projects by experienced and trained local, state, and Federal staff before any PA funding is obligated, (2) grantees provide a quarterly Financial Status Report on funding and a progress report on project status which are reviewed in the Regions.

Evidence: IFMIS, SMARTLINK, and NEMIS. For IHP, see the Inspection Services Contract and State Administrative Plans. For PA, in FY 03, FAMD initiated regional assessments designed to evaluate financial grant management practices, including the PA Program. Initial analysis indicates that the regions have better financial controls in-place. FEMA continues to improve in the financial monitoring of PA grants. Recent audit reports indicate that improvement is occurring. We continue to provide training to regional staff on reviewing and reconciling quarterly financial status reports. Additionally, each region has implemented a grants monitoring plan as of FY 03 and a national workshop on grant monitoring was conducted in FY 03.

Has the program taken meaningful steps to address its management deficiencies?

Explanation: Management deficiencies are assessed on a continuous basis in the aftermath of disaster operations to identify strengths, weaknesses, and best practices and the results are used to identify potential program changes. A number of mechanisms are utilized for this purpose including FEMA's Remedial Action Management Program (RAMP). FEMA is taking action on identified deficiencies. For example, in response to OIG (Report I-02-96) and GAO (GAO/RCED-96-113) reports on PA, FEMA re-engineered the program, updated regulations, documented policies, and widely disseminated program eligibility criteria. The FEMA IG reports that FEMA has acknowledged that major improvements are needed in grants management and has begun an effort to correct long-standing issues.

Evidence: Remedial Action Management Program (RAMP). For PA, in January 25, 2002, IG memorandum on Management Challenges, Grants Management section.

Has the program demonstrated adequate progress in achieving its long-term performance goals?

Explanation: In the FY04 second quarter performance review, the Recovery Program met almost all of its identified milestones, remaining on track to meet its long-term performance goals.

Evidence: FY 2005-2009 Program Planning and Budget System documents.

Does the program (including program partners) achieve its annual performance goals?

Explanation: In the FY04 second quarter performance review, the Recovery Program (including partners) met almost all of its identified milestones, remaining on track to meet its annual performance goals. Any milestones that were not met in the second quarter are expected to be met by the end of the year.

Evidence: FY 2005-2009 Program Planning and Budget System documents.

Does the program demonstrate improved efficiencies or cost effectiveness in achieving program goals each year?

Explanation: Through the PPBS process, performance measures have been established for the FY 2005-2009 period that address percentage reductions in program delivery cost and processing cycle time.

Evidence: FY 2005-2009 Program Planning and Budget System documents.

Does the performance of this program compare favorably to other programs, including government, private, etc., with similar purpose and goals?

Explanation: There are no other programs with a similar purpose or goal that can be compared with FEMA's disaster assistance. For example, there are no other programs of integrated public facility infrastructure recovery from domestic disasters which FEMA provides through its Recovery Program.

Evidence: The Stafford Act defines the disaster assistance provided by FEMA.

Do independent evaluations of sufficient scope and quality indicate that the program is effective and achieving results?

Explanation: The Recovery program has received independent evaluations from the Office of the Inspector General. For example, the OIG reported that PA audits revealed that the program, grantees, and subgrantees indicate that the program is achieving results. Independent evaluations of the IHP and FMAGP programs have not been conducted due to the newness of these programs.

Evidence: OIG Audit Reports and Quarterly Reports. In the IG's latest "Annual Challenges" letter to the FEMA Director, the IG notes that "FEMA's disaster response and recovery program has been and continues to be the cornerstone of FEMA's emergency management program . . . . FEMA's public image can be directly attributed to the success of FEMA's disaster response and recovery system."