FEMA issued it Preparedness Task Force report to Congress last fall. An advisory committee had been authorized by Congress to prepare a report informing Congress of what it could do to enhance National Preparedness. It has been suggested that PPD-8 was one outcome of the Task Force report. I argue that the TASK FORCE under leadership of FEMA and DHS did not come close to helping Congress understand the problems in the current national preparedness setup and certainly did not provide any kind of information base upon which the Congress could legislate to fill preparedness gaps. Please judge for yourself as you read over the recommendations that follow. I would argue that all could be addressed without further legislation but are more a matter of will in FEMA and DHS and the Executive Branch. Perhaps someone will be addressing this deficiency in depth at some point after the next catastrophe.
Here are the Recommendations of the TASK FORCE:
TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS TO CONGRESS
Appendix A: Recommendations to Congress
Strategic Investments to Sustain and Grow Preparedness
Recommendations 1-25
#1: Include preparedness in the portfolio of strategic, futures-oriented analysis currently
conducted by the National Intelligence Council.
Desired Outcomes:
The National Intelligence Council integrates preparedness-related futures analyses into its
activities; and
.
DHS is able to use futures analyses to make authoritative judgments about future
requirements and/or capabilities, enabling anticipatory investments in key areas.
#2: The Department of Education, working with FEMA, should develop materials that school districts can use to implement a preparedness curriculum.
Desired Outcomes:
.
School districts around the country integrate preparedness principles and materials into
curricula; and Citizens entering adulthood understand the preparedness mindset and have taken basic steps to better prepare themselves individually or as a family at home, in the community, and in the workplace.
#3: Establish a system of financial incentives to encourage individuals, families, and businesses to train and materially prepare for emergencies.
Desired Outcomes:
.
Governments at all levels increasingly consider and implement innovative financial
incentives to promote preparedness; and increasing numbers of individuals and businesses engage in preparedness planning and activities.
#4: Provide incentives for jurisdictions to take pre-event steps that will reduce the length and magnitude of disaster recovery.
Desired Outcomes:
.
Jurisdictions take steps—such as those identified in the San Francisco Success Story—to
initiate advanced recovery planning efforts; and jurisdictions are able to recover from catastrophic events more efficiently, rapidly, and effectively.
#5: Ensure national cybersecurity efforts address local, State, Tribal, and Territorial preparedness implications.
Desired Outcomes:
.
Cybersecurity capability enhancement is prioritized at the local, State, Tribal, and
Territorial levels; and
#4. National cybersecurity policy is expanded to include considerations for the resiliency of increasingly cyber-dependent preparedness and emergency management activities at all levels of government.
#5. Policy and Guidance
Desired Outcome:
Transform existing advisory bodies into a “networked” overarching
preparedness policy advisory system capable of influencing policy
policy from initiation to implementation.
#6: Expand the reach of the National Advisory Council.
Desired Outcome:
.
The NAC functions as an intergovernmental focal point and forum for local, State, Tribal,
and Territorial participation in all stages of the preparedness policy process.
#7: Revitalize and “network” the Regional Advisory Councils.
Desired Outcome:
The RACs serve as regional nodes in a preparedness policy advisory system that
communicates regional local, State, Tribal, and Territorial perspectives and informs
national-level policy decisions.
#8: Embed local, State, Tribal, and Territorial officials in the FEMA National Preparedness Directorate (NPD).
Desired Outcome:
.
Embedded local, State, Tribal, and Territorial officials advise their Federal counterparts on emerging policy issues and serve as a conduit through which the NAC and RACs can
contribute to and keep informed of national preparedness policy.
#9: Establish a clear and consistent policy coordination process.
Desired Outcome:
.
DHS establishes a clear, consistent, and efficient preparedness policy process that better
balances the Department’s need for deliberative flexibility with its need to engage broader elements of the homeland security and emergency management enterprise in collaborative policy-making.
#10: Engage non-governmental stakeholders in a collaborative policy process.
Desired Outcome:
.
Individuals and non-governmental organizations are engaged in a genuinely collaborative
preparedness policy process.
#11: Planning-related policy and guidance should ensure that basic emergency plans match community demographics.
Desired Outcome:
.
Communities better understand and account for their unique requirements and plans reflect these realities.
#12: Establish and fund a national, comprehensive mutual aid system based on NIMS.
Desired Outcome:
.
Local, State, Tribal, and Territorial governments efficiently coordinate mutual aid before,
during, and in the aftermath of major emergencies and events requiring national or
interstate level responses through a national, comprehensive mutual aid system.
#13: Develop a strategic policy planning process to prepare for tomorrow’s challenges.
Desired Outcome:
The NAC futures analysis workgroup performs long-range assessments and policy planning to mitigate the risk of strategic surprise and optimize the efficiency and effectiveness of preparedness investments.
Capabilities and Assessment --Overarching Prioritize development and phased implementation of a national Recommendation preparedness assessment framework
#14: Conduct Threat and Hazard Identification Risk Assessment (THIRA) processes at all levels of government to establish a foundation to justify preparedness improvements.
Desired Outcomes:
.
All levels of government are able to assess their risks using appropriate methodologies;
.
Framework for preparedness Investment Justifications is established;
.
Preparedness levels and progress are measured from year to year by evaluating the gaps
between current and targeted capability levels across all levels of government; and
Investments made to close gaps in capability levels result in a more prepared Nation and
reflect a measurable return on investment.
#15: Prioritize ongoing efforts to update the existing Target Capabilities List with tiered, capability-specific performance objectives and NIMS-typed resource requirements.
Desired Outcomes:
.
All levels of government are able to assess their capability levels, with associated
performance objectives and resource needs;
.
FEMA works with all levels of government to identify and address capability performance
gaps; and
.
FEMA works with all levels of government to identify and address gaps in nationally
deployable NIMS-typed resources.
#16: Establish a NIMS-typed resource inventory for nationally deployable homeland security and emergency management assets.
Desired Outcome:
.
Homeland security and emergency management stakeholders have greater visibility into
and access to the range of nationally deployable assets.
#17: Use existing, familiar, user-friendly systems, such as NIMSCAST, to collect preparedness assessment and resource inventory data from all levels of government.
Desired Outcome:
.
FEMA provides a system for data collection and subsequent reporting that is transparent,
repeatable and defendable.
#18: Implement the elements of a preparedness assessment framework over a three-year period, with an integrated set of annual milestones.
Desired Outcomes:
.
All levels of government have an understanding of their threat and hazard profiles,
associated capability needs, and documented capability shortfalls;
.
Grant investments and other preparedness activities are linked to documented capability
shortfalls; and
.
All levels of government have access to a NIMS-typed resource inventory of nationally
deployable assets.
Grants Administration
Make targeted improvements to preparedness grant-related
Overarching coordination and collaboration, business processes, and
capability assessment linkages.
#19: Establish an interagency working group to better coordinate preparedness grants at the Federal level.
Desired Outcomes:
Federal agencies administering preparedness grants meet regularly to coordinate, as
appropriate, development of grant guidance, application/award timelines, monitoring, and
assessments;
.
Federal agencies providing preparedness grants have visibility into grantee-developed
strategic documents and use these documents to inform grant allocations and awards;
.
Preparedness grant programs reflect more consistent timelines; and
.
Preparedness grant programs employ the Grants.gov system as a common system.
#20: Incentivize coordination among local, State, Tribal, and Territorial stakeholders regarding preparedness-related grant funds.
Desired Outcome:
.
SAAs for all Federal grant programs have increased visibility into grant initiatives,
resulting in more efficient and effective use of Federal grant funds.
#21: DHS should evaluate the role of match requirements in Federal preparedness assistance grants to ensure that match requirements do not disincentivize local, State, Tribal, and Territorial participation and that they support capability development and sustainment.
Desired Outcome:
.
DHS conducts evidence-based evaluation to understand how match requirements influence local, State, Tribal, and Territorial participation in preparedness grants.
#22: Federal agencies with decentralized grant administration and monitoring functions should ensure consistent application of standards.
Desired Outcome:
.
Grant programs are administered and monitored consistently by regional offices.
#23: Allow grantees flexibility to use federal grant funds to support sustainment and maintenance costs without limitation.
Desired Outcome:
.
Local, State, Tribal, and Territorial grantees are able to use federal preparedness grants
flexibly to sustain and maintain existing capabilities.
#24: To reflect the diverse goals and objectives of Federal grant programs, grant funding should be allocated using a variety of approaches, including: 1) baseline amounts for each state and territory; 2) amounts based on risk formulas targeted to specific areas; 3) category/programs specific grants; and 4) competitive programs that encourage innovation.
Desired Outcome:
.
Grantees have access to a full range of preparedness grants to meet diverse needs.
#25: More closely link grant programs with capability assessments.
Desired Outcome:
Assessment data supports local, State, Tribal, and Territorial stakeholders by identifying
how grant funds contribute to capability improvements.
