Archive

Archive for the ‘Federal Emergency Management Agency’ Category

CBO — Understanding FEMA’s Rate-Setting Methods for the National Flood Insurance Program (presentation)

October 10, 2014 Comments off

Understanding FEMA’s Rate-Setting Methods for the National Flood Insurance Program
Source: Congressional Budget Office

Program Goals

  • Help property owners recover from floods
  • Limit federal costs
  • Reduce flood losses – Better incentives for property owners – Better floodplain management
  • Allow floodplains to play their natural beneficial roles
About these ads

DHS OIG — Flawed FEMA System Could Hamper Disaster Relief

October 7, 2014 Comments off

Flawed FEMA System Could Hamper Disaster Relief (PDF)
Source: U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Office of Inspector General

After spending more than $247 million on a high-tech system, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) may still not be able to efficiently deliver emergency supplies to survivors of a catastrophic disaster, an Office of Inspector General (OIG) audit has found.

OIG Report 14-151, “FEMA’s Logistics Supply Chain Management System May Not Be Effective During a Catastrophic Disaster,” found the system, developed over nine years, cannot interface with those of its partners and suppliers, making it difficult to track and locate emergency supplies. The report also noted that FEMA does not have enough trained employees to efficiently operate the system.

+ Full Report (PDF)

FEMA Miscalculation Costs Taxpayers $12 Million

October 1, 2014 Comments off

FEMA Miscalculation Costs Taxpayers $12 Million (PDF)
Source: U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Office of Inspector General

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) officials did not follow their own disaster relief guidelines in response to 2008 flooding in Cedar Rapids, IA, resulting in a loss to taxpayers of more than $12 million, according to a new report by the Office of Inspector General (OIG), Department of Homeland Security.

OIG auditors determined that officials did not correctly follow FEMA’s “50 Percent Rule” in determining that four flood-damaged structures in Cedar Rapids be replaced, rather than repaired. The rule states that Federal funds can be used to replace damaged structures only when the cost of repairs meets or exceeds 50 percent of the repair costs. The OIG found that none of the four structures – the Main Library, two animal control facilities and a park maintenance shop – met the 50 percent threshold and could have been repaired for a total of $8.57 million. FEMA granted the city more than $20.6 million to replace the buildings.

“FEMA needs to improve and refine its calculations in regard to repairing or replacing damaged facilities,” said Inspector General John Roth. “We have made several recommendations that will assist FEMA in that process and hopefully prevent misspending on disaster relief.”

+ Full Report (PDF)

Fire/EMS Department Operational Considerations and Guide for Active Shooter and Mass Casualty Incidents

July 23, 2014 Comments off

Fire/EMS Department Operational Considerations and Guide for Active Shooter and Mass Casualty Incidents (PDF)
Source: U.S. Fire Administration

This guide is a fire and emergency medical services (EMS) resource that can be used to support planning and preparation for active shooter and mass casualty incidents. These complex and demanding incidents may be well beyond the traditional training and experience of the majority of firefighters and emergency medical technicians. The U.S. Fire Administration offers this guide as one source of many available for the public safety community, but it takes into consideration the diverse local service levels available across America. In developing the guide, we consulted with individuals and groups engaged in fire and pre-hospital emergency medical services, law enforcement, and hospital medical and trauma care. We also consulted with public safety organizations and numerous federal agencies.

CRS — FEMA’s Disaster Relief Fund: Overview and Selected Issues

May 14, 2014 Comments off

FEMA’s Disaster Relief Fund: Overview and Selected Issues (PDF)
Source: Congressional Research Service (via Federation of American Scientists)

The Robert T. Stafford Emergency Relief and Disaster Assistance Act (P.L. 93-288, as amended) authorizes the President to issue declarations for incidents ranging from destructive, large-scale disasters to more routine, less damaging events. Declarations trigger federal assistance in the forms of various response and recovery programs under the Stafford Act to state, local, and tribal governments. The Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) Disaster Relief Fund (DRF) is the primary funding source for disaster response and recovery.

Funds from the DRF are used to pay for ongoing recovery projects from disasters occurring in previous fiscal years, meet current emergency requirements, and as a reserve to pay for upcoming incidents. The DRF is funded annually and is a “no-year” account, meaning that unused funds from the previous fiscal year (if available) are carried over to the next fiscal year. In general, when the balance of the DRF becomes low, Congress provides additional funding through both annual and supplemental appropriations to replenish the account.

New: Residential Building Electrical Fires (2009-2011)

April 15, 2014 Comments off

New: Residential Building Electrical Fires (2009-2011) (PDF)
Source: U.S. Fire Administration

Findings from this report:

  • An estimated 25,900 residential building electrical fires were reported to fire departments within the United States each year. These fires caused an estimated 280 deaths, 1,125 injuries and $1.1 billion in property loss.
  • Residential building electrical fires resulted in greater dollar loss per fire than residential building nonelectrical fires.
  • In 79 percent of residential building electrical fires, the fire spread beyond the object where the fire started.
  • The leading items most often first ignited in residential building electrical fires were electrical wire/cable insulation (30 percent) and structural member or framing (19 percent).

State Fire Death Rates and Relative Risk

April 9, 2014 Comments off

State Fire Death Rates and Relative Risk
Source: U.S. Fire Administration

The fire problem varies from region to region in the United States. This often is a result of climate, poverty, education, demographics, and other causal factors. Perhaps the most useful way to assess fire fatalities across groups is to determine the relative risk of dying in a fire. Relative risk compares the per capita rate for a particular group (e.g., Pennsylvania) to the overall per capita rate (i.e., the general population). The result is a measure of how likely a group is to be affected. For the general population, the relative risk is set at 1.

In addition to the District of Columbia, the states with the highest relative risk in 2010 included West Virginia, Alabama and Mississippi. The populace of West Virginia was 3.3 times more likely to die in a fire than the general population; however, people living in Oregon, Massachusetts and Arizona were 50 percent less likely to die in a fire than the population as a whole. Twenty-three states and the District of Columbia had a relative risk higher than that of the general population. Three states, Iowa, Washington and New Mexico, had a relative risk comparable to that of the general population.

Relative risk was not computed for HI, ME, ND, VT and WY due to small numbers of fire deaths which are subject to variability.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 938 other followers