DISASTER PREPAREDNESS POLICY IN THE UNITED STATES 2

Disaster Preparedness Policy in the United States:Should the U.S. Federal Emergency Management Agency devote more resources toward preparing for natural disasters?

Alyssa TownsendLinfield College

Table of ContentsTitle Page.1Table of Contents.2Abstract....3Essay4Introduction..4Federal Budget for Natural Disaster Preparedness..5FEMAs Infrastructure.....6Disaster Preparedness Educational Programs..9Accounting for Individuals with Special Needs12Conclusion.15References..16

AbstractHurricane Katrina is one of the largest disasters to hit the United States, and eight years later in the field of disaster preparedness, the Federal Emergency Management Agencys (FEMA) advancements continue to be unclear. It is uncertain if FEMA is receiving and devoting enough resources toward natural disaster preparedness, relief and hazard mitigation efforts. The federal budget for natural disaster preparedness, FEMAs infrastructure, disaster preparedness educational programs, accounting for individuals with special needs and multilateral collaboration between FEMA and nongovernment organizations are all topics that are examined in order to assert that FEMA is not currently able to prepare and respond to the next large-scale disaster. This paper will use these topics to support the argument that FEMA must devote more resources toward preparing individuals, communities, private and nonprofit organizations and local governments for the next large-scale natural disaster in the United StatesKeywords: natural disasters, disaster preparedness, emergency management, hazard mitigation, Federal Emergency Management Agency, first responders, disaster relief

IntroductionThe Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) was founded by President Jimmy Carter in 1979 as one of his last attempts to restructure the federal government. Its goals were to prepare protocols for disaster relief and implement initiatives to respond to nuclear attacks(Perrow, 2006). FEMAs current mission is to prepare the U.S. for natural disasters and provide adequate relief afterward. In March 2003, FEMA was integrated into the Department of Homeland Security. This was done to create a stronger federal government infrastructure and increase the federal budget for overall disaster preparedness (Weitz, 2005). FEMA is infamous for its inadequate response during Hurricane Katrina in 2005. Some argue that this was a result of George W. Bush appointing Michael Brown, a lawyer and former director of the International Arabian Horse Association, head of FEMA. President Barak Obama appointed Craig Fugate as head of FEMA in 2009. Fugate is an experienced disaster management expert and former director of Floridas Division of Emergency Management (Newton-Small, 2012). After Hurricane Katrina in 2005, FEMA was reevaluated and restructured to accommodate for discrepancies in disaster response protocols. This primarily included creating the whole community approach, which is the organizations guiding protocol (Federal Emergency Management Agency, 2011). The whole community approach allows the federal government and local governments to work together collaboratively. It also helps dictate who will be in charge during a disaster, which allows responsibilities and resources to be split among groups (Federal Emergency Management Agency, 2011). The whole community approach is the idea that everyone has a responsibility to prepare for themselves, especially local communities. Disaster preparedness is no longer a top-down system in which the leading government officials tell everyone what to do. Instead, the whole community approach gives the responsibility to small communities (Sargent, 2013).This paper will address key topics that are lacking in FEMAs disaster preparedness. The topics addressed will include federal budgets, FEMAs infrastructure, bureaucratic regulations and an indistinct chain of command, educational programs, accounting for individuals with special needs and multilateral collaboration. Within each topic, an analysis of FEMAs past and present protocols, experiences and initiatives will be presented. Information on FEMAs successes will also be included in order to analyze the growth rate of the organization. Specific examples will be given to support the main arguments. Ultimately, information on these topics will support the assertion that FEMA should devote more resources toward preparing for disasters so that individuals, communities, private and nonprofit organizations and local governments can be better trained and informed on how to prepare for natural disasters. Federal Budget for Natural Disaster PreparednessThe first problem with FEMA is that its budget has never been substantive enough to prepare for disasters. As the federal budget for disaster preparedness continues to be cut, FEMA increasingly continues to not have the resources to adequately prepare the U.S. for natural disasters. The federal government continually reallocates FEMAs funds to other potentially immediate needs. A study by the Trust for America's Health, with the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, found that federal funding for state preparedness has been reduced by 38 percent from 2005 to 2012 (Lloyd, 2012).Since natural disasters are so unpredictable, many government officials argue that other federal initiatives are more important. However, natural disasters are inevitable and many people do not realize that recovery efforts cost the federal government and individual citizens more money than preparing for natural disasters ahead of time. As budget cuts continue, preparedness levels decrease. Without the necessary funding, the government will not be able to help everyone in need after a disaster (Montopoli, 2013). For example, Hurricane Sandy relief cost more than $50 billion, and FEMAs 2012 budget was $1.35 billion. This data shows that the government is not prepared to handle multiple disasters or even one disaster larger than Hurricane Sandy in one fiscal year. The same trend was shown in FEMAs pre-disaster mitigation grants, which fell from $100 million in 2010 to $35.5 million in 2012 (Montopoli, 2013). FEMAs budget cuts continue to negatively affect states disaster preparedness, education and relief efforts. New York received poor ratings after FEMAs disaster preparedness funding was cut. New York Senator Charles E. Schumer says he was astounded that the city was rated so poorly when it was the fault of the government for reallocating the funds to potentially more immediate needs in the first place (Lipton, 2006). Lloyd (2012) and Lipton (2006) blame FEMAs budget cuts for the states poor ratings. Furthermore, the studies by Lloyd (2012) and Lipton (2006) were completed six years apart. The similarity in results shows a lack of progress in states preparedness and a lack of additional funding despite failed ratings. If FEMA is not adequately funded, then state governments will not receive the necessary resources to prepare and respond to natural disasters. Therefore, it is essential that FEMA receives adequate funding to prepare all levels of society. FEMAs InfrastructureFEMAs infrastructure continues to contribute to inadequate U.S. disaster preparedness and relief protocols. Since FEMAs integration into the Department of Homeland Security, it is no longer focusing on natural disaster preparedness efforts. In addition, the incorporation has depleted FEMAs resources and reallocated funds for goals within the Department of Homeland Security rather than for disaster preparedness. FEMAs overlapping responsibilities with the Department of Homeland Security is ultimately the reason disaster preparedness plans have been inadequate in the major natural disasters in the past few decades (Perrow, 2006). Gerber (2007) argues that FEMAs confusion and failures were a result of the shift from an independent agency under the Clinton administration to its present subordinate status within the Department of Homeland Security. Under the direction of the Department of Homeland Security, FEMA now focuses its resources more on terrorism than on natural disaster preparedness. Weitz (2005) also argues that FEMA hasnot devoted enoughresources todisaster preparedness followingits incorporation into the terrorism-focusedDepartment of HomelandSecurity in March 2003. However, Weitz (2005) also argues that the incorporation can be viewed as an opportunity for growth and advancement as long as the infrastructure is adjusted to fit the purposes of both organizations. While this argument may be valid, FEMA and the Department of Homeland Security have yet to combine resources, create definitive boundaries, clarify separate goals and create a distinct chain of command. The funds devoted to the Department of Homeland Security continue to deplete FEMAs resources that are necessary for disaster preparedness and relief initiatives. Within FEMAs infrastructure, bureaucratic regulations continue to debilitate its ability to prepare everyone for natural disasters. It is harder to deliver assistance during a disaster in the U.S. than in other countries because of intense bureaucratic regulations. The U.S. government never wants to admit it needs help (Owen, 2013). Montopoli (2013) argues that medical care is not being provided in a timely manner because of FEMAs bureaucratic regulations and an indistinct chain of command. For example, volunteer physicians were not allowed to help the injured after Hurricane Sandy. FEMA did not allow these physicians to help because they had not been licensed in the same state that the disaster occurred in. Although the need for medical attention was profuse and the volunteer doctors were licensed, they were not allowed to administer medical care in New York because of ambiguous communication between state and federal government agencies. Bureaucratic regulations continue to negatively affect disaster preparedness and create distrust between FEMA and individuals (Montopoli, 2013). Similar to the multifaceted problems associated with bureaucracy, an indistinct chain of command can weaken the infrastructure of FEMA and cause disaster preparedness initiatives to fail. Despite the whole community approach, communities do not know if they are in charge or if the government will be taking over, which creates a lot of miscommunication (Montopoli, 2013). Many Americans are unsure who is in charge of delivering disaster relief after a natural disaster. People are uncertain if they should be asking FEMA, the local government or nonprofit disaster relief organizations for assistance after a natural disaster (Prez-Pea, 2007). An indistinct chain of command is also shown in FEMA and the federal governments leadership roles. Favoritism and political party orientation has defined FEMAs leadership in the past decade and continues to negatively affect disaster preparedness and response. For example, George W. Bush appointed long-time friend Michael Brown, a lawyer and former director of the International Arabian Horse Association, head of FEMA. Brown did not have the experience or knowledge to head a government sector devoted to disaster preparedness since his expertise lay in horsemanship. In contrast, President Barak Obama appointed Craig Fugate as head of FEMA in 2009. Fugate is an experienced disaster management expert and former director of Floridas Division of Emergency Management. Another disaster preparedness pitfall in government leadership occurred when the Bush administration flew to Arizona and California to give speeches on healthcare and did not focus on Hurricane Katrina until three days after the storm. President Obama reacted better by canceling a campaign event in Florida before Hurricane Sandy hit, issuing an emergency press announcement and staying consistently focused on the storm (Newton-Small, 2012). In addition, Newark Mayor Cory Booker, New Jersey governorChris Christieand New York City Mayor Michael Bloombergprepared and reacted to Hurricane Sandy much more effectively than New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin and Louisiana governor Kathleen Blanco, both of whom were stunned as Hurricane Katrina approached in 2005 (Newton-Small, 2012). Although federal leadership has improved slightly since Hurricane Katrina, many government officials are still not trained to handle regulations set forth by the federal government during natural disasters. Hiring for FEMA officials continues to rely heavily on favoritism and political party orientation, and because of this, uneducated and inexperienced people are appointed into federal government positions that are in charge of disaster preparedness, reaction and relief efforts. Disaster Preparedness Educational ProgramsDisaster preparedness educational programs are also inadequate, as a result of FEMAs lack of resources. FEMA does not provide enough educational programs and opportunities for individuals to learn about how to prepare and react to natural disasters because they are not educated on specific preparedness techniques. Government organizations mainly provide educational materials, but conduct only a few discussions and trainings with the public. Planning sessions, exercises and continuous research must be added to a new community outreach program to educate individuals on how to survive a disaster without full government assistance (Gamboa-Maldonado, Marshak, Sinclair, Montgomery, & Dyjack, 2012).Individuals need more than just a 72-hour kit, a tank of gas and a change of clothes to prepare for natural disasters. People from different regions have different belief systems and values; therefore, the government needs to provide preparation programs and education accordingly (Gardner, 2013). An individual from New Orleans would react to a natural disaster differently than a person from Oregon. The individual from New Orleans is likely to have prior disaster experience and because of this, is able to respond more adequately than the individual from Oregon. Past disaster experience, demographics, age, gender and belief systems determine a persons ability to be prepared. The government must realize these factors in order to educate everyone adequately. Since each level of society reacts differently to natural disasters, each group needs specialized education and training from the government. The household, organizational, inter-organizational, state and national levels are unique, and will only be prepared if education is not generalized (Tierney, Lindell, & Perry, 2001). For example, Urist (2012) argues that she was not sufficiently trained to handle a disaster because no one educated her on how to specifically prepare children. Andrea Gielen, director of the Johns Hopkins Center for Injury Research and Policy, says that some things parents are told to do to prepare for an emergency actually increase their childs exposure to life-threatening hazards (Urist, 2012). In addition, the government is not educating the general public on how to prepare for a wide range of natural disasters because not everyone is affected by hurricanes. All types of natural disasters affect people, not just hurricanes; therefore, education needs to be tailored to people according to the region, type of disaster and previous experience with natural disasters (Nampa Fire Department, 2013). In general, FEMA only focuses on educating people in disaster prone areas. Disaster preparedness education should be available for all states, regardless of an individual states likelihood of experiencing a natural disaster. Since a natural disaster can occur anywhere, education needs to be given to everyone from every state in the U.S. By being selective, FEMA is attempting to save money and time. This tactic is only leading people to be unprepared and uneducated on how to respond to disasters. Additionally, a priority should be to inform and educate individuals so they can become volunteers to help with relief efforts. Volunteers are especially important in the relief process because of FEMAs small budget. Volunteers provide free labor and often deliver additional resources. However, since these volunteers are not in immediate danger, FEMA does not prioritize educating volunteers from areas that do not often experience disaster (Gardner, 2013). Redlener (2006) argues that many people think they are prepared until a disaster directly affects them.The general public must be educated on the short-term and long-term effects that result from disasters, so that disaster preparedness can be viewed as a daily activity. For example, Hurricane Sandy gave people advanced warning; however, it was still not enough time to fully inform everyone on what they should have already prepared for. Food supplies become a scarce resource in the days before a disaster strikes, and in actuality people should have constantly reserved food. These individuals were educated based on general guidelines that were not in-depth, and because of it they were unprepared to respond to a natural disaster. FEMA is not thinking about disaster preparedness education in a holistic way that accounts for long-term effects, and because of this individuals are not adequately prepared. For example, flooding caused from a hurricane leads to excessive mosquitos. Mosquitos often fly into a cows nostrils where it is moist and warm, which can cause the cow to suffocate and die. Once all the cows and other livestock die, small communities lose their main source of income and their primary food sources. This scenario is quite common and could wreak havoc on a community (Redlener, 2006). Individuals in a community where this scenario occurred would not be prepared to lose their livestock because FEMA had never informed them that it was a possibility. This shows that long-term effects are being overlooked in FEMAs disaster preparedness education.In contrast, some people argue that education is not just the federal governments responsibility. A nonprofit organizations job is to help government sectors, private groups and individuals find a way to prepare together and engage in preparedness efforts. A nonprofit organization is a resource to help people find out who in the government they need to approach and then act as an intermediary. As a result of federal budget cuts, other experts argue that it is even more important that individuals receive proper education and training so they can care for themselves when the government runs out of resources. Individuals need to educate themselves since the government does not have the adequate resources to fit every individuals needs (Gardner, 2013). Despite these counterarguments, individuals cannot find credible and useful educational resources without government intervention. It is the federal governments job to not only educate individuals, but also to act as a resource to direct individuals where they can go to find additional disaster preparedness information from credible sources. These examples also exhibit a lack of flexibility in FEMAs educational programs. Peoples needs are generalized to save money and time. Therefore, people are not receiving adequate education on disaster preparedness because of this blanketing effect. FEMA must devote more resources toward educational efforts in order to save money long-term and create a well-prepared nation as a whole.These examples show that education is too generalized to be effective. Disaster preparedness educational programs must be more individualized and flexible in order to meet the needs of every individual in the U.S. This is the only way that educational efforts will be well received, useful and actually give individuals information that is pertinent. Accounting for Individuals with Special NeedsFEMA has not been accounting for individuals with special needs. The government has to prioritize the majority of people, causing individuals with special needs to become unknowingly unprepared and unsupported by the government (Gardner, 2013). Many state emergency plans contain common discrepancies and a clear lack of government structure. Plans to assist the sick, elderly, disabled and others with special needs were not thoroughly formed or practiced (Lipton, 2006). For example, gluten intolerant individuals during Hurricane Sandy were physically unable to eat the meals provided by the government. These government-issued meals contain gluten, and there are currently no substitutes for gluten-intolerant individuals. As a result, many individuals were hospitalized from stomach pains or malnutrition (Gardner, 2013). Many senior citizens, especially those in retirement homes, are abandoned during disasters because it takes a long time to evacuate the elderly (Gardner, 2013). Powell, Hanfling and Gostin (2012) argue that people with special needs are being overlooked in preparation plans. This is especially true for people in critical condition at hospitals. Bellevue Hospital failed to account for evacuating disabled patients once the elevators failed. This discrepancy ultimately led two overweight individuals to be stuck inside the hospital during Hurricane Sandy, with no assistance or access to vital resources. These overweight individuals were unable to walk down the stairs and were left to fend for themselves (Powell, Hanfling, & Gostin, 2012).In contrast, some people argue that FEMA has improved its ability to assess the needs of individuals. The Department of Homeland Security (2008) argues that FEMA has more food choices, evacuation options and medical assistance available to help those with special needs. Sargent, FEMAs management analyst for the Oregon Federal Executive Board, (2013) argues that occupant emergency planning has improved since Hurricane Katrina. Occupant emergency planning is a new field in emergency management that researches and tests protocols to account for those with special needs during disasters. This heightened awareness of people with special needs emerged after Hurricane Katrina, when many elderly populations were not cared for or evacuated properly (Sargent, 2013). A study conducted by the Marist College Institute for Public Opinion proved that 46 percent of those surveyed say that the country has become more prepared to respond to disasters, while 18 percent say it has become less ready and 36 percent say that nothing has changed. This proves that the largest percentage of Americans consider themselves prepared, despite experts disagreeing (Prez-Pea, 2007). The Natural Hazards Center (2001) says FEMA is doing the best it can do with little funding to accommodate the specific needs of every individual. Otherwise, special needs should be handled by the community or individual to compensate for the resources FEMA lacks. People are too reliant on outside sources such as technology, instead of preparing individually or in small community groups. Individuals need to learn that they cannot fully rely on government intervention (Genutis, 2013). For example, Mercy Corps created Comfort for Kids, an initiative after Hurricane Katrina that provided psychological care for children and adolescents in order to help alleviate stress induced by the disaster. FEMA would not provide as specialized care as Mercy Corps was able to (Owen, 2013). Some disaster preparedness scholars argue that nonprofit organizations have the time and resources to take care of individual needs and special needs better than the government. Despite these counterarguments, FEMA still needs to improve its ability to devote more resources to individuals with special needs. In order to create a system that is in itself effective but also flexible for all individuals, collaboration between government agencies, nonprofit organizations, private organizations and individuals must increase. This is the best compromise to make individuals accountable for their own safety, while still using the governments resources that U.S. citizens are paying for. In order to begin collaboration, FEMA must increase its number of resources in order to actively contribute. Although some people argue that individuals and nonprofit organizations should be primarily responsible for their own preparation efforts, multilateral collaboration between individuals, communities, nonprofit organizations, private organizations and government sectors will improve FEMAs ability to respond to a disaster. The government should also create communication lines, because without it the chain of command fails (Gardner, 2013). A random citizen cannot summon the National Guard or Red Cross for help, which is why the government must step in to facilitate communication. This example shows that collaboration leads to active participation and well-prepared individuals. Collaboration between all groups is the best supplemental factor to improve FEMAs disaster preparedness efforts. When all groups work together collaboratively, preparedness and relief efforts become more timely and effective (Public Service Electric & Gas, 2013).ConclusionFor many years, the federal government has not provided FEMA with the funds necessary to accomplish its job effectively. FEMA needs more resources in order to better educate individuals and communities on how to prepare and respond to disasters. It must also prioritize its responsibilities and be able to distinctly identify its mission, despite its integration in the Department of Homeland Security. Additionally, evaluating its bureaucratic regulations and chain of command to create more efficient protocols is essential. FEMA also needs more resources to accommodate the special needs of individuals, and the best way to do this is to encourage collaboration between government agencies, nonprofit organizations, communities and individuals. To accomplish all of these necessities and create a well-prepared country, FEMA must devote more resources toward preparing for natural disasters. These changes and advancements are essential because FEMA is currently monetarily and structurally unable to prepare and respond to natural disasters effectively.

ReferencesDepartment of Homeland Security. (2008). FEMAs preparedness for the next catastrophic disaster (DHS Publication No. OIG-08-34). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.FEMA. (2011). A whole community approach to emergency management: Principles, themes and pathways for action (FEMA Publication No. FDOC 104-008-1). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.Gamboa-Maldonado, T., Marshak, H., Sinclair, R., Montgomery, S., & Dyjack, D. T. (2012). Building capacity for community disaster preparedness: A call for collaboration between public environmental health and emergency preparedness and response programs. Journal of Environmental Health, 75(2), 24-29. Retrieved from Nicholson Library Database.Gardner, R. (2013, March 8). Interview by Alyssa Townsend. From notes and recording. Genutis, O. (2013). The electrical aftermath of Superstorm Sandy. EC&M Electrical Construction Maintenance, 112(2), 14-16. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier. Gerber, B. J. (2007). Disaster management in the United States: Examining key political and policy challenges. The Policy Studies Journal, 35(2), 227-238. Retrieved from Sociological Abstracts. Lipton, E. (2006, June 17). U.S. report faults nation's preparedness for disaster. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://tinyurl.com/byyakgwLloyd, J. (2012, December 19). Report: States losing ground in emergency preparedness. USA Today. Retrieved from http://tinyurl.com/cbr6zoyMontopoli, B. (2013, February 26). Experts lament cuts in funds for disaster preparedness. CBS News. Retrieved from http://tinyurl.com/chcplgxNampa Fire Department. (2013, March 26). International Association of Fire Fighters emergency management meeting; Nampa, Idaho. From personal observation and notes. Natural Hazards Center. (2011, October 6). FEMA: Lots of small change, no credit. University of Colorado at Boulder Natural Hazards Center. Retrieved from http://tinyurl.com/c6ajkhjNewton-Small, J. (2012, October 30). As government reacts to Sandy, lessons from Katrina and other natural disasters. Time. Retrieved from http://tinyurl.com/ab5zo4jOwen, A. M. (2013, April 5). Interview by Alyssa Townsend. From notes. Prez-Pea, R. (2007, February 20). Sense of progress on disaster preparedness. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://tinyurl.com/cecpkgoPerrow, C. (2006, June 11). Using organizations: The case of FEMA. Social Science Research Council. Retrieved from http://tinyurl.com/bpznl9sPowell, T., Hanfling, D., & Gostin, L. O. (2012). Emergency preparedness and public health: The lessons of Hurricane Sandy. The Journal of the American Medical Association, 308, 2569-2570.Public Service Electric and Gas. (2013).Transmission & Distribution World,65(3). Retrieved from Academic Search Premier.Redlener, K. (2006).Americans at risk: Why we are not prepared for megadisasters and what we can do now. New York: Knopf.Sargent, J. (2013, April 4). Interview by Alyssa Townsend. From notes. Tierney, K., Lindell, M. K., & Perry, P. W. (2001). Facing the unexpected: Disaster preparedness and response in the United States. Washington, D.C.: Joseph Henry Press.Urist, J. (2012, November 1). Hurricane Sandy exposes faults of modern family preparedness. The Washington Post. Retrieved from http://tinyurl.com/b3m6jge Weitz, R. (2005, November 21). FEMA, DHS andKatrina:Managingdomesticcatastrophes better. Hudson Institute. Retrieved from http://tinyurl.com/colvslu