OTHER ATTENDEES NAME TITLE/ORGANIZATION Martha Braddock Policy Advisor and staff liaison for Government Affairs Committee, International Association of Emergency Managers Fred Endrikat Branch Chief, Urban Search & Rescue, FEMA Kathy Fields Designated Federal Officer, National Advisory Council, FEMA Kathleen Fox National Preparedness Assessment Division, National Preparedness Directorate, FEMA Craig Fugate Administrator, FEMA Pat Hart Senior Advisor to the Deputy Administrator, FEMA Lynn Jennings Executive Director, Big City Emergency Managers Amanda Johnson External Affairs Special Assistant, FEMA Alicia Jolla Senior Group Manager for Global Assets Protection, Target Nicole McKoin Senior Specialist, Crisis Management, Target Jason McNamara Chief of Staff, FEMA Ingrid Osterholm NAC Office Staff, FEMA Charlotte Porter Office of External Affairs, Intergovernmental Affairs Division, FEMA John Rasin Chief, Assessments Branch, National Capital Region, Protection & National Preparedness Division, FEMA Richard Serino Deputy Administrator, FEMA Brittany Trotter Office of External Affairs, Public Affairs Division, FEMA Matt Wilse NAC Office Contract Support, SRA International Alexandra Woodruff Alternate Designated Federal Officer, National Advisory Council, FEMA MEETING SUMMARY The meeting was called to order at 8:30 am EST by Kathy Fields, Designated Federal Officer. Jim Featherstone, Chair, National Advisory Council • The last two days of subcommittee meetings were great. Discussed what the NAC does; which promoted the question, ‘so what?’ The answer to this question will come out in today’s discussions. Jason McNamara—Chief of Staff, FEMA • FEMA’s Strategic Plan (FY 2011-2014) was released in February 2011. With respect to overall Agency strategy, nothing has changed. FEMA still operates under the four major goals: 1. Foster a Whole Community Approach to Emergency Management Nationally; 2. Build the Nation’s Capacity to Stabilize and Recover from a Catastrophic Event; 3. Build Unity of Effort and Common Strategic Understanding Among the Emergency Management Team; and 4. Enhance FEMA’s Ability to Learn and Innovate as an Organization. • Two current initiatives that are making progress include expanding the FEMA Team and building FEMA’s internal capability to learn: o FEMA is developing a curriculum for professionalizing training at EMI through a certification program for emergency management professionals at the Basic, Leader, and Executive Levels. o FEMA is also developing proposed recommendations to put into doctrine how FEMA, both as an Agency and as a National Program Executive, will integrate after action reports. • Over July 4th week there were a number of power outages from the storm. FEMA was able to find and address the problems quickly positively—in part because of FEMA’s internal organization. FEMA Logo FEMA Logo Craig Fugate – Administrator, FEMA • There is a lot of activity leading up to the start of hurricane season. Hurricane season is 142 days and there are only 119 days left in this administration. Everyone wants to know “what’s next?”—addressing this question is when mistakes are made. • When Craig arrived at FEMA in May 2009, FEMA was $180 million over budget and employees were being paid without working disasters, especially in the Disaster Relief Fund (DRF). o Congress agreed that the DRF would no longer be a supplemental funding request; FEMA was authorized for current disasters and operations. o FEMA’s fiscal situation was dire. Accountability and controlling budgets is not glamorous, but important. o 2011 was the first year that FEMA didn’t have a shortfall to meet. FEMA ran its budgets at or under projections. National Level Exercise (NLE) 11 demonstrated that the National Response Coordination Center (NRCC) could not operate in its current space, promoting FEMA to invest in renovation. • There were no issues reviewing the FEMA budget in 2012. There is a leftover balance of $600 million dollars in DRF, which means there is no anticipation of going into immediate needs funding. FEMA supports the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) reauthorization, extending for 5 years. • Amending the Stafford Act to allow federally recognized tribes to request a Presidential disaster declaration was accomplished this congress. With the amendment FEMA will not require tribes to go out on their own, but they will have the choice to stay with their states if they desire. o FEMA now has a full time attorney to address tribal issues because there are nuances that program offices don’t have the resources to do. • Another issue is the cost of debris removal. FEMA has been working to change the debris program so that funding is better aligned to respond. • FEMA expects the NAC to come back and tell us we can improve. It’s about building better national capability. FEMA is at this meeting to hear what it needs to know. Many times the acoustic noise is deafening in Washington, DC and the NAC members have and bring a unique point of view, it is why you are here. Richard Serino – Deputy Administrator, FEMA • FEMA is working on the Disaster Workforce Transformation, transferring the Disaster Assistance Employees (DAEs) to Reservists, of the 13,000 applications, 7,500 were transferred. FEMA’s Reservist Application Panels were convened in late-July/early August to review all the Reservist applications received. Decisions on qualifications for positions will be made by the end of August. • The implementation of National Civilian Community Corps (NCCC)-FEMA Corps begins this week on the NCCC campuses in Vinton, IA and Vicksburg, MS with the arrival of the first 42 Team Leaders for NCCC training. In mid- August, 438 additional Members will begin NCCC training. Beginning in mid-September, following induction into NCCC-FEMA Corps, the first 480 Members will report to the Center for Disaster Preparedness in Anniston, AL for two weeks of FEMA training. After completing FEMA training in early October, the first 480 Members will be deployed to support FEMA disaster management operations. • Another important initiative, The FEMA Qualification System (FQS), will evaluate all FEMA personnel in this performance based system. All employees have to be FEMA qualified and FQS will ensure FEMA disaster response and recovery professionals are evaluated based on consistent standards. Discussion with NAC • NAC Question: Please discuss the 50 percent sequestration cut? • The 50 percent appropriation cuts are shared by Department of Defense, the State Department, and DHS. Many believe the cut will never come; most likely nothing will happen until after the election. There may be a rushed omnibus bill after the election. • NAC Question: Given the recent unprecedented high temperatures that are building earlier and earlier, has FEMA re-calculated its strategy around extreme heat? • Extreme temperatures have been built into plans. Deaths were lower this time; we learned lessons from the 90s. Previously communities didn’t have cooling shelters, now they do. A better term for emergency management is ‘climate disruption’. NOAA scientists say that disruptions will become more acute, that there will be more extreme heat and extreme cold. FEMA is seeing these events happen closer together, will need look at the frequency and how it affects our response. o We need to build more resiliencies in the system. What are the things we can do to mitigate, and how can we respond better and faster. FEMA Logo FEMA Logo • Above ground power lines and trees don’t mix. Everything has been about power around the Washington, DC area, there was concern that there would be weeks without power. States found that there power restoration plans were lacking. o Generator capacity shortfall is another issue in the south. There were concerns that the National Grid could not hold the capacity because the heat wave had been further north. • NAC Question: How is FEMA doing with the coordination across disciplines to include the private sector, NGOs, and Voluntary Organizations Active in Disaster (VOADs)? Concerned with duplication and gaps as more and more folks become involved. • FEMA and private sector are still bumping into each other but now we know each other. It’s good to know others out there that are geographically localized to provide support. • The ‘tweens’ (between catastrophic storm and not) are where FEMA builds a stronger team and do a better job with our state and local partners. ‘Tweens’ are when a disaster declaration is made but no Individual Assistance (IA). Hundreds of families are often impacted without a declaration. Frameworks help fill the gaps. o The National Disaster Recovery Framework (NDRF) acknowledges that all FEMA programs do not fix all the problems, FEMA provides temporary solutions. The NDRF brings the key agencies together. So when the state has an IA request, FEMA isn’t done. FEMA will offer technical assistance. In addition, FEMA recognized the Stafford Act didn’t work well with catastrophic disasters. • FEMA doesn’t build houses; it provides temporary houses. When shelters are opened, people are still there a couple weeks after because FEMA is not responding quickly enough. Our IA housing inspection contracts are based on “first in, first out” policy. Generally, people are not in the shelter by choice. By contract we cannot send housing staff to the shelters to move the people out. • NAC Question: Around the issue of FEMA not going away with the IA; will FEMA IA employees coordinate with individuals seeking IA and then pass it to the U.S. Department Housing and Urban Development (HUD) or other agencies? Will it be done through IA folks? • It will be done through the states; FEMA has done it many times on an informal basis. There are a lot of things that states and locals can do that FEMA can’t do, including fundraise. FEMA will offer the technical assistance to the state and ensure that the federal agencies are at the table. The NDRF gives FEMA the mechanisms to sit at the table with the federal partners while still interacting with the states • NAC Comment: Important to make ensure that all players move together and lessons learned are communicated so FEMA, private sector, NGOs make the appropriate changes. For example, with providing clean water, doesn’t make sense for FEMA, Wal-Mart, Target, etc. all to bump into each other and work separate to all provide water bottles. There needs to be a National Business Emergency Operations Center (NBEOC) to solve the water problem example. • The Federal Disaster Recovery Coordinators are being hired in regions to help build the NBEOC team. • In August, FEMA is bringing all constituency groups to Washington, DC at the GPD National Conference. The meeting is going to allow them to work together and get to know each other. • NAC Question: During the storms at the beginning of the month Wal-Mart had 150 stores offline and had an issue with reopening due to getting landfills open. How will the NBOC help with private sector information sharing? • At the national level, FEMA can facilitate or coordinate the Federal Coordinating Officer (FCO) to address it. These issues would be helpful replicated by successful states. If FEMA knows there is a hot spot, FEMA can have the FCO or the Liaison work with the state to get the issues addressed. There is a strong willingness from FEMA’s day-to-day partners to facilitate these conversations. • NAC Comment/Question: There will be a lot involved to implement the grants reform bill. Concerned that mitigation is not being heavily stressed. What are your expectations? • Administrator Fugate’s expectation is more cuts. A big question is, “how we better manage risk in this country?” Doing mitigation only when someone else pays for it is not a good practice. Sometimes mitigation is done after a disaster declaration. Mitigation is most effective when jurisdictions adhere to building codes and the NFIP. The negative effects were seen with Hurricane Andrew. You could tell which Florida building code had been enforced and not. So what if FEMA said, “you won’t get mitigation dollars unless you have building codes and management in place?”As a nation we need to move to better systemic mitigation by enforcing building codes and the NFIP. There is not enough money to reduce the cost of damage using mitigation. • Mitigation is dealt with through the administration of Stafford Act programs. There is no whole community in mitigation. Industry is starting to realize that the days of doing things and not worrying about the effects of disasters are over. FEMA is working to ensure the private sector is engaged. • NAC Comment: Local decisions about where to build are not affected by the lack of mitigation dollars. FEMA Logo FEMA Logo • It’s about getting mitigation to take a step back and look at it though tax and risk base verses long term growth. Once a development deal goes through, the risk goes back to the tax payers. Will the dollars coming back in from these developments outweigh the long term costs of that risk? Currently our nation and FEMA doesn’t have a good way to model it or have a tool to analyze investment strategies and make better decisions. Better decisions need to be made regarding how risk is transferred back to the taxpayers. • NAC Question/Comment In regards to training and Emergency Management Institute (EMI) there are separate courses for disability? How are these competencies being integrated? • There is a cycle to update courses; FEMA is working to integrate whole community with each review cycle of the course. This year we brought in different communities but they are still separate. We realize that if FEMA talks to groups separately it does not reflect the whole community. FEMA understand this doesn’t make sense and needs to be fixed. • NAC Comment: Updating courses seems to happen in geological time. Is there a way to speed it up? • It’s a resource issue. Tony Russell, the new EMI superintendent, is looking to identify and fix disconnects between FEMA’s courses and the real world. • NAC Question: With upcoming Hurricane season and the new Hurricane Declaration Policy, did FEMA upgrade the criteria for requesting a declaration? • Yes, FEMA changed the policy because the threshold was getting unsafe. The issue was when to decide to recommend providing funding to support an evacuation with predicting a disaster. Every time a state evacuates, the Federal government is expected to pay. This becomes a huge cost prohibitive for the states to mobilize their resources and it can tend to push the envelope of people being safe. When states need federal assistance they should ask for a disaster declaration, there is no prohibition on a governor asking for a declaration. FEMA expects to be brought in at any given time. It’s like this with other events, lead agencies won’t ask for our help until its gets really bad. • NAC Question/Comment: Under the whole community concept there seems to be less attention on children and dietary needs. • This goes back to this issue of, how to fulfill state requests. FEMA has worked with Red Cross to ensure shelter packs include age appropriate supplies. Always ask how much baby food FEMA is shipping, these discussions are starting to take effect. FEMA doesn’t move anything without proper distribution rations. FEMA needs to be better at adapting to the needs of the community. If a state asked for a thousand meals, FEMA would know the ratios that are need. FEMA built the logistical packets; four years ago this wasn’t the case. • NAC Comment: Thank you Craig for implementing the NAC recommendation to include tribes in the Stafford Act. James Featherstone, Chairman, FEMA National Advisory Council • In regards to NAC charges, moving away from “monitor” and “briefing on” to specify actual measurable goals. This allowed the subcommittees to be more focused and work towards a solution set. Chuck Kmet – Chair, Preparedness & Protection Subcommittee Subcommittee Mission: To advise and provide recommendations to the FEMA National Advisory Council regarding the missions of FEMA National Preparedness & Protection including those specifically addressed in the Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act (PKEMRA) ensuring that all public needs are represented. PREVIOUS CHARGES 1. Cleared—Monitor the NAC recommendations related to the NRF Revision process and provide input as appropriate. - Subcommittee members developed a crosswalk of the revisions; reviewed them and reported out to the subcommittee. This charge can be cleared. 2. Revisiting—Continue engagement with EMTES and provide input as appropriate. - This is now the Emergency Management Professional Program (EMPP). The subcommittee had several conference calls with FEMA on the EMPP. Since February meeting, EMI has conducted several foundation level courses with positive feedback. FEMA just started the executive level which is over four weeks and will be finished late spring of 2013. The subcommittee is revisiting the charge. The subcommittee still has questions and FEMA requested feedback on the mid-level coursework. 3. Cleared—The Subcommittee will request of FEMA to provide a briefing on the new draw down and spending guidance, as announced in guidance from DHS Secretary on February 13, 2012. - The Appropriations Committee did not combine the grants; this is no longer an issue. Subcommittee FEMA Logo FEMA Logo suggests better coordination between the state and local, tribal, and county jurisdictions to ensure a better vetting process. Charge cleared. 4. Revisiting—The Subcommittee will request of FEMA to provide a briefing on the National Training & Education System (NTES) for purposes of identifying the intersection of PPD-8 core competencies between NTES and EMTES. - Keith Holtermann briefed the subcommittee on NTES; overall there will be more requirements directed for training. The true needs for training nationwide are still undefined. The subcommittee will revisit this charge. - FEMA Comment: FEMA is in the process of asking the Secretary and principals to define their goals for the next National Level Exercise. Are there specific aspects of this program you want to dig deeper? • The subcommittee is interested in the final draft document of the NTES. • The subcommittee discussed pulling historical documents to see what was presented and recommended previously to compare what has changed. NEW RECOMMENDATIONS AND CHARGES: Draft Recommendation 1: The NAC recommends that FEMA utilize the upcoming National Incident Management System (NIMS) revision roll-out to clear up various topics such as; what “NIMS compliant” means; clarify overarching issues about NIMS vs. Incident Command System (ICS); and, distinctly show any differences between the NIMS revisions through proper implementation, marketing, and communication to states, tribes, territories and local jurisdictions, taking into consideration the whole of community. The NAC further recommends that FEMA provide the NAC with the marketing/implementation plan for comment prior to the roll out. Discussion: • This recommendation came from the subcommittee discussion about the roll out for PPD-8 and NIMS. FEMA should identify the purpose of the rollout—a marketing effort, a roll out effort, awareness or functional training to present a tool for users. There is confusion about who is supposed to be at the “roll-outs” and who sets the rules. For example, it was brought up that some public hospitals are not NIMS compliant. • FEMA Comment: The rollout will be similar to the National Disaster Recovery Framework (NDRF) roll out, but this is a good recommendation. Draft Recommendation 2: The NAC supports and recommends that the proposed mid-level training of the Emergency Management Professional Program (EMPP) (previously known as EMTES) focus on the five mission areas of PPD-8 (Prevent, Protect, Respond, Recover and Mitigate) through crosswalk and curriculum. Additionally, during the development and delivery, the NAC recommends that FEMA bring forward specific areas of question or challenge to the NAC. Discussion: No Comments Draft Charges: 1. Continue engagement with FEMA on NTES and the development/implementation of EMPP to include revisiting with an overall strategic perspective and ensuring the intersection of the PPD-8 core competencies with NTES & EMPP. Discussion: • The subcommittee will look at the NTES white paper. • The subcommittee would like FEMA to move from delivery to design/distribution to include other external education providers. Make entry education more widely available online, not just G course (state controlled not widely available). • FEMA requested help on depth, breath, content, and structure with mid-level training at EMPP. Subcommittee will have a briefing with Tom Gilboy to start the conversation. 2. The Subcommittee would like to engage with FEMA to determine whether health care organizations are procedurally being left out of the planning process with regards to capabilities-building funding. Discussion: • The Subcommittee would request of FEMA to have a grants briefing with DHS FEMA and HHS with specific consideration on health care organizations on the cross walk of capabilities building and grant process and terminology to determine if health care organizations have appropriate opportunities to build them. 3. The Subcommittee will review previous NAC recommendations on NIMS to determine which ones, if any, are still relevant and which ones were implemented and how the recommendations fit within the NIMS revision. Discussion: FEMA Logo FEMA Logo • This is a good time to do that, to ensure none of our recommendations fall through the cracks. The National Advisory Council concurred to forward the two recommendations to the Administrator. Larry Larson – Chair, Federal Insurance & Mitigation Subcommittee Subcommittee Mission: To advise and provide recommendations to the FEMA National Advisory Council on strategies to lessen the loss of life and property from the impact of disasters, to ensure all public needs are represented, and implement ways to measure success. PREVIOUS CHARGES: 1. Cleared—Advise on how to actually start implementing frameworks and operational plans and be specific as to what needs to be addressed and how to do some of the actions in the next four months. This will include digging deeper into community engagement. - The subcommittee drafted a recommendation related to this charge. 2. Cleared—Investigate and advise on the relationships between frameworks and grants—specifically the relationships between dollars and strategy. - Specifically as it relates to THIRA and eligibility. 3. Revisiting—Engage with FEMA on Council Recommendation #2 regarding total costs of flooding and who bears the costs. - This charge was not addressed and the subcommittee will revisit it. NEW RECOMMENDATIONS AND CHARGES: Draft Recommendation 1: National Frameworks and Operational plans, when sharing the five national frameworks with non-federal partners (state, tribal, local, territorial) FEMA should ensure that a conscientious effort is made to: • Explain their expectations for the rollout. • Bring the appropriate strategic partners and operational people to the table. • Engage in substantive discussion on how to operationalize the frameworks and how it will impact partners— focus on dialogue, not marketing. Discussion: • The issue is unclear; there needs to be a concrete deliverable. • This recommendation responds to the method for which the NDRF was rolled out—through town hall meetings. The subcommittee suggests that the rollout include dialogue, instead of the “talking heads” approach. The questions for FEMA are: what is the goal of the roll out, and what does it mean? Draft Recommendation 2: THIRA and Grants alignment, as DHS moves toward the Quadrennial Homeland Security Review (QHSR), FEMA should consider consistent alignment of the all hazards approach in THIRA with similar all hazards criteria for grant eligibility. This may require a review of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 in order to allow state/locals to access grants and ensure an all-hazards approach. Discussion: • The move to THIRA from HIRA is a move from a science based approach to a subjective approach. The NAC is concerned that it will be difficult to award grants for activities that are not directly tied to terrorism. • The QHSR might be a mechanism for the NAC to recommend issues that should be looked at in more depth and to present issues on a larger scale. For example, in regards to the issue with the terrorism nexus, the QHSR is an opportunity to look at what has gone on over time. • A member disagreed, if this recommendation is in any way impacting the Reserve Officers' Training Corps (ROTC) program and is attempting to say that the country should ensure the all hazards approach with all its funding. • It was made clear that the recommendation would not change ROTC. • There is commonality in risk assessment for mitigation programs. Everyone should be on the same level and on the same assessment. • Not as concerned about moving to a totally new program, but concerned that there is loose language, specifically the all-hazard approach language. • The best way to look at this issue is a deep dive; DHS would have to do it by law and provide an opportunity for all groups to weigh in. • If the QHSR considers any change in the legislation, it may affect National Urban Area Security Initiatives (UASI) funds. • If UASI funds are used, they have to deal with terrorism. But states spend those funds on other projects; it is broader than most people think. o The problem is that it appears to say that an all-hazards approach should be the priority for State and Locals. Draft Charges: 1. National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) Reform Bill, request briefing on FEMA implementation of 2012 NFIP Reform legislation that was signed by the President on July 6. We will have a briefing from Dave Miller on this that will be significant. To get a handle on its impact on all the communities in the nation and the 5.6 million policy holders. Discussion: No comments or questions. The National Advisory Council concurred to forward the two recommendations to the Administrator. Teresa Scott – Chair, Response & Recovery Subcommittee Subcommittee Mission: To advise and provide recommendations to the FEMA National Advisory Council on strategic issues relating to the country’s disaster response and recovery, and to help develop FEMA’s initiatives in these areas (ex. NDHS, NDRF, NIMS, NRF), ensuring that all public needs are met. PREVIOUS CHARGES 1. Cleared— The Subcommittee will request of FEMA to provide a briefing on the National Grid System that identifies the purpose and its impacts in order to determine whether we should move to the National Grid System. 2. Cleared— The Subcommittee will request of FEMA to provide for a briefing on the Federal Qualification System 3. Cleared— Continue to monitor the Public Assistance Bottom-Up Review and provide input as appropriate. NEW RECOMMENDATIONS AND CHARGES: Draft Recommendation 1: FEMA explore partnerships with states, tribes, and locals to allow state, tribal, and local employees to train for deployment in the reservist program to enhance the capabilities of the state, tribal, and local levels as well as expand the national reservist capacity. Discussion: • The subcommittee discussed the opportunity for non-federal organizations employees to train as reservists. The benefit is that employees get the training and the community gets the skills that can be employed locally. • A problem could be that those resources will be called up and not available to the organization. It might not be ideal for smaller municipalities with fewer resources, but larger communities would have the capability. • This will be attributed to the reservist programs, not the FEMA CORPS, which focuses on 18-24 year olds. • Was FEMA at this discussion of federalizing employees during disasters? o Yes, FEMA was there and we discussed the employees will be paid by FEMA during that time. • This would require paperwork, IDs, emails and administration—all of which require significant cost. Did FEMA feel that this is ok? o The subcommittee is making this recommendation to inquire about the possibility. • FEMA will develop a reserve whether or not the NAC participates. The point is that, as they develop it, they should consider state and local resources in that program. • Modifications to the recommendation: o Include private sector, NGOs, VOADs to the language in the recommendation. o Expand to allow for training and development. Draft Recommendation 2: The process and methodology used in developing the FEMA Qualification System be documented and made available so that other entities (especially NGOs) can learn from the best practices and lessons learned. Discussion: No comments on questions. Draft Recommendation 3: As FEMA prepares for the potential passage of legislation that will allow tribes to directly request disaster and emergency declarations from the President, the NAC requests that FEMA periodically provide updates to, and seek input from the NAC as rules and plans for implementation of the legislation are developed. Discussion: • With new legislation, tribes will have the option to request disaster declarations directly from the President; this will not affect the current process of tribes working with states for Presidential disaster declarations. There will be calculations and regulations required for the tribes, such as population density. • The NAC continues to support the amendments to the Stafford Act. Draft Charges: 1. Receive briefing(s) on the new tribal policy for Presidential disaster declarations and federal assistance so that the NAC can stay proactively involved in providing input on the rulemaking and implementation plans. Discussion: No comment. 2. Review how FEMA allocates planning, training, and funding resources to ensure whole community sustainability of response and recovery efforts beyond 72 hours. Discussion: • This addresses the concern that there are not enough planning efforts sustained over longer periods of time between the response and the recovery efforts. The emphasis is on the first wave of response. • FEMA acknowledges this, and that the sustainability of the recovery is a challenge. • The language in this charge doesn't answer the “so what?” • Charge Modification: Add a preamble sentence "The NAC is concerned that as we have built the nation’s capacity to respond to disasters, we have not focused on the sustainability of the response after 72 hours.” 3. Request FEMA to provide an updated briefing on the FQS specifically regarding outcomes of the gap analysis, partnerships with state, tribal, and local stakeholders to expand the reservist cadre and long term strategies of applicability of the FQS to external agencies and/or NGO’s. Discussion: • FEMA's tendency is to want to get this right internally, so it is a good opportunity to engage with staff. • Charge Modification: Add the private sector into this recommendation. The National Advisory Council concurred to forward these three recommendations with modifications to the Administrator. Kathleen Fox, Director, National Preparedness Assessment Division, National Preparedness Directorate, FEMA Presentation and Discussion on the National Preparedness Report • Initially, there was major pushback on doing an assessment like this; this was a huge leap for FEMA. • The 2012 National Preparedness Report was developed through: o Collaborating with federal interagency partners o Using the 2011 State Preparedness Report o Engaging with whole community stakeholders o Soliciting ideas through online collaboration forum o Conducting open-source research o Evaluating trends and progress across core capabilities o Shared drafts widely for review, comment, and update • State preparedness reports go back one year—much of the data goes back further, some back to 2001. • FEMA does not share the individual states results from the Core Capability Progress Survey. • Health and Social Services could be ranked low as a priority capability for a couple reasons: o Some states do a better job involving the health communities, but also if you are comparing it against operational communications; they are going to be making priority choices for those that are most operationally important. • NAC Question: Are some regions stronger than others? • Part of the overall approach to assessing preparedness is not easily compared from state to state. The goal is not to compare state to state but understand the different strategic goals and gaps. Last year FEMA asked states to select the threat/hazard that would most stress their capabilities and provide the information to FEMA regions so they can provide feedback, support, and communicate correctly. • All the states understand that the gravy train won’t last, so they want to demonstrate that this funding is being used well. • NAC Comment: There is subjectivity in the core capabilities. It is hard to determine which capabilities apply to certain areas. • Question to the NAC—do the results seem reasonable? How should FEMA do future reports? Don’t need feedback now, but can discuss and email later. o Unlike last year, FEMA has been trying to involve the committees in this year’s report • NAC Comment: In the final report, FEMA should show the variations between the state responses in preparedness. • The raw questions and answers without identifiers would not make sense unless you understood the specific goals of the state and it is a massive Excel spread sheet. • NAC Question: Are there other groups whose perceptions should be looked at? Is there a way to survey partner agencies to see how they are working with their partners? In many cases they aren’t actually working or training with them. • FEMA is asking the state about organic capability. The questionnaire does not ask about specific partners but asks about mutual aid. From an assessment standpoint, FEMA is trying to determine what states can do themselves. • NAC Comment/Question: Appears you have self-fulfilling success since these are self reports. • Correct, self-assessments aren’t ideal. FEMA always looks for independent validations (GAO, etc.). FEMA also has discussions with other agencies along the way. • As you see the homeland security budget decline, it isn’t clear if you will be able to see that performance is declining. Fred Endrikat, Branch Chief, Urban Search & Rescue, FEMA Presentation and Discussion on Eliminating Restrictions on the Use of Specialized International Teams in the United States • The two perspectives in international response are import and export. • The requirements of a truly worldwide catastrophic event are astounding and will strip the nation of specialized resources. • In Haiti, the Iceland team was first on the ground and the liability question (compensation and benefits) was not answered. FEMA has two teams to send internationally, Florida Task Force and California Task Force. FEMA sent one team over, without the liability question resolved. • FEMA is seeking guidance on the following five points: 1. How can the delay of entry or restrictions on the use of international responders based on issues of liability or licensure be avoided in the U.S. for the use of international teams of assistance? 2. How can FEMA encourage US States to provide solutions to this challenge? 3. Should Stafford Act be revised to include a limited waiver of liability for the use of foreign responders that meet certain internationally-recognized standards with certain agreed-upon limitations? 4. Can states extend the protections afforded under existing Good Samaritan laws to international responders? 5. What other alternatives are available to streamline and make the process for using international responders more reliable? • NAC Comment: The NAC should add the five questions from the issue paper to the charges for the Response and Recovery Subcommittee. o Suggest the NAC doesn’t look solely at international issues but also look at intra-national issues. • Craig has great relationship with international community. There was a high level of interest in participation in the NLE 12—it had good representation of the things that could have actually happened. FEMA could work through questions/concerns and begin to work on bilateral agreements. • NAC Question: Have you considered how swamped you might become with the spontaneous volunteers? • FEMA experienced that every day after September 11, there were a thousand people that shouldn’t have been there, mostly firefighters. The challenge is transporting specialists to international disasters, for example, Doctor’s with specialty in crushed victims, paramedics, and engineers. o Eventually may take the blue card approach—a credential to cross boarders for mutual aid. Could already have an organized team ready to go. • NAC Comment: The U.S. House of Representatives passed an extension of the Dale Long EMS Protection Act on June 28. It provides benefits to non-profit EMS personal. • NAC Questions: The number of FEMA Urban Search and Rescue (USAR) teams has been static at 28. Is there acceptable level of certified teams? How are teams selected to be certified? • Every three years FEMA has a two-day onsite readiness evaluation for its teams. The Administrator reviewed the USAR program; there is an 80 page document and it is the first review of its kind. The evaluation is now going to be an operational exercise, with critique on the physical components. • FEMA ended up with 25 USAR teams in 1990 (not strategically). It was decided by who could fund and build the teams. FEMA added three more over the next 8 years, up to 28. • There is a separate funding stream for the two international task forces. FEMA maintains a separate response cooperative agreement with each of the 28 teams. • FEMA has resisted defining and classifying ‘catastrophic’ because FEMA doesn’t want constraints on it and it will breed other classifications. • FEMA’s solicitations from other countries are usually donations. Other counties offer services to FEMA as a diplomatic gesture. The challenge is when FEMA/U.S. cannot meet liability requests. • USAR is only one piece of this whole thing, trying to do a lot with importing and exporting resources and equipment. As a country, we have put together resources to ensure that we don’t have to go asking around for them. Public Comment Period No public comments were received. Mark Cooper –Vice-Chair, Public Engagement & Mission Support Subcommittee Mission: Provide recommendations to the National Advisory Council on enhancing/optimizing all aspects of public engagement and FEMA’s mission support while ensuring all public needs are met. PREVIOUS CHARGES 1. Cleared-Consider ways FEMA can institutionalize the Strategic Foresight Initiative (SFI). Provide input on the way forward including suggestions of other goals and activities that SFI might pursue most cost effectively and the FEMA role to drive Whole Community embracing essential capabilities, innovative models and tools, and dynamic partnerships. 2. Revisit-Monitor the Youth Preparedness Strategic Framework drafted by ARC, the Department of Education and FEMA. Support youth preparedness efforts as a major key to national preparedness, discuss ways we can seek to instill behavioral change so that Americans know how to take protective actions versus simply assembling and having disaster kits (UK Resilience model), and focus on impact versus cause (trigger versus consequence preparedness). - FEMA Comment: It is a work in progress. - A recommendation may be to have a semiannual discussion. 3. Cleared-Engage in FEMA Workforce Transformation roll-out and provide input as appropriate. - FEMA Comment: FEMA is going to move to a more regionally based, reservist model. - The NAC talked about the state’s ability to mobilize them. - FEMA Comment: Will bring it back to NAC if there is further opportunity to engage. 4. Cleared-Examine the role and value of establishing MOU with external organizations in furthering FEMA’s mission? Are they effective? When it is; when should be more formal, are some not worth it, and what is the criteria of success? - While the NAC encourages and supports FEMA’s partnerships, the charge number 4— related to MOUs— should be removed as it does not fall under the purview of the NAC. NEW RECOMMENDATIONS AND CHARGES: Draft Recommendation 1: FEMA should develop a web portal to support SFI including links to best practices and lessons learned. Discussion: • As far as socializing, SFI should be institutionalized at the local level and organically spread to the federal level. Draft Recommendation 2: FEMA should develop practical applications to drive SFI at the local level so that it becomes relevant to locals, possibly to include incentives. Discussion: • This recommendation addresses SFI becoming more practical and understandable at the local level, approach from the organic level. This will lead to a level of ambassadorship for FEMA. • FEMA Comment: FEMA is working on trying to build innovation from the bottom up. Grant money is decreasing but FEMA is looking at other sources for incentives. There is a piece of legislation out there that would allow FEMA to create independent funding. Draft Recommendation 3: FEMA should establish SFI as a primary doctrine of the FEMA Think Tank and as a pivotal point for research. Discussion: • This will be 20 years down the road; all Think Tanks should align with SFI. Draft Recommendation 3: FEMA should identify quick wins for SFI to help establish credibility and relevance to the initiative. Discussion: No comments Draft Charges: 1. Continue to engage with FEMA on the Youth Preparedness strategic framework to include semi-annual updates on the initiative to facilitate strategic support from the NAC. 2. Engage and support FEMA's Private Sector Office initiatives including promotion of small business resiliency, development of private sector programs and State and local levels, and the development of international program. This should include semi-annual reports to the NAC. Discussion: • This should be a regular briefing. • Only 22 states have private sector liaisons, FEMA has identified private sector gaps in the US, but those gaps are exponential in the international arena. The National Advisory Council concurred to forward the 3 recommendations to the Administrator. Closing Remarks • FEMA takes what the NAC says seriously and acts on it. NAC ideas are from the community at large. Anything that the NAC can do to show Congress how critical these issues are will help communities in the long run. • Next meeting is in Washington DC, October 16, 17, and 18. Hotel has not been reserved yet. • Would be good to have a briefing on Joplin, MI-from listening to the Think Tank, there are some things they have put in place that could benefit whole community. It would be good to hear about it and see what they did. • Will provide the After Action Report on Joplin and have a NAC briefing on the topic. The meeting adjourned at 3:30 pm EST. I hereby certify that to the best of my knowledge, the foregoing executive summary of the National Advisory Council Quarterly Meeting on July 12, 2012 is accurate and complete. irman A National Advisory Council FEMA National Advisory Council Meeting Notes -July 12, 2012 • \1\