FEMA Strategic Plan Fiscal Years 2008 – 2013 Performance Addendum Baseline Measurements for Fiscal Year 2009 Table of Contents Executive Summary 3 Introduction 4 Purpose of Addendum Background Alignment with DHS Strategic Plan 6 FEMA Strategic Goals and Performance Measures Align with DHS Strategic Plan Tying Performance to FEMA’s Strategic Goals 8 Linking Individual Performance to FEMA Strategic Goals Program Performance in the Future Year Homeland Security Program Supporting FEMA’s Strategic Goals through Baseline Performance Measures 10 FY 2009 Baseline Measures for FEMA Strategic Plan FY 2008-2013 12 Analysis of How Performance Measures Align to Strategic Goals 19 Overall Analysis Performance Results and Trends Summary of Performance for FEMA Strategic Goals Identifying Gaps in Measuring Performance across the FEMA Strategic Plan Goals Conclusion 25 The Way Ahead 26 Background: In early 2008, FEMA released a new strategic plan to establish a common long-term direction for the agency. While the Plan stressed the importance of measuring performance, it did not include performance measures. The intent was to capitalize on FEMA’s ongoing efforts to refine its performance measures and then annually report on the measures. Thus, this FEMA Strategic Plan Performance Addendum serves as the first annual performance “diagnostic check” in gauging FEMA’s performance against the agency’s strategic goals and objectives. Approach: The Performance Addendum includes nineteen “initial” baseline measures reported in the Department of Homeland Security’s Annual Performance Report. FEMA analyzed the measures and aligned them to the agency’s strategic goals, identifying potential gaps in coverage across the agency’s five strategic goals. The measures primarily support FEMA’s first strategic goal to strengthen the Nation’s ability to address disasters, emergencies and terrorist events. FEMA met more than eighty percent of the nineteen measures in Fiscal Year (FY) 2008 and corrective action is being taken to address the remaining measures that were not met. The Way Ahead: FEMA will conduct further analysis to identify possible gaps in implementing the Strategic Plan, developing and refining additional measures to address the newly identified issues and gaps in future performance addendums. Additionally, FEMA will continue to assess its programs and to recalibrate associated program measures, thus ensuring program effectiveness and support in implementing the Strategic Plan. The performance addendum shows FEMA’s continuing commitment to demonstrate the results of its efforts to protect and serve the American public as the Nation’s Preeminent Emergency Management and Preparedness Agency. FEMA is committed to results and measuring how it accomplishes its mission. In early 2008, FEMA released a new strategic plan to establish a common long-term direction for the agency. The Strategic Plan outlined strategic goals, objectives, and strategies that provided a roadmap for implementing the agency’s vision as the Nation’s Preeminent Emergency Management and Preparedness Agency. Though performance measures are frequently a part of strategic plans, FEMA chose a different approach by issuing a separate Performance Addendum. There are currently many performance measures throughout FEMA, ranging from broad program measures intended to satisfy the Government Performance Results Act and Future Year Homeland Security Program (GPRA/FYHSP), to individual measures incorporated into performance plans of the agency’s senior executives. FEMA has placed increased emphasis on ensuring that this full range of measures is coordinated, truly measurable, relevant, and meaningful. Because of this ongoing effort to improve measures, and due to operational and budget realities, it was decided that an annual performance addendum would be developed to accompany the FEMA Strategic Plan, rather than embed measures in the Plan itself. Thus, this first FEMA Strategic Plan Performance Addendum establishes an initial baseline of strategic measures to measure the agency’s progress in implementing its strategic direction. Purpose of Addendum FEMA is committed to mission continuity and strategic success by ensuring that the agency’s performance measures support the FEMA Strategic Plan goals, and actually tell a story of what the American taxpayer is getting in terms of tangible performance. In essence, the Performance Addendum will be an annual effort to examine programs’ successes or shortfalls in achieving the agency’s strategic vision. It will be updated in the first quarter of each fiscal year to influence the following fiscal year’s five-year planning and budget cycle. Each addendum will provide: * an annual performance “diagnostic check”, or barometer, gauging FEMA’s performance against the agency’s strategic goals and objectives; and * information to help program managers develop justifications for requirements that will be integrated into FEMA’s five-year budget submission (the Future Year Homeland Security Program or FYHSP). For FY 2009, the Performance Addendum focuses on a baseline of measures reported through the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Annual Performance Report. The Performance Addendum will serve as a bridge between the agency’s vision and its budget processes, program and regional strategic plans, spend plans, five-year planning efforts, and performance results. Additionally, the FY 2009 Performance Addendum will provide the new administration with performance metric data that informs how FEMA is performing its strategic mission direction. Background As required by the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA), the DHS Annual Performance Report provides detailed fiscal year performance information that enables the President, Congress and the public to assess the effectiveness of the department's mission performance and resource stewardship. FEMA contributes to the DHS performance report by providing FEMA measures that demonstrate the agency’s performance. FEMA has a multitude of performance measures that range from higher-level GPRA/FYHSP and Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART)1 measures to program and regional office measures. Since FEMA provides the higher level GPRA/FYHSP and/or PART measures to DHS, and in turn to Congress through the Annual Performance Report process, these same measures are presented in the FEMA FY 2009 Performance Addendum. FEMA aligned these measures with the agency’s Strategic Plan and made adjustments to some of the measures for FY 2009. The measures are considered “initial” or “early” measures that will serve as a baseline in gauging the implementation of FEMA’s Strategic Plan. 1 The Office of Management and Budget’s Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART) is used by federal agencies to review their program performance. It focuses on the importance of utilizing credible measures of performance in assessing program performance. Alignment with DHS Strategic Plan The DHS Strategic Plan identifies strategic goals that guide the coordination and integration of DHS component operations in executing the DHS mission. Performance measures are developed at all levels in the organization to measure program success and strategic progress. FEMA must ensure that its performance information supports the DHS Strategic Plan goals shown below. FEMA’s mission performance supports DHS Goals 3, 4, and 5, though the strongest mission alignment is with the preparedness and emergency response focus of Strategic Goal 4. DHS strategic goals 1 and 2 primarily apply to the missions of other DHS components. DHS Strategic Plan Goals FY 2008-2013 Goal 1: Protect our Nation for Dangerous People. Goal 2: Protect our Nation from Dangerous Goods. Goal 3: Protect Critical Infrastructure. Goal 4: Strengthen our Nation's Preparedness and Emergency Response Capabilities. Goal 5: Strengthen and Unify DHS Operations and Management. FEMA’s strategic goals for FY 2008-2013 are shown below. They primarily align with DHS Strategic Goals 3, 4, and 5. The first three FEMA Strategic Goals address how FEMA implements its mission of preparing for, protecting and mitigating against, responding to, and recovering from the impacts of natural disasters and terrorist or man-made incidents. The final two Strategic Goals focus on FEMA’s people, processes, procedures, systems, and organizational change. 1. Lead an integrated approach that strengthens the Nation’s ability to address disasters, emergencies, and terrorist events 2. Deliver easily accessible and coordinated assistance for all programs 3. Provide reliable information at the right time for all users 4. FEMA invests in people and people invest in FEMA to ensure mission success 5. Build public trust and confidence through performance and stewardship The goals build on the FEMA vision and a comprehensive and integrated mission statement to provide the agency with a clear and well-defined pathway for the future. A description of how FEMA performance measures support the agency’s strategic goals is provided later in the Addendum. Tying Performance to FEMA's Strategic Goals Linking Individual Performance to FEMA Strategic Goals One of the most effective means of ensuring that strategic planning and performance measures matter is to link individual performance to organizational performance. For the past several years, the department and FEMA have been operating under a senior executive service pay-for-performance system that requires linkage of senior executive performance plan objectives to department and agency strategic plans. The intent is to ensure that each employee-specific performance objective includes quantifiable and meaningful performance targets that support the organization’s strategic goals. The FY 2008 performance rating guidance required component heads and senior executive service rating officials to consider organizational performance results in determining individual senior executive performance ratings. In FY 2009, this linkage continues to strengthen. Each senior executive service performance plan must include mission-oriented performance measures and targets that link to the new DHS and FEMA Strategic Plans, including at least one GPRA/FYHSP measure. Inclusion of PART measures is strongly encouraged as well. At the end of the rating period, the senior executive’s performance rating will factor in his or her contributions to actual program results. Each FYHSP or PART measure contained in this Performance Addendum should be incorporated into one or more senior executive performance plans for FY 2009, thereby ensuring a keen focus on results. It can be expected that the goals and performance targets included in each of the senior executive performance plans will, in turn, be reflected in program priorities and cascade to individual employee performance plans within the various FEMA components. This alignment of strategic goals and performance targets—from the departmental level to the individual—will help ensure that all employees are working toward the same strategic ends and that progress toward achieving those ends can be measured. Program Performance in the Future Year Homeland Security Program The DHS FYHSP summarizes the department’s programs and associated resources (i.e., investments, human capital, information technology, and other support and funding) needed to achieve DHS’s strategic goals, objectives, and planning priorities. Since planning drives budgets, DHS and FEMA follow the Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution process that includes the following phases: * Planning establishes strategic goals; * Programming develops multi-year plans to achieve the strategic goals; * Budgets are developed to support the execution of the multi-year plans; and, * Execution is monitored to ensure a link between expenditures and the expected level of performance. Each fiscal year, strategic planning priorities for developing FEMA’s multi-year budget are derived from the DHS Secretary’s Integrated Planning Guidance, FEMA Administrator’s Intent, and the DHS and FEMA Strategic Plans. Each FEMA component produces a budget that is aligned with the planning priorities, followed by spending plans that detail spending priorities for each program office. The spend plans include a summary of the activities that will be accomplished in each fiscal year. The performance measures associated with these activities “roll up” to support the overall implementation of the strategies contained in the FEMA Strategic Plan. Supporting FEMA's Strategic Goals through Baseline Performance Measures Most performance measures in FEMA align with the various elements of the FEMA Strategic Plan. Some measures are annually refined and adjusted by program offices, in conjunction with FEMA’s Program Analysis and Evaluation Division, to reflect priorities and budget realities. Since FEMA provides nineteen higher level GPRA/FYHSP and/or PART measures to DHS, and in turn to Congress through the Annual Performance Report process, these same measures are presented in the FEMA FY 2009 Performance Addendum. FEMA aligned these measures with the agency’s Strategic Plan and made adjustments to some of the measures for FY 2009. These measures are considered baseline measures for gauging agency progress in implementing the FEMA Strategic Plan. A full list of the nineteen performance measures provided to DHS is provided, including: * an explanation of the measure; * fiscal year 2008, 2009, and 2013 targets and actual performance against the 2008 targets; * the FEMA organization responsible for the measure; and, * an indicator of whether each measure’s linkage to a particular strategic goal is “primary” or “secondary.” An analysis of the measures and how they align to the FEMA strategic goals follows the listing. 2 The 2008 and 2009 targets are included to provide information on current performance, and the 2013 targets are included to provide a long-term look at FEMA’s future performance expectations. FY 2009 Baseline Metrics for FEMA Strategic Plan FY 2008-2013 (Excel File) * P represents the primary goal that the measure supports. ** S represents a secondary goal that the measure supports. "Percent of customers satisfied with Individual Recovery Assistance (FYSHP)The percent of Americans affected by disaster or other emergency who indicate satisfaction with the Individual Disaster Recovery Assistance provided by FEMA to help them return to normal and function quickly and efficiently." "Disaster Assistance" FY08 92% FY08 Achieved 92.7% FY 09 93% FY 2013 97% Goal2 P Goal5 S "Percent of customers satisfied with Public Recovery Assistance (FYHSP) The percent of communities affected by disaster or other emergencies who indicate satisfaction with the Public Disaster Recovery Assistance provided by FEMA to help them return to normal and function quickly and efficiently. Assistance includes debris removal, emergency protective measures, and repair or replacement of damaged infrastructure." "Disaster Assistance" FY08 90% FY08 Achieved 90% FY09 90% FY2013 90% Goal2 P Goal5 S "Percent of response teams reported at operational status (FYHSP) The percent of FEMA's response teams indicating they are ready to respond quickly and effectively to acts of terrorism, natural disasters, and other emergencies. This measure tracks the readiness of three types of teams: the 28 task forces of Urban Search and Rescue (US&R); the five Mobile Emergency Response Support (MERS) detachments; and the two Federal Incident Management Assistance Teams (IMATs)." "Disaster Operations" FY08 91% FY 08 Achieved 93% FY09 94% FY 2013 100% Goal 1 P "Average time in hours to provide essential logistical services to an impacted community of 50,000 or fewer (FYHSP) The average response time in hours to provide essential logistical services to a community of 50,000 or fewer, in the event of a natural disaster or other emergency. FEMA provides logistical services to communities which include ice, water, meals ready to eat, and other commodities. Start time is measured from the driver pick up time and end time is measured as delivery to the destination." "Logistics" FY 08 56% FY 08 Achieved "Not Met" FY 09 Closed FY 2013 Closed Goal 1 P "Percentage of Federal Departments and Agencies with fully operational Continuity of Operations (COOP) capabilities (FYHSP, PART) The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) works with Federal departments and agencies to develop and exercise plans that ensure the continuation of federal operations and the continuity and survival of an enduring constitutional government. FEMA collects the results of exercises and self-assessments to measure the percentage of departments and agencies that have in place the necessary plans and capabilities." "National Continuity Programs" 08 100% 08 Achieved 100% 09 100% 2013 100% Goal 1 P "Percentage of Federal Departments and Agencies with fully operational Continuity of Government (COG) capabilities (FYHSP, PART)The percentage of federal departments and agencies that have developed and exercised plans to ensure the continuity of government operations and essential functions in the event of crisis or disaster." "National Continuity Programs" 08 90% 08 Achieved 72% 09 90% 2013 90% Goal 1 P "The per capita loss of life due to fire in the U.S (FYHSP) This measure is based on data that analyzes the reduction in the rate of loss of life from fire-related events by one percent per year. It examines the fatalities in the U.S. per million population using modified targets based on the review of historical data. The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) reports data in September for the previous year. NFPA Survey data are analyzed to produce the report on fire related civilian fatalities. FY 2006 actual results are the most recent data available and will be updated when NFPA reports the data in September of the current fiscal year." United States Fire Administration 08 13.0 08 Achieved 11.4 09 12.9 2013 12.3 Goal 1 P "Percent of States and territories accredited by the Emergency Management Accreditation Program (EMAP) (PART) This measure directly supports the long-term goals of the program, as it reflects States and territories' efforts to meet national standards for emergency management in order to comply with and implement the National Preparedness Guidelines, the National Priorities, and their State homeland security strategies. EMAP is a voluntary review process for State and local emergency management programs. Using self-assessments, documentation, and peer reviews, an independent commission grants accreditation to jurisdictions that demonstrate national standards for emergency management. This evaluation utilizes the EMAP Standard, an agreed-upon set of 63 national standards developed with input from emergency managers and State and local government officials." Grant Programs 08 "Base-line" 08 Achieved New Metric 09 40% 2013 60% Goal 1 P "Percent of analyzed capabilities performed acceptably in exercises (FYSHP, PART) Exercises form a critical part of the backbone of national emergency preparedness. During an exercise, a jurisdiction is required to implement its critical capabilities under circumstances as close as possible to an actual emergency. Historically exercises were evaluated using critical tasks; now they are evaluated using capabilities as described by the Homeland Security Exercise and Evaluation Program. Exercises expose areas of strength, weaknesses in plans and abilities, and areas of possible improvement. As such, exercises are the most cost-effective and accessible means of demonstrating whether or not a jurisdiction has attained a desired level of emergency capabilities." "Grant Programs" 08 40% 08 Achieved 65.3% 09 40% 2013 60% Goal 1 P Goal 2 S "Percent of grantees reporting significant progress towards the goals and objectives identified in their State homeland security strategies (FYHSP) This measure reflects grantee progress against goals and objectives identified in homeland security strategies." "Grants Programs" 08 26% 08 Achieved 65% 09 69% 2013 78% Goal 1 P "Percent of participating urban area grant recipients reporting significant progress made towards identified goals and objectives (FYHSP) This measure reflects grantee progress against the goals and objectives identified in their Urban Area homeland security strategies. The term ""significant"" means a 0.1 increase in the average progress of all of the objectives in the grantee's strategy." "Grants Programs" 08 26% 08 Achieved 50% Closed Closed P "Percent reduction in firefighter injuries in jurisdictions receiving Assistance to Firefighter Grants funding compared to the national average (FYHSP, PART) This measure compares the percent reduction in fighter injuries in jurisdictions that receive AFG grants to the average percent reduction in firefighter injuries nationwide. The measure assesses improvements in firefighter safety in jurisdictions that receive AFG funding. Comparing AFG-funded jurisdictions to the national average shows the impact of AFG grant awards on reducing firefighter injuries. The measure specifically focuses on line-of-duty firefighter injuries, not any injury that a firefighter may have." " Grant Programs" 08 18% 08 Achieved 18% 09 21% 2013 25% Goal 1 P "Percent of significant progress toward implementation of National Priorities (PART) Outcome measure which indicates the degree of progress states are making on national priorities set forth in the National Preparedness Goal. States will make progress on different priorities at different rates. An increase indicates improvement and also indicates an improvement in the area of building the culture of preparedness based on progress against a common set of priorities. Implementation is monitored by Preparedness Officers." "Grant Programs" 08 25% 08 Achieved 52% 09 73% 2013 85% Goal 1 P "Percent of the national population whose safety is improved through the availability of flood risk data in Geospatial Information System (GIS) format (FYHSP) The cumulative percent of the national population that has updated digital flood risk data available online for their community. This digital data replaces old-fashioned paper flood maps. There are some communities, representing 8% of the population, with little to no flood risk that will not be mapped." " Mitigation" 08 70% 08 Achieved 71% 09 80% 2013 94% Goal1 P Goal 3 S "Potential property losses, disasters, and other costs avoided (FYHSP) The estimated dollar value of losses to the American public which are avoided or averted through a strategic approach of natural hazard risk management. Losses are avoided to property (buildings and infrastructure) through the provision of: 1) Financial and technical assistance to States, territories, tribes, and communities to implement pre-identified, cost-effective mitigation measures (via Hazard Mitigation Assistance grants); 2) Sound floodplain management; 3) State-of-the-art building science technologies, guidance and expertise for natural and man-made hazards (Disaster-Resistant Building Sciences), thus protecting American citizens from disasters through assistance, education, and technology." " Mitigation" 08 $2.10 B 08 Achieved $2.53B 09 $2.26 B 2013 $2.48B Gaol 1 P "Percent of respondents reporting they are better prepared to deal with disasters and emergencies as a result of training (FYHSP) The percent of students attending training at the Emergency Management Institute (EMI) and FEMA's Employee Development program who responded to a survey and indicated that they are better prepared to deal with disasters and emergencies as a result of the training they received. This training provides Federal, State, local and tribal officials having key emergency responsibilities with the knowledge and skills needed to strengthen nationwide preparedness and respond to, recover from, and mitigate against acts of terrorism, natural disasters, and other emergencies." National Preparedness 08 90% 08 Achieved 92.9% 09 92% 2013 95% Goal 1 P "Percent of Radiological Emergency Preparedness Program communities with a nuclear power plant that are fully capable of responding to an accident originating at the site (FYHSP) Percentage of U.S. communities surrounding a nuclear power plant that are prepared and capable of responding to and recovering from an accident or terrorist attack. This assessment is based on first responder performance in exercises conducted at the facilities." " National Preparedness" 08 100% 08 Achieved 100% 09 100% 2013 100% Goal 1 P "Percent of Federal, State, Local and Tribal Governments compliant with the National Incident Management System (NIMS) (PART)This measure tracks the percentage of critical partners with the exception of tribes who are compliant with the National Incident Management System (NIMS). Federal Agencies were required to identify a point of contact within their agency to act as a liaison with NIMS Integration Center (NIC), create a NIMS Implementation Plan, incorporate NIMS into their respective Emergency operations Plans, and train all appropriate personnel in the NIMS standard training curriculum. States are required to submit self-certification of compliance based on 23 compliance requirements in the NIMCAST system. The DHS Office of Grants and Training (OG&T) and the NIC coordinate to monitor the previous year's submission of NIMS implementation within States. Selective data audits, field monitoring and continuous refinements on reporting metrics to identify inconsistencies and errors are used to ensure reliability." *OPPA PA&E is working with the program to update/correct the future year target levels to more accurately reflect the program and tribes who are compliant with NIMS. " National Preparedness" 08 100% 08 Achieved 100% 09 * 100% 2013 100% Goal 1 P Goal 2 S "Percent increase in knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSAs) of State and local homeland security preparedness professionals receiving training (FYHSP) Percent improvement in knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSA) of state and local homeland security professionals after the completion of training, which demonstrates strengthened first responder preparedness and mitigation with respect to acts of terrorism, natural disasters, and other emergencies. Measuring these improvements indicates the impact of training services on the nation's preparedness level. This measure evaluates the gain in knowledge, skills, and abilities of students through pre and post course assessments." " National Preparedness" 08 27% 08 Achieved 27% 09 43% 2013 45% Goal 1 P Analysis of How Performance Measures Align to Strategic Goals Overall Analysis The goals and objectives in FEMA’s Strategic Plan are comprehensive and cross-cutting in recognition of the need to better coordinate and integrate missions across FEMA programs. For example, Goal 1 represents an integrated and comprehensive approach to strengthening the Nation’s ability to address disasters, emergencies, and terrorist events. It crosses over numerous FEMA programs that work to build national capabilities. Goal 1 contains forty percent of the strategic objectives in the entire Strategic Plan, so it is not surprising that many of FEMA’s nineteen performance measures support strategic Goal 1. The measures generally target FEMA’s efforts to strengthen national capabilities through a number of approaches, including supporting continuity operations within federal departments and agencies; providing training, grants, and exercise support at the state and local level; and, through supporting disaster mitigation measures and flood plain management to reduce future flood losses. The measures also look at the outcomes of FEMA efforts, such as the reductions in the trends of injuries and loss of life from fires, or losses to the American public that are avoided or averted through natural hazard risk management actions. Some of the measures strictly target FEMA’s efforts, such as the readiness of selected disaster response teams or the service time involved with providing logistical support, including the provision of generators, food and water. Other measures are targeted more broadly, examining national capabilities that include the efforts of federal, state and local partners. Some examples of these measures that examine national capabilities are provided below. * Assessments of how local jurisdictions performed on critical tasks in exercises. * Determinations of the percentage of federal departments and agencies with fully operational continuity of operations capabilities. * Examinations of compliance by critical agency partners with the National Incident Management System (NIMS), including whether states are certified on twenty-three compliance requirements. FEMA is also looking at how it is perceived by customers. For example, FEMA examines customer satisfaction with how well FEMA provides disaster assistance. Customer service surveys are conducted to determine the satisfaction levels of individual Americans affected by disasters who contacted FEMA’s call centers to register for assistance. FEMA also surveys officials in communities impacted by disasters to determine their satisfaction levels with FEMA’s assistance in supporting repair and restoration of damaged infrastructure. FEMA will continue to assess its programs and to recalibrate associated program measures, thus ensuring program effectiveness and support in implementing the Strategic Plan. Performance Results and Trends FEMA is committed to strengthening its ability to report on performance results in achieving strategic goals and delivering value to the American public. While the agency has a wide array of performance measures, this focuses on the nineteen performance measures reported in the DHS Annual Performance Report. For each measure, there is a level of performance or ‘target’ assigned with the expectation that it will be met. In FY 2008, more than eighty percent of FEMA’s measures were met. For those instances where FEMA significantly exceeded or did not meet its targets, program offices, in conjunction with FEMA’s Program Analysis and Evaluation Division, conduct analysis to determine why the actual performance differed from targeted levels and adjustments are made accordingly. There are a number of reasons why FEMA did not meet all of its performance measure targets for FY 2008, including those shown below. * Some performance measures are baseline measures and require additional information to establish fiscal year targets. * Situational factors outside the control of a FEMA program influenced actual performance -- i.e. reallocation of funding and lack of resources to perform necessary assessments to fully evaluate performance. * Reorganizations and a lack of verifiable data collection methodologies also hindered the ability to measure performance. In an instance where a target is not met, corrective action is being taken by the respective program offices. For example, some baseline measures require refinement to more accurately measure success while other measures require the development of verifiable data collection methodologies. Additionally, a measure may be retired and subsequently replaced with a new improved measure. Summary of Performance for FEMA Strategic Goals 1. Lead an integrated approach that strengthens the Nation’s ability to address disasters, emergencies, and terrorist events Goal 1 represents an intentional approach to integrate efforts of all partners, public and private, in a holistic approach that will strengthen the national emergency management system and improve the Nation’s ability to respond and recover when confronted by disasters, emergencies, and terrorist events. Performance trends suggest that FEMA is performing well in the following areas: * training and preparedness; * response teams reported at an operational status or readiness; * capabilities in exercises and grant funded exercises; * federal continuity of operations readiness; * risk and capability analysis (i.e. providing flood risk data); and, * loss reduction. 2. Deliver easily accessible and coordinated assistance for all programs Goal 2 focuses on providing assistance, both before and after events, in an easily accessible and coordinated manner using simple and effective delivery mechanisms, while also minimizing waste, fraud, and abuse. Customer care is an integral part of building public trust, so FEMA is reaching out to its customers through questionnaires and surveys that address the quality of care that customers receive. FEMA consistently meets its performance target for customers satisfied with Individual and Public Recovery Assistance. The improved responsiveness seen in delivering individual assistance is reflected in a strong satisfaction survey result of 92.7% for FY 2008, and this measure has maintained a better than 90% satisfaction rate for five years. FEMA is also improving performance in reducing delivery costs and cycle time for grants, and continues to examine customer satisfaction and identify corrective actions to address public concerns. 3. Provide reliable information at the right time for all users Goal 3 addresses the need for FEMA to provide timely and accurate information, whether related to ongoing programs, or for situational awareness in emerging events. While the Annual Performance Report measures do not specifically target the Goal 3 objectives, they do indirectly support them. For example, FEMA’s Annual Performance Report measures look at state and territory accreditations, state and local capabilities performed acceptably in exercises, and the percent of communities near a nuclear power plant that are fully capable of responding to an accident. In the case of exercises, a review of performance in the exercise would include examining how “real time” reliable information was provided during an event. 4. FEMA invests in people and people invest in FEMA to ensure mission success Goal 4 stresses FEMA’s commitment to invest in its people to develop a capable workforce that is motivated to ensure mission success. FEMA’s current Annual Performance Report measures do not address the objectives of Goal 4, though FEMA has internal measures that align to Goal 4’s focus on training, hiring and retaining personnel, and tracking workforce data. FEMA’s Management Directorate and Human Capital Division are developing improved baseline measures to better report on FEMA performance within these areas. 5. Build public trust and confidence through performance and stewardship Goal 5 focuses on building public trust and confidence through a culture that rewards performance, personal stewardship, innovation, and accountability. FEMA is reviewing its overall performance measures to identify specific measures for reporting FEMA performance within these areas. Identifying Gaps in Measuring Performance across the FEMA Strategic Plan Goals To improve and expand the baseline of the agency’s overall performance in implementing the Strategic Plan, FEMA will continue to analyze its performance measures to identify possible gaps, overlaps, or inconsistencies. FEMA directorates, offices, and regions are already engaged in identifying additional measures that will better demonstrate performance across the agency’s strategic goals. An example for the Management Directorate is shown below. * Improving the tracking of key workforce data to improve performance measures related to staff development, training, hiring, and retention efforts. (Strategic Goal 4) As gaps in implementing the strategic plan are identified, more measures will be developed to address them. Additionally, some FEMA performance measures will evolve as they are further refined into more meaningful and/or outcome-oriented measures. Conclusion FEMA is developing a results-oriented management culture within the agency. We owe it to the American public to tell them what their dollars are getting in terms of performance. The nineteen measures presented in this Performance Addendum represent a first step outside of the FYHSP structure in linking the agency’s program performance to the FEMA Strategic Plan. Additional measures will be included in future Performance Addendums to more fully reflect the agency’s performance in implementing all of the Plan’s strategic goals. FEMA will conduct further analysis to identify possible gaps in implementing the Strategic Plan, and will continue to examine how current measures address the agency’s strategic objectives. This analysis will help to develop and refine additional measures that address the newly identified issues and gaps in future performance addendums. As the annual performance addendum is further developed, the expectation is that it will help to: * improve program effectiveness and public accountability by promoting a new focus on results, service quality, and customer satisfaction; * improve resource decision-making by raising the visibility of strategic measures and helping managers align their individual performance with the agency’s strategic direction; * improve service delivery, by requiring that Federal managers plan for meeting program objectives and by providing them with information about program results and service quality; * improve internal management of the Federal Government as well as congressional decision making by providing more objective information on achieving statutory objectives, and on the relative effectiveness and efficiency of Federal programs and spending; and, * improve the confidence of the American people in the capability of FEMA by more visibly holding FEMA accountable for achieving program results. The Way Ahead FEMA will continue to engage in multi-year goal setting and resource planning and will use performance reports such as this addendum to inform the planning process. The agency will also continue to refine its approach to linking resources and results, including efforts to develop additional measures focused on outcomes, to meet existing performance challenges. Ultimately the need to translate the planned and actual use of resources into concrete and measureable results remains an essential step in achieving a more results-oriented government. Long-term connectivity of planning and budget requires careful monitoring of the strategic plan, performance management, and budget management processes. To that end, FEMA will continue its effort to link resources to results and to institute periodic reviews to focus on program funding and associated performance measures that support the respective funding levels. These reviews, in turn, will better inform decision makers on how to handle scarce resources issues. Consequently, it is critically important that each office and directorate demonstrate the effectiveness of their programs and the results that are to be achieved in order to be adequately funded, accomplish its mission, and ultimately protect the American public. FEMA must clearly and successfully integrate its performance and budget to ensure it has the resources to fulfill its vision. To further support the Strategic Plan and justify FEMA funding to all of its stakeholders—including the taxpayer—there must be both a short-term and strategic focus on identifying outcomes and measuring performance.  FEMA’s ability to analyze and evaluate the results of the plans, programs, and organizational initiatives is key to managing its strategic and long-range organizational goals.  As FEMA moves forward, the focus will be to implement a system that effectively links planning, budgeting, and performance to measure program success or failure.  This will require continual monitoring of measures, assessments of the programs, and recalibration of the measures to continue to develop stretch goals and measures to ensure program effectiveness.  This Performance Addendum represents a significant step in demonstrating FEMA’s commitment in protecting and serving the American public as the Nation’s Preeminent Emergency Management and Preparedness Agency.