FEMA National Advisory Council Teleconference, September 14, 2011 – Meeting Notes NAC MEMBER ATTENDANCE NAME DISCIPLINE PRESENT ABSENT Jim Featherstone, Chair, Emergency Response PRESENT Don Dunbar, Vice Chair , Emergency Response PRESENT Beth Armstrong,Standards Setting PRESENT Paul Biedrzycki, Public Health PRESENT Joe Bruno, Emergency Management PRESENT Mickey Caison, FEMA Administrator Selection PRESENT Mark Cooper, Emergency Management PRESENT Nancy Dragani, FEMA Administrator Selection ABSENT Lee Feldman, Local Non Elected Official ABSENT Ed Gabriel, Infrastructure Protection PRESENT Ellen Gordon, Homeland Security Advisory Council ABSENT Jerome Hatfield, Standards Setting ABSENT John Hines, State Elected Official ABSENT June Kailes, Functional Accessibility ABSENT Chuck Kearns, Emergency Medical Provider PRESENT Chuck Kmet, Tribal Government PRESENT Clifton Lacy, Health Scientist PRESENT Cathy Lanier, Emergency Response PRESENT Larry Larson, FEMA Administrator Selection ABSENT Robert Lee, FEMA Administrator Selection ABSENT David Markenson, In- Patient Medical Provider PRESENT Adora Obi Nweze, FEMA Administrator Selection ABSENT Mike Phillips, Cyber Security ABSENT Mike Rackley, FEMA Administrator Selection ABSENT Todd Rosenblum, U.S. Department of Defense ABSENT George Schloegel, Local Elected OfficialABSENT Kurt Schwartz, State Non-Elected Official PRESENT Teresa Scott, FEMA Administrator Selection PRESENT Charley Shimanski, FEMA Administrator Selection PRESENT Mary Troupe, Disabilities ABSENT David Waldrop, Communications PRESENT Rebecca White, Tribal Elected Government ABSENT Kevin Yeskey, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services ABSENT Phil Zarlengo, FEMA Administrator Selection PRESENT OTHER ATTENDEES NAME ORGANIZATION TITLE Patricia A. Kalla, FEMA, Designated Federal Officer Donald Lumpkins, FEMA, Executive Director, PPD-8 Program Executive Office ACTION ITEMS Please see below for a list of major outstanding action items that resulted from the meeting: ACTION ITEM TOPIC AREA RESPONSIBLE PARTY DUE DATE NAC wants to be involved in reviews/revisions on the PPD-8 moving forward. PPD-8 FEMA Forward 6 recommendations on PPD-8 to FEMA PPD-8 NAC MEETING SUMMARY- The meeting was called to order at 3:05 pm EDT and roll call taken by Patricia Kalla, Designated Federal Officer. Patricia Kalla – Designated Federal Officer, FEMA National Advisory Council * Welcomed members, new members, and the public (in listen-only capacity). Reiterated the purpose of the teleconference, to review, discuss, deliberate, and make a decision on the subcommittee draft recommendations for National Preparedness Goal (NPG) as direct by Presidential Policy Directive 8 (PPD-8). FEMA received one public written comment from the National Institute of Building Sciences, which was provided to NAC members before the call. * Prior to this call the subcommittee received four briefings from the FEMA Preparedness program office for the purpose of gathering information. * Reminded members of requirement to have quorum to concur recommendations. Donald Lumpkins – Executive Director, PPD-8, Program Executive Office, FEMA * Provided an overview of the current status of the NPG and background on PPD-8. * The NPG document is on an aggressive timeline with the first addition due on September 25 to the White House. Now through November 24, FEMA will be developing the systems and tools to complete the overarching goals. In the next phase FEMA will develop and revise the National prevention, protection, and mitigation frameworks. FEMA will send the document to the White House on March 30. Chuck Kmet – Chair, Preparedness & Protection Subcommittee * Reviewed and explained the Preparedness & Protection Subcommittee draft recommendations on the NPG to the committee. Highlights from the discussion include: * Concern that the document appears highly terrorist driven; the other hazards need to be more developed. * The Stafford Act defines 16 major disasters. Does the NPG speak to all of them? * On a local level, there is more to prevention than terrorism and law enforcement, in terms of core capabilities. The language should be broadened. * Specific sections could include more natural disasters. * FEMA needs to think about possible critical infrastructure security issues and whether the end-states and objectives are achieved in an all hazards approach. FEMA should consider how they tie in the grants program and effectively deliver PPD-8 and whether fundamental changes within the organization or operations need to occur. * Include “whole community approach” and consider how smaller communities will be changed. Incorporate a boarder community involved including format, language, and how the message is disseminated to the smaller, local communities. * Develop metrics at the federal level to measure end-states with the state, local, tribal and private sectors developing their own. * Locals want accountability at a federal level. Recognized the opportunity with PPD-8 to clarify the federal entity responsible for delivering a response. * Pare down number of core capabilities making it easier to assimilate, digest, and discuss * Tightened and define language vague language such as, community, resiliency, critical, security. These words do not provide clarity on “what, why, and how” and could have different meanings on a local vs. federal level. The document seems very strategic but not specific * Recommendations: 1. Overall, the NAC concurs with the direction and approach of the National Preparedness Goal. 2. The NAC recommends that FEMA ensure the intent of the National Preparedness Goal is truly “all hazards.” Portions of the draft seem to be “terrorist” driven. The need to focus on all hazards should be emphasized throughout the document and simply stating “other hazards” does not adequately accomplish that. 3. Although it is not initially directed in the National Preparedness Goal, the NAC recommends that FEMA consider targeting grants in the National Preparedness Goal. * On a larger scale, while the NAC will not make specific recommendations to the operational and organizational make-up of FEMA, the NAC recommends that FEMA begin to look at how the PPD-8 will be effectively and efficiently “delivered” and whether fundamental changes within the FEMA organization or operations will need to occur. 4. The NAC recommends that FEMA review the strategy to ensure the “Whole Community” approach is incorporated, with a reminder of, “you’re only as strong as your weakest link,” especially as it pertains to an “all-of-Nation” concept. The National Preparedness Goal “will define the core capabilities that must be established by the Nation in order to prevent, protect against, mitigate the effects of, respond to, and recover from the specific types of incidents that pose the greatest threat to the security of the Nation,” Which indicates risk-based or threat-based methodology. As a result, there is a concern that the smaller communities may be unable to receive grant funding to build capability. * The key tenets of PPD-8 are to achieve national preparedness through broader community engagement and strengthening of community resiliency. * Given that the word “community” is a key in the strategy and approach, this document should be meaningful to a broader community, rather than just government emergency management. To that end, the mission, capabilities, performance objectives, and end-states must resonate with the community to enhance buy-in and success.  * However, the NAC realizes that FEMA must start with the familiar and be comfortable in terms of nomenclature, narrative, and format.  The NAC supports this National Preparedness Goal document and will monitor how these documents are distributed, promoted, assimilated, and used by locals on the ground to achieve “broader community involvement, enhanced community-wide capabilities and strengthening of community resiliency.” 5. The NAC recommends developing metrics for measuring and evaluating “end-states” and providing clarity on the roles and responsibilities at the Federal level. * This would be instructional for the State, local, tribal and private sector in development of their own metrics and clarity because quite often, due to vagueness and ambiguity, there is a disconnect between overarching Federal strategy and what that means for the local community in interpreting “end-states” or objectives to meet their specific goals for preparedness and resiliency. 6. The NAC recommends the inclusion of a visual or graphic that connects the mission with core capabilities, performance objectives, and end-states to improve clarity on the big picture.  This would help facilitate a discussion on how to measure and evaluate progress of performance as it relates to achieving outcomes (end-states)—all of which should directly relate to improved national preparedness and resiliency for all hazards. * The National Advisory Council concurred to move these six recommendations forward. The meeting adjourned at 4:00 pm EST. I hereby certify that to the best of my knowledge, the foregoing meeting notes of the National Advisory Council Teleconference on September 14, 2011 are accurate and complete. Signed ___________________________________ James Featherstone Chairman, FEMA National Advisory Council