FY2006 Emergency Management
Performance Grants
Program Guidance and Application Kit
November 2005
ISSUANCE DATE: NOVEMBER 14, 2005
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. NATIONAL PREPAREDNESS.......................................................................................................................2
A. INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................................................................2
B. THE NATIONAL PREPAREDNESS GOAL.............................................................................................................2
C. EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AND NATIONAL PREPAREDNESS .........................................................................3
II. PROGRAM GUIDANCE.................................................................................................................................6
A. OVERVIEW......................................................................................................................................................6
B. STRATEGY AND PROGRAM COORDINATION GUIDANCE ...................................................................................8
C. PROGRAM GUIDANCE....................................................................................................................................11
D. ALLOWABLE COSTS GUIDANCE .....................................................................................................................13
E. CONSTRUCTION AND RENOVATION GUIDANCE..............................................................................................16
F. PERSONNEL COSTS GUIDANCE.......................................................................................................................17
G. UNALLOWABLE COSTS GUIDANCE.................................................................................................................17
H. GENERAL GUIDANCE .....................................................................................................................................17
I. ODP RESOURCES AND SUPPORT ....................................................................................................................19
III. ELIGIBLE APPLICANTS AND FUNDING AVAILABILITY..................................................................22
A. ELIGIBLE APPLICANTS ..................................................................................................................................22
B. FUNDING.......................................................................................................................................................22
IV. APPLICATION KIT ......................................................................................................................................24
V. AWARD AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS........................................................................................29
A. GRANT AWARD TO STATE.............................................................................................................................29
B. DRAWDOWN OF FUNDS.................................................................................................................................29
C. REPORTING REQUIREMENTS ..........................................................................................................................29
D. MONITORING ................................................................................................................................................31
E. GRANT CLOSE-OUT PROCESS ........................................................................................................................32
APPENDIX A: SAMPLE AWARD PACKAGE ................................................................................................. A-1
APPENDIX B: LIST OF TERMS..........................................................................................................................B-1
ISSUANCE DATE: NOVEMBER 14, 2005
I. NATIONAL
PREPAREDNESS
FY06 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE GRANTS
2 ISSUANCE DATE: NOVEMBER 14, 2005
NATIONAL PREPAREDNESS
Vision of the
National Preparedness Goal:
To engage Federal, State, local,
and tribal entities, their private
and non-governmental partners,
and the general public to achieve
and sustain risk-based target
levels of capability to prevent,
protect against, respond to, and
recover from major events in
order to minimize the impact on
lives, property, and the economy.
I. NATIONAL PREPAREDNESS
A. Introduction
On March 31, 2005, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) issued the Interim National
Preparedness Goal (the Goal) and accompanying National Preparedness Guidance (NPG). The
Goal establishes a vision for a National Preparedness System, and the NPG provided an
introduction to several of the key building blocks for that system, including the National
Planning Scenarios, Universal Task List (UTL), Target Capabilities List (TCL), and seven
National Priorities. The Strategy Guidance issued on July 22, 2005, provides follow-on guidance
for use by States and Urban Areas in placing their preparedness efforts within the context of this
new doctrine and updating their existing Homeland Security Strategies to ensure that they
support the Goal and reflect the seven National Priorities. Similarly, this year’s guidance
supports the Goal and State Homeland Security Strategies.
B. The National Preparedness Goal
The Goal represents a significant evolution in the way
we approach preparedness and homeland security. The
Goal presents a collective vision for national
preparedness, and establishes National Priorities that
will help guide the realization of that vision. The
vision set forth by the Goal encompasses the full
spectrum of activities necessary to address a broad
range of threats and hazards, including terrorism.
The Goal provides a common framework for a systemsbased
approach to build, sustain, and improve national
preparedness for a broad range of threats and hazards.
The Goal and other source documents define four
mission areas of this framework: prevent, protect,
respond, and recover.
Each mission area includes a collection of capabilities that require the integration of multiple
disciplines, processes, and procedures. These capabilities underpin seven National Priorities
listed in the Goal. The National Priorities are intended to guide the Nation’s preparedness efforts
to meet its most urgent needs, and fall into two categories: (A) three overarching priorities that
contribute to the development of multiple capabilities, and (B) four capability-specific priorities
that build selected capabilities for which the Nation has the greatest need.
FY06 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE GRANTS
3 ISSUANCE DATE: NOVEMBER 14, 2005
NATIONAL PREPAREDNESS
National Priorities
Overarching Priorities
• Implement the National Incident Management System (NIMS) and National Response Plan
(NRP)
• Expanded Regional Collaboration
• Implement the Interim National Infrastructure Protection Plan
Capability-Specific Priorities
• Strengthen Information Sharing and Collaboration capabilities
• Strengthen Interoperable Communications capabilities
• Strengthen CBRNE Detection, Response, and Decontamination capabilities
• Strengthen Medical Surge and Mass Prophylaxis capabilities
At the heart of the National Preparedness Goal is the TCL. The current TCL identifies 37
national preparedness capabilities, provides a description of each capability, and presents
guidance on the levels of capability that Federal, State, local, and tribal entities will be expected
to develop and maintain. Each level of government or geographical area will not be expected to
develop and maintain all capabilities at the same level. The expectation will vary based upon the
risk and needs of different levels of government and geographic area. For example, basic
capability levels may be expected of a rural, low-population jurisdiction, while more advanced
levels of capability may be expected of a group of jurisdictions, large metropolitan area, an entire
State, or the Federal government.
C. Emergency Management and National Preparedness
Implementing a common, shared approach to achieving the National Preparedness Goal requires
the Nation to align its programs and efforts in support of the Goal. Alignment can best be
achieved through the application of a systems-based approach, utilizing capabilities-based
planning as a common, all-hazard, major events planning process. This will support the
establishment of a true National Preparedness System, which will provide a mechanism for
measuring preparedness and informing future preparedness investments.
The National Preparedness System is a system of systems. As stated in the National
Preparedness Goal, “a system is a combination of facilities, equipment, personnel, procedures,
and communications integrated into a common organizational structure to achieve a mission or
outcome.” Many processes, programs, and capabilities already in place within State, local,
tribal, and private sector homeland security programs and across disciplines will support the
National Preparedness System. The emerging National Preparedness System provides a way to
enhance these existing resources by networking them together more effectively.
The National Preparedness System provides a means for the Nation to answer three fundamental
questions: “How prepared do we need to be?”, “How prepared are we?”, and “How do we
prioritize efforts to close the gap?” The system helps enable all levels of government to
collaborate seamlessly in order to identify critical gaps and deficiencies, develop strategies to
address those gaps and deficiencies, track and report on progress toward resolution, and
aggregate this information to better understand our level of preparedness nationally. The system
FY06 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE GRANTS
4 ISSUANCE DATE: NOVEMBER 14, 2005
NATIONAL PREPAREDNESS
also helps enable leaders at all levels to allocate resources systematically to close capability gaps,
thereby enhancing the effectiveness of preparedness efforts.
The implications of moving to an integrated and adaptive National Preparedness System are
significant. This shift will involve organizational and operational change across agencies,
disciplines and jurisdictions – and across State lines. Mutual aid agreements, interorganizational
linkages, information sharing, and collaboration are critical elements of the new
homeland security landscape.
In facing these changes, however, we must recognize that we are not starting over. Rather, we
are building on the effective systems, processes, and capabilities we already have in place.
Aligning these existing programs, processes, and organizational structures to a common
framework will not happen overnight, but will be an incremental change over time.
In employing a systems-based approach to National Preparedness, no single component part can
be the sole responsibility of one individual or group. We have organized and formed many of
the core coordinating structures and working groups, however, progress can still be made in how
these coordinating structures and working groups operate. Achieving full integration and
interconnectedness between the public and private sector, among different levels of government,
among multiple jurisdictions, and among departments and agencies within a single jurisdiction
requires robust collaboration. Initial progress has been made in our collaboration and
coordination efforts to date, but further progress can and must be made to support the Goal.
Implementation of the National Preparedness System requires that the emergency management
discipline play a vital role in support of the Goal, as well as the implementation of National
Priorities and achievement of the target levels of capability described in the TCL. As the
coordinator for disaster response operations, the emergency management discipline is essential to
the prevention, protection, response, and recovery efforts necessary when disasters or other
incidents of national significance occur at the State and local level, and when Federal assistance
is needed.
Therefore, to sustain and enhance emergency management capabilities in support of the Goal,
the Emergency Management Performance Grants (EMPG) program is designed to assist States
and Urban Areas achieve the target levels of capability to sustain and enhance the effectiveness
of their emergency management program.
ISSUANCE DATE: NOVEMBER 14, 2005
II. PROGRAM GUIDANCE
FY06 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE GRANTS
6 ISSUANCE DATE: NOVEMBER 14, 2005
PROPGRROAGMR AGMU IGDUAINDCAEN CE
II. PROGRAM GUIDANCE
A. Overview
Recent national disasters, including Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, reflect the spectrum of events
for which States and Urban Areas must prepare for and plan. In particular, these events have
also highlighted the critical importance of effective, pre-incident catastrophic planning. As a
nation, we must share and evaluate lessons learned from these events, so that States and Urban
Areas may enhance their emergency management and catastrophic planning capabilities and
leverage regional resources. Pre-incident planning for catastrophic events is essential to all
mission areas of emergency management. These planning efforts include the development of
comprehensive emergency operations plans, including annex/appendices addressing evacuation,
shelter/reception, logistics and resource management, and other key plan components.
Additionally, it is essential that these plans are consistent at the State, local and tribal levels with
NIMS to aid in the seamless interface among the elements.
With funds provided through FY06 EMPG, States have the opportunity to support these
emergency management mission areas and structure individual emergency management
programs based on identified needs and priorities for strengthening their capabilities, while
simultaneously addressing issues of national concern as identified both in the National Priorities
and the TCL. States have the flexibility to develop intrastate and interstate emergency
management systems that encourage the building of partnerships to include government,
business, volunteer, and community organizations. It is essential that State and local
governments coordinate and establish strong working relationships with neighboring
jurisdictions, which may include all levels of government, including tribal governments, in
developing emergency management capabilities for joint operations, effective mutual aid and
support locally, regionally, State-to-State and nationwide.
A comprehensive state emergency management system must be inclusive of local programs and
input. Local emergency management organizations should remain informed and have the
opportunity to provide input to State planning processes. Although DHS expects States to
include support for their local jurisdictions in the EMPG programs, each State is responsible for
determining the appropriate amount of funding to be passed through to support the development
or enhancement of local emergency management capabilities.
Emergency management must be able to respond to natural and manmade hazards, homeland
security-related incidents, and other emergencies that may threaten the safety and well-being of
citizens and communities. An all-hazards approach to emergency preparedness encourages
effective and consistent response to any disaster or emergency, regardless of the cause.
Emergency management plays an important role in the implementation of national priorities,
such as NIMS, the NRP, and the Goal. As the coordinator for disaster response operations,
emergency management must be the leader in all-hazards planning, training, and exercises to
ensure a seamless response when disasters occur at the State and local level, and when Federal
assistance is needed.
FY06 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE GRANTS
7 ISSUANCE DATE: NOVEMBER 14, 2005
PROPGRROAGMR AGMU IGDUAINDCAEN CE
Developing EMPG Work Plans
States should use the Emergency Management Accreditation Program (EMAP) Standard
(September 2004) structure, the National Emergency Management Baseline Capability
Assessment Program (NEMB-CAP), the NRP, and NIMS (as published by DHS on March 1,
2004) as a basis for developing work plans and performance evaluations for EMPG.
NEMB-CAP is an ongoing effort sponsored by the Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) that is analyzing existing emergency management programs planning efforts at the State
level using the EMAP Standard. To date, 40 States have completed the NEMB-CAP process.
Of the 40 States, only two met all criteria for planning, only five were compliant with most or all
standards, and only two states were fully compliant in all 14 functional areas. The process has
highlighted the importance of ensuring that roles and responsibilities are not only well
understood, but also operationalized at the State and local level; additionally, findings from this
process have revealed critical national weaknesses in key operational areas and catastrophic
planning efforts, including:
• Incident management
• Planning, including continuity of operations and recovery strategies
• Hazard identification, risk assessment, and impact analysis
• Resource management, including identification of resource objectives, by hazard, predisaster.
As a condition for receipt of funds, States must also comply with FY06 NIMS implementation
requirements, as outlined below. States are not required to receive accreditation under the
EMAP Standard, but are required to use the EMAP Standard, the NEMB-CAP process, the NRP,
and NIMS as a baseline around which to design their EMPG work plans. Specifically, States
must focus FY06 EMPG program activities on addressing shortfalls and sustaining capabilities in
their emergency management program, as identified through either the NEMB-CAP process or
other assessment process, with a specific focus on planning for catastrophic events. States can
use the work plan submitted with the application to demonstrate how they have already
addressed existing shortfalls and how they plan to further enhance or sustain those capabilities.
Additional information on the EMAP Standard is available at
http://www.emaponline.org/index.cfm; additional information on the NEMB-CAP process is
available at http://www.fema.gov/preparedness/baseline.shtm; and additional information on
NIMS is available at http://www.fema.gov/nims. Results from other assessments can also serve
as a reference, and can include specific targeting of the EMPG funding to those areas identified
as needing improvement or sustainment.
NIMS Implementation Guidance
HSPD-5, “Management of Domestic Incidents,” mandated the creation of NIMS and the NRP.
NIMS provides a consistent framework for entities at all jurisdictional levels to work together to
manage domestic incidents, regardless of cause, size, or complexity. To promote interoperability
and compatibility among Federal, State, local, and tribal capabilities, NIMS includes a core set of
guidelines, standards, and protocols for command and management, preparedness, resource
management, communications and information management, supporting technologies, and
management and maintenance of NIMS. The NRP, using the template established by NIMS, is
an all-discipline, all-hazards plan that provides the structure and mechanisms to coordinate
FY06 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE GRANTS
8 ISSUANCE DATE: NOVEMBER 14, 2005
PROPGRROAGMR AGMU IGDUAINDCAEN CE
operations for evolving or potential Incidents of National Significance. Incidents of National
Significance are major events that “require a coordinated and effective response by an
appropriate combination of Federal, State, local, tribal, private sector, and nongovernmental
entities.”
State, territorial, tribal, and local entities are being asked to become fully compliant with NIMS
during FY 2006. DHS has issued guidance to States on FY 2006 NIMS implementation
requirements, including two matrices: one that identifies the State and territorial level NIMS
implementation requirements and one that identifies the NIMS implementation requirements that
must be taken at the tribal and local government levels. Jurisdictions will be required to meet the
FY 2006 NIMS implementation requirements as a condition of receiving Federal preparedness
funding assistance in FY 2007.
Most important of the FY 2006 requirements, States and territories must establish a planning
process that incorporates the appropriate procedures to ensure the effective communication and
implementation of NIMS requirements across the State, including tribes and local governments.
This planning process must include a means for measuring progress and facilitate the reporting
of NIMS implementation among its tribal and local jurisdictions.
Additional information about NIMS implementation and resources for achieving compliance are
available through the NIMS Integration Center (NIC). The NIC web page,
http://www.fema.gov/nims, is updated regularly with information about NIMS and additional
guidance for implementation.
B. Strategy and Program Coordination Guidance
State and Urban Area Homeland Security Strategies
State and Urban Area Homeland Security Strategies will continue in FY06 to provide the
overarching strategic vision for the implementation of State and Urban Area homeland security
programs. States and Urban Areas were recently required to update their strategies to bring them
into alignment with the seven National Priorities included in the Goal. The updated strategies
address the four homeland security mission areas: prevent, protect, respond, and recover.
Updated State and Urban Area Homeland Security Strategies provide a context for performing
the strategic exercise of asking “How are we organized?” and “How are we managing our
homeland security programs?” This evaluation will enable us as a Nation to think about how we
build our preparedness programs and capabilities within and across State boundaries.
Program Coordination Requirements
The Office for Domestic Preparedness (ODP) expects grantees and subgrantees to take a holistic
approach to implementing their strategic homeland security goals and objectives by considering
all available support and assistance programs, regardless of the source. Emergency management
officials at all levels should seek opportunities to leverage funding from multiple sources
whenever possible and not restrict their activities to only Federal funding.
In FY05, States were required to establish a senior advisory committee or similar entity of senior
officials overseeing assistance programs from ODP, the Centers for Disease Control and
FY06 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE GRANTS
9 ISSUANCE DATE: NOVEMBER 14, 2005
PROPGRROAGMR AGMU IGDUAINDCAEN CE
Prevention (CDC), Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), and other Federal
agencies providing homeland security assistance. The purpose of this senior advisory committee
is to enhance the integration of disciplines involved in homeland security, including public health
and medical initiatives. The expectation for FY06 is that States use these senior advisory
committees to facilitate implementation of the Goal and the National Preparedness Guidance.
The membership of the senior advisory committee must, at a minimum, include State officials
directly responsible for the administration of ODP grants and CDC and HRSA cooperative
agreements. In addition, program representatives from the following entities must be included
on the senior advisory committee:
• State Administrative Agency (SAA)
• State Homeland Security Advisor (if this role is not also the SAA)
• State emergency management director (if this role is not also the SAA)
• State public health officer
• State public safety office (and SAA for Justice Assistance Grants, if different)
• State trauma system manager
• State emergency medical services director
• HRSA Program Director/Primary Investigator (listed in Section 10 of HRSA Notice of
Grant Award)
• HRSA Bioterrorism Hospital Coordinator
• CDC Program Director/Primary Investigator
• State Citizen Corps point of contact
• Local representatives (as appropriate).
States are still encouraged to broaden membership of the senior advisory committee, and/or its
sub-committees, to include membership from additional disciplines and associations, including
law enforcement, fire, public health, behavioral health, public works, agriculture, information
technology, and other pertinent disciplines.
Leveraging Multiple Funding Sources
Emergency managers at all levels should leverage all available funding and resources from
multiple sources wherever possible. Grantees and subgrantees should not restrict their activities
to only Federal funding to achieve the goals outlined within their strategies. Rather, special
attention should be given to leveraging relevant funding sources and resources that support
implementation of these strategies. These funding sources include, but are not limited to:
• Other Federal preparedness programs, including those offered by the Department of
Health and Human Services (HHS) through CDC, HRSA, and the U.S. Food and Drug
Administration; the U.S. Department of Agriculture; the U.S. Department of Justice
(DOJ); the U.S. Department of Transportation; FEMA; DHS Science and Technology
Directorate; DHS Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection Directorate; and
other relevant organizations
• Other State homeland security and preparedness programs and resources
• Local and tribal homeland security and preparedness programs and resources
• Private sector homeland security preparedness programs and resources, as permitted by
FY06 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE GRANTS
10 ISSUANCE DATE: NOVEMBER 14, 2005
PROPGRROAGMR AGMU IGDUAINDCAEN CE
applicable laws and regulations.
Table 1 outlines other available FY06 preparedness grant programs which can be leveraged for
these purposes. EMPG program participants are strongly encouraged to coordinate and leverage
program activities, where appropriate, to gain maximum benefit from available federal resources.
Table 1. Other Available FY06 Preparedness Programs
FY 2006
Program Program Overview
State Homeland
Security Program
(SHSP)
SHSP supports the implementation of the State Homeland Security Strategy to address the
identified planning, equipment, training, and exercise needs. In addition, SHSP supports the
implementation of the National Preparedness System, NIMS, and the NRP. In particular,
SHSP funds should be focused on enhancing catastrophic planning across all hazards,
particularly with 30 of the 36 Target Capabilities which are “dual-use” in nature, common to
natural disasters or terrorist attacks.
Urban Areas
Security Initiative
(UASI)
UASI funds address the unique planning, equipment, training, and exercise needs of high
risk Urban Areas, and to assist them in building an enhanced and sustainable capacity to
prevent, protect, respond to, and recover from acts of terrorism. Allowable costs for the
Urban Areas comport with the FY 2006 SHSP, and funding is expended based on the Urban
Area Homeland Security Strategies.
Law Enforcement
Terrorism
Prevention
Program (LETPP)
LETPP focuses upon the prevention of terrorist attacks and provides law enforcement and
public safety communities with their private partners funds to support the following
activities: intelligence gathering and information sharing through enhancing/establishing
fusion centers; hardening high value targets; planning strategically; continuing to build
interoperable communications; and collaborating with non-law enforcement partners, other
government agencies and the private sector. LETPP funds should be focused on enhancing
the 6 of the 36 Target Capabilities unique to terrorism.
Metropolitan
Medical Response
System (MMRS)
Program
MMRS funds support MMRS jurisdictions to further enhance and sustain an integrated,
systematic mass casualty incident preparedness program that enables a first response during
the first crucial hours of an incident. The program prepares jurisdictions for a response to
the range of mass casualty incidents – from CBRNE events to epidemic outbreaks, natural
disasters and large-scale hazardous materials incidents.
Citizen Corps
Program (CCP)
Citizen Corps is DHS’s initiative to actively involve all citizens in hometown security
through personal preparedness, training, exercises, and volunteer service. CCP funds
support Citizen Corps Council efforts to engage citizens in dealing with all-hazards
prevention, protection, response, and recovery, including planning and evaluation, public
education and communication, training, exercising, volunteer programs and activities to
support emergency responders, surge capacity roles and responsibilities, and providing
proper equipment to volunteer citizens.
Buffer Zone
Protection
Program (BZPP)
BZPP provides funding for enhanced security for select critical infrastructures and assets.
The intent of the program is to establish Buffer Zone Plans which are intended to help local
law enforcement and emergency responders develop preventive measures around high
priority infrastructure targets.
Transit Security
Grant Program
(TSGP)
TSGP provides funding to support security enhancements for intercity passenger rail
transportation, freight rail, and other security measures. The program addresses three transit
modalities: rail transit, intra-city bus transit, and ferry systems.
Port Security
Grant (PSG)
Program
PSG funds owners and operators of ports, terminals, as well as port authorities and state and
local agencies that provide a layered approach, U.S. inspected passenger vessels and ferries,
as well as port authorities and State and local agencies to improve security for operators and
passengers through physical security enhancements. The Program strives to create a
sustainable, risk-based effort for the protection of critical infrastructure from any incident
that would cause major disruption to commerce and significant loss of life.
FY06 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE GRANTS
11 ISSUANCE DATE: NOVEMBER 14, 2005
PROPGRROAGMR AGMU IGDUAINDCAEN CE
FY 2006
Program Program Overview
Intercity Bus
Security Grant
Program (IBSGP)
The IBSGP provides financial assistance to owners/operators of fixed route, intercity bus
services, and special need charter bus to improve security for operators and passengers. The
Program strives to create a sustainable effort for the protection of critical infrastructure from
any incident that would cause major loss of life and severe disruption. Allowable costs
comport with the FY 2005 ODP Homeland Security Grant Program (HSGP).
Highway Watch
Program
Also referred to as the trucking industry security grants, the Highway Watch Program
provides funds to assist highway professionals in efforts to identify and report security and
safety situations, build capability, plan for emergencies and train.
Assistance to
Firefighters Grant
(AFG) Program
The purpose of these grants is to enhance the safety of the public and firefighters with
respect to fire and fire-related hazards. The primary goal of the AFG Program’s Fire
Prevention and Safety Grant is to reach high-risk target groups in order to mitigate the high
incidences of death and injuries. Additionally, the authorization remains that includes
funding for Firefighter Safety Research and Development.
Bioterrorism
Hospital
Preparedness
Program,
HRSA, HHS
The purpose of the National Bioterrorism Hospital Preparedness Program (NBHPP) is to
prepare hospitals and supporting healthcare systems, in collaboration with other partners, to
deliver coordinated and effective care to victims of terrorism and other public health
emergencies. Cooperative agreement funds may be used for activities that include
increasing surge capacity, which encompasses beds, personnel, pharmaceuticals, PPE,
decontamination capacity, isolation capacity and interoperable communications, as well as
the enhancement of EMS services, competency based training, and exercises.
Bioterrorism
Training and
Curriculum
Development
Program,
HRSA, HHS
The Bioterrorism Training and Curriculum Development Program (BTCDP) provides
support to health professions schools, health care systems, and other educational entities to
equip a workforce of health care professionals to address emergency preparedness and
response issues. The program consists of two discrete foci: (1) provision of continuing
education for practicing health care providers; and (2) curriculum development and
enhancement and training in health professions schools.
Public Health
Emergency
Preparedness
Cooperative
Agreement,
CDC, HHS
The purpose of the Division of State and Local Readiness' cooperative agreement program is
to upgrade and integrate State and local public health jurisdictions' preparedness for and
response to terrorism and other public health emergencies with Federal, State, local, and
tribal governments, the private sector, and Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs). These
emergency preparedness and response efforts are intended to support the NRP and NIMS.
Activities included in the cooperative agreement are designed to develop emergency-ready
public health departments.
C. Program Guidance
Period of Performance
The period of performance for FY06 EMPG is 24 months, from October 1, 2005 through
September 30, 2007. Although EMPG is an annual process, this period of performance will
allow emergency management agencies (EMAs) maximum flexibility to plan and coordinate the
use of EMPG funds. Any unspent balance will be unobligated by ODP at the end of this period.
Cost Share Requirements
EMPG has a 50% Federal and 50% State cost-share cash or in-kind match requirement. Unless
otherwise authorized by law, Federal funds can not be matched with other Federal funds. In
accordance with Federal guidelines and DHS Office of General Counsel rulings, match
requirements are waived for the U.S. Territories of American Samoa, Guam, the Virgin Islands,
and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. For further information on allowable
sources and types of funds, timing of match contributions, and records for match, please consult
the Office of Grant Operations (OGO) Financial Management Guide. DHS administers cost
FY06 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE GRANTS
12 ISSUANCE DATE: NOVEMBER 14, 2005
PROPGRROAGMR AGMU IGDUAINDCAEN CE
sharing requirements in accordance with 44 C.F.R. 13.24, which is located at
http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/04nov20031500/edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2003/octqt
r/44cfr13.24.htm.
Pass-Through Requirements
Each State shall obligate 100% of the total grant program amount to the designated State-level
EMA. If the SAA is also the EMA, this requirement is automatically met. If the SAA is
separate, or has separate budget processes, then these funds must be obligated to the EMA within
15 days of the grant award date. State EMAs are encouraged to pass EMPG funds through to
local EMAs, as appropriate.
Territorial Pass-Through Requirements: Due to the unique nature of the territorial
governments in Guam, American Samoa, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and the Commonwealth of the
Northern Mariana Islands, no pass-through requirements will be applied to these territories.
However, these territories are expected to take into account the needs of local communities.
Drawdown of Funds
Grantees and subgrantees may elect to drawdown funds up to 120 days prior to
expenditure/disbursement, which echoes the recommendation in the Funding Task Force. ODP
strongly encourages recipients to drawdown funds as close to expenditure as possible to avoid
accruing interest. Funds received by both grantees and subgrantees must be placed in an interestbearing
account and are subject to the rules outlined in 28 C.F.R. Part 66, Uniform
Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements to State and Local
Governments, at http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_04/28cfrv2_04.html and 28 C.F.R.
Part 70, Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Agreements (Including
Subawards) with Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals and other Non-profit Organizations,
at http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_03/28cfr70_03.html. These guidelines state that
subgrantees are required to promptly, but at least quarterly, remit interest earned on advances to:
United States Department of Health and Human Services
Division of Payment Management Services
P.O. Box 6021
Rockville, MD 20852
The subgrantee may keep interest amounts up to $100 per year for administrative expenses.
Please consult the OGO Financial Management Guide or the applicable OMB Circular for
additional guidance.
NOTE: Although advance drawdown requests may be made, State grantees remain subject to
the interest requirements of the Cash Management Improvement Act (CMIA) and its
implementing regulations at 31 C.F.R. Part 205. Interest under CMIA will accrue from the time
Federal funds are credited to a State account until the time the State pays out the funds to a
subgrantee or otherwise for program purposes.
FY06 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE GRANTS
13 ISSUANCE DATE: NOVEMBER 14, 2005
PROPGRROAGMR AGMU IGDUAINDCAEN CE
D. Allowable Costs Guidance
EMPG allowable costs are divided into planning, organization, equipment, training, and
exercises categories. In addition, management and administration (M&A) costs are allowable.
The following provides general EMPG allowable costs guidance:
Planning Costs Guidance
EMPG funds may be used for a range of emergency management planning activities, including
activities and costs related to the EMAP accreditation process (State and/or local):
• Planning for NIMS implementation
• Modifying existing incident management and emergency operations plans to ensure
proper alignment with the NIMS and NRP coordinating structures, processes, and
protocols
• Developing/enhancing comprehensive emergency management plans
• Developing/enhancing all-hazards mitigation plans
• Developing/enhancing catastrophic incident plans
• Developing/enhancing logistics and resource management plans
• Developing/enhancing evacuation plans, including sheltering efforts
• Developing/enhancing mass casualty and mass fatality plans
• Developing/enhancing financial and administrative procedures for use before, during, and
after disaster events in support of a comprehensive emergency management program
• Public education and awareness
• Developing/enhancing a crisis communications plan
• Updating the State Homeland Security Strategy to address all-hazards
• Developing/enhancing other response and recovery plans
• Developing/enhancing emergency management and operations plans to integrate
citizen/volunteer resources and participation
• Conducting a hazard analysis and risk assessment
• Other EMPG-related planning activities.
Organizational Costs Guidance
As provided in law, EMPG funds may be used for all-hazards emergency management
operations, staffing, and other day-to-day activities in support of emergency management.
Proposed staffing activities should still be linked to achieving goals outlined in the EMPG work
plan.
Equipment Costs Guidance
Allowable equipment categories for FY06 EMPG are listed on the web-based Authorized
Equipment List (AEL) on the Responder Knowledge Base (RKB), which is sponsored by ODP
and the National Memorial Institute for the Prevention of Terrorism (MIPT) at
http://www.rkb.mipt.org.
The FY06 EMPG AEL is housed on the RKB and relies heavily on the Standardized Equipment
List (SEL) developed by the InterAgency Board (IAB) for Equipment Standardization and
Interoperability. The FY06 EMPG AEL will be available on the RKB effective December 2,
FY06 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE GRANTS
14 ISSUANCE DATE: NOVEMBER 14, 2005
PROPGRROAGMR AGMU IGDUAINDCAEN CE
2005. The 2006 AEL maintains the cross-referencing to the SEL in an effort to eliminate
redundancy. Both the AEL and SEL are available on the RKB, which also offers an interactive
version that provides links to corresponding SEL items and commercial products.
In some cases, items on the SEL are not allowable under FY06 EMPG or will not be eligible for
purchase unless specific conditions are met. In addition, some items eligible under this grant
program are beyond the scope of the SEL and thus will only appear in the AEL.
The select allowable equipment includes equipment from the following AEL categories:
• Information Technology (Category 4)
• Cyber-Security Enhancement Equipment (Category 5)
• Interoperable Communications Equipment (Category 6)
• Detection Equipment (Category 7)
• Power Equipment (Category 10)
• CBRNE Reference Materials (Category 11)
• CBRNE Incident Response Vehicles (Category 12)
• Physical Security Enhancement Equipment (Category 14)
• CBRNE Logistical Support Equipment (Category 19)
• Other Authorized Equipment (Category 21).
If State agencies and/or local governments have questions concerning the eligibility of
equipment not specifically addressed in the AEL, they should contact their ODP Preparedness
Officer for clarification.
States that are using EMPG funds to purchase Interoperable Communications Equipment
(Category 6) must consult SAFECOM’s coordinated grant guidance which outlines standards
and equipment information to enhance interoperable communications. This guidance can be
found at www.safecomprogram.gov. SAFECOM is a communications program of DHS’ Office
for Interoperability and Compatibility, in the Science and Technology Directorate’s Office of
Systems Engineering and Development.
Training Costs Guidance
EMPG funds may be used for a range of emergency management-related training activities to
enhance the capabilities of State and local personnel, including the following:
• Developing/enhancing systems to monitor training programs
• Conducting all-hazards emergency management training, including NIMS FY 2006
training requirements
• Attending Emergency Management Institute (EMI) training or delivering EMI train-thetrainer
courses in the States as allowed previously under EMPG and not limited to
terrorism-related courses
• Hiring full or part-time staff to support training-related activities
• Other EMPG-related training activities.
FY06 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE GRANTS
15 ISSUANCE DATE: NOVEMBER 14, 2005
PROPGRROAGMR AGMU IGDUAINDCAEN CE
Exercise Costs Guidance
EMPG funds may be used to design, develop, conduct, and evaluate emergency management
related exercises. Exercises must be consistent with the principles outlined in the Homeland
Security Exercise and Evaluation Program (HSEEP), as well as applicable existing emergency
management standards. Activities include the following:
• Developing/enhancing systems to monitor exercise programs
• Conducting all-hazards exercises, based on the likely hazards/scenarios a jurisdiction
may encounter
• Conducting emergency management exercises, while incorporating NIMS FY 2006
exercise requirements
• Hiring full or part-time staff to support exercise-related activities
• Other EMPG-related exercise activities.
Exercises conducted with ODP support (including grant funds) must be managed and executed in
accordance with the Homeland Security Exercise and Evaluation Program (HSEEP). HSEEP
Volumes I-III contain guidance and recommendations for designing, developing, conducting,
and evaluating exercises. HSEEP Volume IV provides sample exercise materials. All four
volumes can be found at the HSEEP website (http://hseep.dhs.gov). Exercises conducted using
EMPG funding must be NIMS compliant.
Management and Administrative Costs Guidance
M&A costs include the following categories of activities:
• Hiring of full-time or part-time staff or contractors/consultants:
o To assist with the management of FY06 EMPG funds
o To assist with design, requirements, and implementation of FY06 EMPG
• Hiring of full-time or part-time staff or contractors/consultants and expenses related to:
o FY06 EMPG pre-application submission management activities and application
requirements
o Meeting compliance with reporting/data collection requirements, including data
calls
• Development of operating plans for information collection and processing necessary to
respond to DHS/ODP data calls
• Travel expenses
• Meeting-related expenses
• Acquisition of authorized office equipment, including personal computers, laptop
computers, printers, LCD projectors, and other equipment or software which may be
required to support the implementation of the homeland security strategy
• The following are allowable only within the period of performance of the grant program:
o Recurring fees/charges associated with certain equipment, such as cell phones,
faxes, etc.
o Leasing and/or renting of space for newly hired personnel to administer programs
within FY06 EMPG.
FY06 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE GRANTS
16 ISSUANCE DATE: NOVEMBER 14, 2005
PROPGRROAGMR AGMU IGDUAINDCAEN CE
M&A costs are allowable for both State and local-level EMAs. The State EMA may use up to
5% of the total amount for M&A purposes. If the SAA is not the EMA, the SAA is not eligible
to retain funds for M&A. In addition, local EMAs may retain and use up to 3% of their
subaward from the State for local M&A purposes.
E. Construction and Renovation Guidance
While the EMPG program is not intended to support construction activities, DHS recognizes that
an updated, functioning emergency operations center (EOC), accessible to and usable by
individuals with disabilities, is a core component of an effective emergency management system.
Therefore, limited construction and renovation activities for EOCs are allowable under EMPG,
consistent with past EMPG practices. The State must match 50% of any money used for
construction and must comply with the Davis-Bacon Act. (Additional information on the Davis-
Bacon Act is available from the following website: http://www.dol.gov/esa/programs/dbra/.)
In order for grantees to drawdown funds for limited EOC construction and renovation projects
under EMPG:
1. Grantee must provide to ODP:
a. Description of the EOC facility, location, and the scope of the construction or
renovation project
b. Certification that an assessment has been conducted to identify EOC needs
regarding such issues as the facility, communications capability, computer
systems and network capabilities, survivability, and sustainability
c. How the construction or renovation project will address the needs identified from
the assessment
d. Consequences of not implementing the construction or renovation project
2. Written approval must be provided by ODP prior to the use of any EMPG funds for
construction or renovation.
• National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). NEPA requires ODP to analyze the
possible environmental impacts of each construction project. The purpose of a NEPA
review is to weigh the impact of major Federal actions or actions undertaken using
Federal funds on adjacent communities, water supplies, historical buildings, endangered
species, or culturally sensitive areas prior to construction. Grantees wanting to use ODP
funding for construction projects must complete and submit a NEPA Compliance
Checklist to their respective ODP Preparedness Officer for review. Additionally,
grantees may be required to provide additional detailed information on the activities to be
conducted, locations, sites, possible construction activities, possible alternatives, and any
environmental concerns that may exist. Results of the NEPA Compliance Review could
result in a project not being approved for ODP funding or the need for ODP to perform
an Environmental Assessment (EA) or draft an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).
FY06 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE GRANTS
17 ISSUANCE DATE: NOVEMBER 14, 2005
PROPGRROAGMR AGMU IGDUAINDCAEN CE
F. Personnel Costs Guidance
Personnel costs, including salary, overtime, compensatory time off, and associated fringe
benefits, are allowable under FY06 EMPG. These costs must comply with OMB Circular A-87,
Cost Principles for State, Local, and Indian Tribal Governments. Proposed personnel costs
should still be linked to achieving objectives outlined in the EMPG work plan.
G. Unallowable Costs Guidance
Several costs are strictly prohibited under FY06 EMPG. Grantees should contact their ODP
Preparedness Officer for guidance and clarification on the following unallowable costs:
Construction and Renovation
Construction and renovation are generally prohibited, except as noted above under Construction
and Renovation Guidance on page 16.
Hiring of Public Safety Personnel
EMPG funds may not be used to support the hiring of sworn public safety officers for the
purposes of fulfilling traditional public safety duties or to supplant traditional public safety
positions and responsibilities.
H. General Guidance
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)
ODP recognizes that much of the information submitted in the course of applying for funding
under this program, or provided in the course of its grant management activities, may be
considered law enforcement sensitive or otherwise important to national security interests. This
may include threat, risk, and needs assessment information, and discussions of demographics,
transportation, public works, and industrial and public health infrastructures. While this
information under Federal control is subject to requests made pursuant to the Freedom of
Information Act, 5. U.S.C. §552, all determinations concerning the release of information of this
nature are made on a case-by-case basis by the DHS FOIA Office, and may likely fall within one
or more of the available exemptions under the Act. Applicants are encouraged to consult their
own State and local laws and regulations regarding the release of information, which should be
considered when reporting sensitive matters in the grant application, needs assessment and
strategic planning process. Applicants may also consult their ODP Preparedness Officer
regarding concerns or questions about the release of information under State and local laws.
Grantees should be familiar with the regulations governing protected critical infrastructure
information (6 C.F.R. Part 29) and sensitive security information (49 C.F.R. Part 1520), as these
designations may provide additional protection to certain classes of homeland security
information.
Services to Limited English Proficient (LEP) Persons
Recipients of ODP financial assistance are required to comply with several Federal civil rights
laws, including Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended. These laws prohibit
discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, and sex in the delivery of
services. National origin discrimination includes discrimination on the basis of limited English
proficiency. To ensure compliance with Title VI, recipients are required to take reasonable steps
FY06 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE GRANTS
18 ISSUANCE DATE: NOVEMBER 14, 2005
PROPGRROAGMR AGMU IGDUAINDCAEN CE
to ensure that LEP persons have meaningful access to their programs. Meaningful access may
entail providing language assistance services, including oral and written translation, where
necessary. Grantees are encouraged to consider the need for language services for LEP persons
served or encountered both in developing their proposals and budgets and in conducting their
programs and activities. Reasonable costs associated with providing meaningful access for LEP
individuals are considered allowable program costs. For additional information, please see
http://www.lep.gov.
Integrating Individuals with Disabilities into Emergency Planning
Executive Order #13347, entitled “Individuals with Disabilities in Emergency Preparedness” and
signed in July 2004, requires the Federal Government to support safety and security for
individuals with disabilities in situations involving disasters, including earthquakes, tornadoes,
fires, floods, hurricanes, and acts of terrorism. Consequently, Federal agencies are required to:
1) encourage consideration of the unique needs of employees and individuals with disabilities
served by State, local, and tribal governments and private organizations and individuals in
emergency preparedness planning; and 2) facilitate cooperation among Federal, State, local, and
tribal governments and private organizations and individuals in the implementation of
emergency preparedness plans as they relate to individuals with disabilities. A January 2005
letter to Governors from Secretary Ridge asked States to consider several steps in protecting
individuals with disabilities:
• Ensure that your State’s existing emergency preparedness plans are as comprehensive as
possible with regard to the issues facing individuals with disabilities
• Ensure that emergency information and resources are available by accessible means and
in accessible formats
• Consider expending Federal homeland security dollars on initiatives that address and/or
respond to the needs of individuals with disabilities for emergency preparedness,
response, and recovery.
Grantees are encouraged to use funding for activities that integrate people with disabilities into
their planning and response processes. Grantees can consult Census data for their geographic
location to discover the percentage of the population that is categorized as individuals with
disabilities.
Further information can be found at the Disability and Emergency Preparedness Resource Center
at www.dhs.gov/disabilitypreparedness. This Resource Center provides information to assist
emergency managers and in planning and response efforts related to people with disabilities.
Buy American Act Compliance
In general, grantees are not required to comport with the restrictions of the Buy American Act
(41 U.S.C. 10a). However, grants authorized under the Stafford Act, including the EMPG
program, must follow these standards. The Buy American Act requires that all materials
purchased be produced in the United States, unless such materials are not available, or such a
purchase would not be in the public interest.
FY06 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE GRANTS
19 ISSUANCE DATE: NOVEMBER 14, 2005
PROPGRROAGMR AGMU IGDUAINDCAEN CE
I. ODP Resources and Support
To assist grantees with program activities, ODP has several support mechanisms available to
grantees.
Role of ODP’s Preparedness Officers
Throughout the project period, ODP Preparedness Officers will work closely with State and local
officials in assigned States and territories to assist agencies in enhancing their homeland security
preparedness through planning, training, equipment acquisition, exercises, and technical
assistance. Preparedness Officers will be in continuous contact with the SAAs and local
officials, and should be considered as the primary point of contact within ODP for addressing
questions, concerns, general issues, and accessing specialized expertise.
Additionally, ODP Regional Preparedness Officers are available to work closely with State and
local officials in their assigned regions and to serve as a regional liaison for national ODP
programs. The ODP Regional Preparedness Officer is also available to support and review State
and local planning efforts related to the EMPG and MMRS programs, and the associated
development of applications, work plans and performance evaluations for EMPG.
Role of ODP’s Exercise Managers
ODP Exercise Managers will work closely with state and local exercise points of contact in
assigned States and territories to assist agencies in enhancing their homeland security
preparedness through exercise conduct. Exercise Managers should be considered as the primary
point of contact within ODP for addressing questions and concerns regarding exercises.
Centralized Scheduling and Information Desk (CSID) Help Line
CSID is a non-emergency resource for use by State and local emergency responders across the
nation. CSID provides general information on all ODP programs and information on the
characteristics and control of CBRNE materials, defensive equipment, mitigation techniques, and
available Federal assets and resources. CSID also provides information on the following
services: CBRNE training, centralized scheduling capability, CBRNE exercises, State Homeland
Security Assessment and Strategy Grants, and technical assistance (TA).
CSID can be contacted by telephone at 1-800-368-6498 or via email at askcsid@dhs.gov. CSID hours of
operation are from 8:00 a.m. - 7:00 p.m. (EST), Monday through Friday.
Federal Fiscal Support and Oversight
ODP’s OGO will provide fiscal support and oversight of the grant programs included in this
solicitation. All grant and sub-grant recipients should refer to the OGO Financial Management
Guide. Please contact OGO to obtain a copy of this Guide. OGO can be contacted by telephone
at 1-866-9ASKOGO or by email at ask-OGO@dhs.gov.
Homeland Security Preparedness Technical Assistance Program
ODP’s technical assistance program is a capabilities-based program that seeks to build and
sustain State and local jurisdiction capacity related to two primary functional areas: (1) overall
homeland security program management; and (2) priority preparedness activities (prevent,
protect against, respond to, and recover from major events, including threats or acts of terrorism).
FY06 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE GRANTS
20 ISSUANCE DATE: NOVEMBER 14, 2005
PROPGRROAGMR AGMU IGDUAINDCAEN CE
This two-pronged approach ensures that technical assistance services measurably contribute to
the enhancement of the homeland security architecture within each state and local jurisdiction as
well as the associated preparedness capabilities housed therein. The technical assistance services
designed, developed, and delivered to State and local homeland security personnel address the
full spectrum of mission areas, priorities, and capabilities outlined in the National Preparedness
Goal. All technical assistance services are available to eligible recipients at no charge. ODP will
cover the cost of providing the technical expertise, travel, and related expenses.
For additional information, please refer to ODP’s online TA site at
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/odp/ta.htm under the Catalog link or contact CSID.
Lessons Learned Information Sharing (LLIS) System
LLIS is a national, online, secure website that houses a collection of peer-validated lessons
learned, best practices, and AARs from exercises and actual incidents, and other relevant
homeland security documents. LLIS is designed to help emergency response providers and
homeland security officials prevent, prepare for, respond to, and recover from catastrophic
events and acts of terrorism. LLIS facilitates improved preparedness nationwide by providing
response professionals with access to a wealth of validated front-line expertise on effective
planning, training, equipping, and operational practices for homeland security.
The LLIS website also includes a national directory of responders and homeland security
officials, as well as an updated list of homeland security exercises, events, and conferences.
Additionally, LLIS includes online collaboration tools, including secure email and message
boards, where users can exchange information. LLIS uses strong encryption and active site
monitoring to protect all information housed on the system. The LLIS website is located at
located at https://www.LLIS.gov.
Additional information on each of these programs can be found on the ODP website located at:
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/odp or by contacting the State’s assigned ODP Preparedness Officer.
FY06 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE GRANTS
ISSUANCE DATE: NOVEMBER 14, 2005
III. ELIGIBLE
APPLICANTS AND
FUNDING AVAILABILITY
FY06 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE GRANTS
22
ELIGIBLE APPLICANTS AND FUNDING AVAILABILITY
III. ELIGIBLE APPLICANTS AND FUNDING AVAILABILITY
A. Eligible Applicants
The Governor of each State has designated an SAA to apply for and administer ODP grant funds.
The SAA is the only agency eligible to apply for FY06 EMPG funds and is responsible for
passing through those funds to the State EMA within prescribed timelines.
B. Funding
Per Congressional direction, FY06 EMPG funds have been allocated consistent with previous
fiscal years. Pursuant to the Compact of Free Association, $50,000 may be available for the
Federated States of Micronesia and $50,000 for the Republic of the Marshall Islands. Table 2
provides a breakdown by State of FY06 EMPG funding allocations.
Table 2. FY06 EMPG Funding Allocation
State/Territory FY06 Allocation State/Territory FY06 Allocation
Alabama $ 2,990,292.00 New Hampshire $ 1,811,165.00
Alaska $ 1,579,387.00 New Jersey $ 4,497,040.00
Arizona $ 3,346,277.00 New Mexico $ 2,024,094.00
Arkansas $ 2,338,031.00 New York $ 8,376,735.00
California $ 14,236,075.00 North Carolina $ 4,397,775.00
Colorado $ 2,997,532.00 North Dakota $ 1,575,815.00
Connecticut $ 2,613,621.00 Ohio $ 5,536,456.00
Delaware $ 1,639,410.00 Oklahoma $ 2,625,696.00
District of Columbia $ 1,552,473.00 Oregon $ 2,635,897.00
Florida $ 7,479,004.00 Pennsylvania $ 5,871,885.00
Georgia $ 4,485,848.00 Rhode Island $ 1,735,818.00
Hawaii $ 1,800,137.00 South Carolina $ 2,851,022.00
Idaho $ 1,835,393.00 South Dakota $ 1,622,362.00
Illinois $ 5,969,142.00 Tennessee $ 3,471,431.00
Indiana $ 3,604,254.00 Texas $ 9,339,277.00
Iowa $ 2,421,236.00 Utah $ 2,193,427.00
Kansas $ 2,340,116.00 Vermont $ 1,569,343.00
Kentucky $ 2,845,654.00 Virginia $ 4,020,848.00
Louisiana $ 2,988,865.00 Washington $ 3,571,151.00
Maine $ 1,818,307.00 West Virginia $ 2,004,480.00
Maryland $ 3,346,891.00 Wisconsin $ 3,340,701.00
Massachusetts $ 3,703,030.00 Wyoming $ 1,526,119.00
Michigan $ 5,033,090.00 Puerto Rico $ 2,759,680.00
Minnesota $ 3,185,941.00 Virgin Islands $ 654,248.00
Mississippi $ 2,397,372.00 American Samoa $ 468,716.00
Missouri $ 3,425,703.00 Guam $ 609,316.00
Montana $ 1,676,890.00 Northern Mariana Islands $ 487,308.00
Nebraska $ 1,977,881.00 Republic of the Marshall Islands $ 51,694.00
Nevada $ 2,140,955.00 Federated States of Micronesia $ 51,694.00
Total $179,450,000
FY06 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE GRANTS
ISSUANCE DATE: NOVEMBER 14, 2005
IV. APPLICATION KIT
FY06 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE GRANTS
24 ISSUANCE DATE: NOVEMBER 14, 2005
APPLICATION KIT
IV. APPLICATION KIT
SAAs must apply for FY06 EMPG funding through the online Grants Management System
(GMS) at https://grants.ojp.usdoj.gov/. Applications are available as of November 14, 2005 and
must be received by ODP no later than December 14, 2005. ODP will evaluate applications and
award funds within 30 days of receipt of application.
These grants are through DHS/ODP. The program title listed in the Catalog of Federal Domestic
Assistance (CFDA) at http://12.46.245.173/cfda/cfda.html is “Office for Domestic Preparedness
Fiscal Year 2006 Emergency Management Performance Grants.” The CFDA number for FY06
EMPG is 97.042. When completing the online application, applicants should identify their
submissions as new, non-construction applications. The project period will be for a period not to
exceed 24 months. Table 3 outlines the required application elements.
Table 3. EMPG Application Checklist
Required Application Submissions
1. SF-424 Grant Application with certifications (through GMS)
• Non-Supplanting Certification: This certification from the SAA, which is a required
component of the online GMS application, affirms that Federal funds will only be used to
supplement existing funds and will not replace (supplant) funds that have been
appropriated for the same purpose. Potential supplanting will be addressed in the
application review as well as in the pre-award review, post-award monitoring, and the
audit. Applicants or grantees may be required to supply documentation certifying that a
reduction in non-Federal resources occurred for reasons other than the receipt or expected
receipt of Federal funds.
? SF-424 Grant Application with Certifications (through GMS)
? Non-Supplanting Certification
? Assurances
? Certifications Regarding Lobbying; Debarment, Suspension, and
Other Responsibility Matters; and Drug-Free Workplace Requirement
? DUNS Number
? EMPG Program Narrative and Budget
? Program Narrative
? PART I: Management Capabilities
? PART II: Challenges and Impediments
? PART III: Recommendations
? PART IV: Major Initiatives
? PART V: NEMB-CAP
? PART VI: Work Plan
? PART VII: Catastrophic Planning
? Budget and Budget Narrative
? Review of Application by the State Single Point of Contact (SPOC)
FY06 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE GRANTS
25 ISSUANCE DATE: NOVEMBER 14, 2005
APPLICATION KIT
• Match Requirement: EMPG has a 50% Federal and 50% State cost-share cash or inkind
match requirement. Unless otherwise authorized by law, Federal funds can not be
matched with other Federal funds. In accordance with Federal guidelines and DHS OGC
rulings, match requirements are waived for the U.S. Territories of American Samoa,
Guam, the Virgin Islands, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. For
further information on allowable sources and types of funds, timing of match
contributions, and records for match, please consult the OGO Financial Management
Guide.
• Assurances: The online GMS application includes a list of assurances that the applicant
must comply with in order to receive Federal funds under this program. It is the
responsibility of the recipient of the Federal funds to fully understand and comply with
these requirements. Failure to comply may result in the withholding of funds,
termination of the award, or other sanctions. The applicant agrees to these assurances
upon the submission of the application.
• Certifications Regarding Lobbying; Debarment, Suspension, and Other
Responsibility Matters; and Drug-Free Workplace Requirement: This certification,
which is a required component of the online application, commits the applicant to
compliance with the certification requirements under 28 C.F.R. Part 67, Governmentwide
Debarment and Suspension (Non-procurement); 28 C.F.R. Part 69, New
Restrictions on Lobbying; and 28 C.F.R. Part 83 Government-wide Requirements for
Drug-Free Workplace (Grants). All of these can be referenced at
http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_04/28cfrv2_04.html. The certification will
be treated as a material representation of the fact upon which reliance will be placed by
DHS in awarding grants.
• Suspension or Termination of Funding: DHS, by written notice, may terminate this
grant, in whole or in part, when it is in the Government's interest.
2. DUNS Number. The SAA must provide a Dun and Bradstreet (D&B) Data Universal
Numbering System (DUNS) number with the FY06 EMPG application. An application will
not be considered complete until a valid DUNS number is provided by the applicant. This
number may be provided in one of the attachment fields within the online GMS application.
Organizations should verify having a DUNS number or take the steps necessary to obtain one
as soon as possible. Applicants can receive a DUNS number at no cost by calling the
dedicated toll-free DUNS Number request line at 1-800-333-0505.
3. EMPG Program Narrative and Budget. Grantees must maintain and expand any
necessary capabilities to sustain an effective emergency management program. These
capabilities must be able to address all-hazards emergencies. To help assess these
capabilities, the FY06 EMPG requires that all EMPG award recipients submit a narrative as a
part of the EMPG application. To frame the program narrative, please use the following
structure:
FY06 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE GRANTS
26 ISSUANCE DATE: NOVEMBER 14, 2005
APPLICATION KIT
EMPG Program Narrative
PART I: Management Capabilities. Please provide a description of current resource
management capabilities to develop, implement, and manage the programmatic
requirements associated with EMPG funding and other Federally funded programs
supporting the State emergency management program and the State Homeland Security
Strategy. When describing current management capabilities, consider including such
information as the following:
• Identify the major organizations, committees, and other structures accountable for
implementing the emergency management program initiatives
• Provide an overview of the core emergency management organization, and the
structures used to support emergency management across the State.
• Indicate the staffing/resource levels within those core organization responsible for
program administration and oversight
• Provide an overview of the process(es) used to determine funds allocation to any
subgrantee of the emergency management authority.
In addition, the description must make specific reference to the following:
• Current efforts to achieve NIMS implementation and institutionalization across the
entire State/territory response system during FY06
• Current efforts to address deficiencies identified as a result of the NEMB-CAP
process, the EMAP process, or other emergency management-related assessments
• Current efforts to enhance or sustain existing capabilities already put into place to
address shortfalls identified through the NEMB-CAP process, the EMAP process, or
other emergency management-related assessments
• Current efforts to institutionalize all-hazards preparedness into the existing State
Homeland Security Strategy.
PART II: Challenges and Impediments. Please provide an explanation of challenges
and impediments that complicate the administration and management of programs
supporting the statewide emergency management program.
PART III: Recommendations. Please provide recommendations for beneficial services,
tools, and/or resources that would assist the State/territory in better implementing the
statewide emergency management program and integrating the program into the existing
State Homeland Security Strategy.
PART IV: Major Initiatives. Please provide a list of major emergency management
initiatives and a brief overview of each initiative. The overview should address the major
objectives and key milestones of the initiative, as well as how it relates to the Emergency
Management Functions identified through EMAP. Consistent with the emergency
management function chosen, the State may propose activities at a local level as well as
activities that have statewide application. For example, a State’s program objective for
exercises may include those conducted by counties or municipalities as well as those
conducted by the State.
FY06 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE GRANTS
27 ISSUANCE DATE: NOVEMBER 14, 2005
APPLICATION KIT
PART V: NEMB-CAP. Please provide a summary of key shortfalls identified in the NEMBCAP
process. States who have not yet completed the NEMB-CAP assessment should note
that in their work plan, including expected timeframe for completion of the NEMB-CAP or
provide a summary of shortfalls as identified in the most recent relevant assessment.
PART VI. Work Plan. Please provide a proposed work plan to address specific areas of need
identified in the NEMB-CAP process or other assessment process. If a State has not
completed NEMB-CAP, it should use the EMAP Standard and lessons learned from
catastrophic events, such as Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, to assist in identifying and
prioritizing areas upon which to focus. If the key areas of need or weaknesses identified in the
NEMB-CAP process have already been addressed, the State should describe how it will
sustain these capabilities or how it will address any other priority needs identified
through ongoing assessment efforts.
PART VII. Catastrophic Planning. Please provide a detailed summary of catastrophic
planning efforts and proposed actions to address.
EMPG Budget and Budget Narrative
Additionally, all EMPG award recipients are required to submit a budget and budget
narrative addressing EMPG related costs and expenses, as a part of the EMPG
application. This budget narrative should be brief and should serve to: (1) explain how
the costs were estimated, (2) justify the need for the costs, and (3) outline how the match
requirement of the grant program will be met. For clarification purposes, the narrative
should include tables describing cost and expense elements (e.g. equipment list with unit
costs/quantity). ODP Preparedness Officers can provide additional guidance on the
development of this narrative.
4. Single Point of Contact (SPOC) Review: Executive Order 12372, located at
http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/codification/executive_order/12372.html, requires
applicants from State and local units of government or other organizations providing services
within a State to submit a copy of the application to the State SPOC, if one exists and if this
program has been selected for review by the State. Applicants must contact their State SPOC to
determine if the program has been selected for State review. The date that the application was
sent to the SPOC or the reason such submission is not required should be provided.
Applicants must familiarize themselves with the requirements and restrictions of the
Program Guidance for FY06 EMPG, available in Sections I through V of the Fiscal
Year 2006 Emergency Management Performance Grants: Program Guidance and
Application Kit. The Program Guidelines contain critical information regarding this
grant program. All grant recipients are assumed to have read, understood, and
accepted the Program Guidance as binding.
FY06 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE GRANTS
ISSUANCE DATE: NOVEMBER 14, 2005
V. AWARD AND
REPORTING
REQUIREMENTS
FY06 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE GRANTS
29 ISSUANCE DATE: NOVEMBER 14, 2005
AWARD AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
V. AWARD AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
A. Grant Award to State
Upon approval of the application, the grant will be awarded to the respective SAA. This date
will be known as the “award date.” The State’s obligation period must be met within 15 days of
the award date. See Appendix A: Sample Award Package for additional information.
Required Submissions: Signed award document and special conditions returned to the OJP
OC Control Desk.
B. Drawdown of Funds
Following acceptance of the grant award and release of any special conditions withholding
funds, the grantee can drawdown funds through the Automated Standard Application for
Payments (ASAP), Phone Activated Paperless Response System (PAPRS), or Letter Of Credit
Electronic Certification System (LOCES) payment systems.
In support of our continuing effort to meet the accelerated financial statement reporting
requirements mandated by the U.S. Department of the Treasury and the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB), payment processing will be interrupted during the last five (5) working days
of each month. SAAs should make payment requests before the last five working days of the
month to avoid delays in deposit of payments. For example, for the month of September, the last
day to request (drawdown) payments will be September 23, 2005. Payments requested after
September 23, 2005 will be processed when the regular schedule resumes on October 1, 2005. A
similar schedule will follow at the end of each month thereafter.
To avoid denial of payment requests, grantees are encouraged to submit their SF269a FSRs
online at http://grants.ojp.usdoj.gov. Additional information and instructions are available at this
website.
Questions regarding grant payments should be addressed to the OJP OC by telephone at 1-800-
458-0786 or email askoc@ojp.usdoj.gov. Questions regarding all other financial/administrative
issues should be addressed to the OGO Information Line at 1-866-9ASKOGO (927-5646) or
email at ask-ogo@dhs.gov.
C. Reporting Requirements
Reporting requirements for all programs included in EMPG will be consolidated into a single
reporting system.
Financial Status Report
Obligations and expenditures must be reported to ODP on a quarterly basis through the Financial
Status Report (FSR), which is due within 45 days of the end of each calendar quarter (i.e. for the
quarter ending March 31, FSR is due on May 15). A report must be submitted for every quarter
the award is active, including partial calendar quarters, as well as for periods where no grant
activity occurs. A copy of this form will be included in the initial award package. Future awards
FY06 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE GRANTS
30 ISSUANCE DATE: NOVEMBER 14, 2005
AWARD AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
and fund drawdowns will be withheld if these reports are delinquent. FSRs may be filed on-line
through the internet at http://grants.ojp.usdoj.gov.
Grantees are reminded to review the following documents and ensure that grant activities are
conducted in accordance with the applicable guidance:
• OMB Circular A-102, Grants and Cooperative Agreements with State and Local
Governments, at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars/index.html
• OMB Circular A-87, Cost Principles for State, Local, and Indian Tribal Governments, at
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars/index.html
• OMB Circular A-110, Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Other
Agreements with Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals and Other Non-Profit
Organizations, at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars/index.html
• OMB Circular A-21, Cost Principles for Educational Institutions, at
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars/index.html
• OMB Circular A-122, Cost Principles for Non-Profit Organizations, at
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars/index.html.
Additionally, grantees should be familiar with the requirements included in the OGO Financial
Management Guide. This Guide may be obtained by contacting OGO.
Required Submissions: FSR (quarterly).
Biannual Strategy Implementation Reports (BSIR) and Categorical Assistance Progress
Report (CAPR)
Following award of grant, the State and subgrantees will be responsible for providing updated
obligation and expenditure information on a regular basis. States will provide consolidated
information to ODP in their BSIR. The BSIR submission will satisfy the narrative requirement
in Box 12 of the biannual Categorical Assistance Progress Report (CAPR – OJP Form 4587/1).
States will still be required to submit the CAPR form with a line in box 12 which reads: See
BSIR. The BSIR and the CAPR are due within 30 days after the end of the reporting period (July
31 with a reporting period of January 1 through June 30, and on January 31 with a reporting
period of July 1 though December 31). Updated obligation and expenditure information must be
provided with the BSIR to show progress made in meeting strategic goals and objectives. ODP
will provide a web-enabled application for the BSIR submission to grantees and a copy of the
CAPR (OJP Form 4587/1) will be included in the initial award package. Future awards and fund
drawdowns may be withheld if these reports are delinquent. The final BSIR is due 120 days
after the end date of the award period.
Required Submissions: BSIR (biannually).
Exercise Evaluation and Improvement
Exercises implemented with grant funds should be threat- and performance-based and should
evaluate performance of critical tasks required to respond to the exercise scenario. Guidance on
conducting exercise evaluations and implementing improvement is defined in the HSEEP
Volume Exercise Evaluation and Improvement located at http://hseep.dhs.gov. Exercises
FY06 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE GRANTS
31 ISSUANCE DATE: NOVEMBER 14, 2005
AWARD AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
must be included in the Multiyear Exercise Plan calendar, and added to the National Exercise
Schedule through the ODP Secure Portal. The SAA must report on scheduled exercises and
ensure that an AAR and Improvement Plan (IP) are prepared for each exercise conducted with
ODP support (grant funds or direct support) and submitted to ODP within 60 days following
completion of the exercise.
The AAR documents the performance of exercise related tasks and makes recommendations for
improvements. The IP outlines the actions that the exercising jurisdiction(s) plans to take to
address recommendations contained in the AAR. Generally, the IP, with at least initial action
steps, should be included in the final AAR. ODP is establishing a national database to facilitate
the scheduling of exercises, the submission of the AAR/IPs and the tracking of IP
implementation. Guidance on development of AARs and IPs is provided in the HSEEP manuals.
Financial and Compliance Audit Report
Recipients that expend $500,000 or more of Federal funds during their fiscal year are required to
submit an organization-wide financial and compliance audit report. The audit must be performed
in accordance with the U.S. General Accountability Office Government Auditing Standards,
located at http://www.gao.gov/govaud/ybk01.htm, and OMB Circular A-133, Audits of States,
Local Governments, and Non-Profit Organizations , located at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb
/circulars/index.html. Audit reports are currently due to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse no later
than 9 months after the end of the recipient’s fiscal year. In addition, the Secretary of Homeland
Security and the Comptroller General of the United States shall have access to any books,
documents, and records of recipients of FY06 EMPG assistance for audit and examination
purposes, provided that, in the opinion of the Secretary of Homeland Security or the Comptroller
General, these documents are related to the receipt or use of such assistance. The grantee will
also give the sponsoring agency or the Comptroller General, through any authorized
representative, access to and the right to examine all records, books, papers or documents related
to the grant.
The State shall require that subgrantees comply with the audit requirements set forth in OMB
Circular A-133. Recipients are responsible for ensuring that sub-recipient audit reports are
received and for resolving any audit findings.
D. Monitoring
Grant recipients will be monitored periodically by ODP Preparedness Officers and OGO to
ensure that the program goals, objectives, timeliness, budgets, and other related program criteria
are being met. Monitoring is accomplished through a combination of office-based and on-site
monitoring visits. Monitoring involves the review and analysis of the financial, programmatic,
and administrative issues relative to each program, and helps identify areas where technical
assistance and other support may be needed.
The SAA is responsible for monitoring subgrantee activities to provide reasonable assurance that
the sub-recipient administers Federal awards in compliance with Federal and State requirements.
Responsibilities include the accounting of receipts and expenditures, cash management, the
maintaining of adequate financial records, and the refunding of expenditures disallowed by
audits.
FY06 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE GRANTS
32 ISSUANCE DATE: NOVEMBER 14, 2005
AWARD AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
E. Grant Close-Out Process
Within 120 days after the end of the grant period, the grantee will submit a final FSR and a final
BSIR detailing all accomplishments throughout the project. After both of these reports have
been reviewed and approved by the ODP Preparedness Officer, a Grant Adjustment Notice
(GAN) will be completed to close-out the grant. The GAN will indicate the project as being
closed, list any remaining funds that will be de-obligated, and address the requirement of
maintaining the grant records for three years from the date of the final FSR. After the financial
information is received and approved by OGO, the grant will be identified as ‘Closed by the
Office of Grant Operations.’
Required Submissions: 1) Final SF-269, 2) Final CAPR, and 3) Final BSIR.
FY06 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE GRANTS
Appendix A
Sample Award Package
FY06 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE GRANTS
A-1
APPENDIX A: SAMPLE AWARD PACKAGE
TAB 1: SAMPLE REVIEW OF AWARD
Office for Domestic Preparedness
Office of Grant Operations
Post Award Instructions for ODP Awards
1. Review Award and Special Conditions Document.
Carefully read the award and any special conditions or other attachments. There is an original
plus one copy of the award page.
If you agree with the terms and conditions, the authorized official should sign and date both the
original and the copy of the award document page in Block 19. You should maintain a copy and
return the original signed documents to:
Office of Justice Programs
Attn: Control Desk - ODP Award
810 Seventh Street, NW – 5th Floor
Washington, DC 20531
If you do not agree with the terms and conditions, contact the awarding ODP Preparedness
Officer as noted in the award package.
2. Read Guidelines.
Become familiar with the OGO Financial Management Guide, which is available by contacting
OGO at 1-866-9ASKOGO. New award recipients are automatically placed on a mailing list to
receive future Guides and their change sets.
Up to 5 copies of the Guide may be ordered at no cost through: http://puborder.ncjrs.org
You may also order the Guide by calling 1-800-851-3420. Select #2 for publications, select #1
to speak with a publications specialist.
FY06 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE GRANTS
A-2
TAB 2: SAMPLE POST AWARD INSTRUCTION
Office for Domestic Preparedness
Office of Grant Operations
Office of the Comptroller
Post Award Instructions
OGO will provide fiscal support and oversight of the ODP grant programs, while the OJP OC
will continue to provide support for grant payments. The following is provided as a guide for the
administration of awards from ODP. Forms and other documents illustrating each step are
attached.
Step 1. Review Award and Special Conditions.
If you agree with the terms and conditions stated in the award, sign and date the award document
and the last page of the Special Conditions, and return to OJP. Notify an ODP Preparedness
Officer when Special Conditions have been met (refer to Step 1 attachment);
If you do not agree with the terms and conditions as written, contact an ODP Preparedness
Officer.
Step 2. Read Guidelines.
Read and become familiar with the OGO Financial Management Guide and related material
Step 3. Complete and Return Automated Clearing House (ACH) Form.
The ACH Vendor/Miscellaneous Payment Enrollment Form (refer to Step 3 attachment) is used
to arrange direct deposit of funds into the designated bank account.
Step 4. Access to Payment Systems.
OJP uses two payment systems: Phone Activated Paperless System (PAPRS) and Letter of
Credit Electronic Certification System (LOCES) (refer to Step 4 attachment). Current LOCES
users will see the addition of new ODP grants on the LOCES grant number listing as soon as the
ODP award acceptance has been received. PAPRS grantees will receive a letter with the award
package containing their PIN to access the system and Grant ID information.
Step 5. Reporting Requirements.
Reporting requirements must be met during the life of the grant (refer to the OGO Financial
Management Guide and the specific program guidance for a full explanation of these
requirements, special conditions and any applicable exceptions). The payment systems contain
edits which will prevent access to funds if reporting requirements are not met on a timely basis.
Refer to Step 5 attachments for forms, due date information, and instructions.
Step 6. Questions about your ODP award?
A reference sheet is provided containing frequently asked financial questions and answers.
Questions regarding grant payments should be addressed to the OJP OC at 1-800-458-0786 or
email askoc@ojp.usdoj.gov. Questions regarding all other financial/administrative issues should
be addressed to the OGO Information Line at 1-866-9ASKOGO (927-5646) or email at askogo@
dhs.gov.
FY06 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE GRANTS
APPENDIX B
LIST OF TERMS
FY06 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE GRANTS
B-1
APPENDIX B: LIST OF TERMS
A
AEL Authorized Equipment List
ASAP Automated Standard Application for Payments
B
BSIR Biannual Strategy Implementation Reports
BZPP Buffer Zone Protection Plan
C
CAPR Categorical Assistance Progress Reports
CBRNE Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear, and Explosive
CCP Citizen Corps Program
CDC Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CFDA Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
CSID Centralized Scheduling and Information Desk
D
D&B Dun and Bradstreet
DHS U.S. Department of Homeland Security
DOJ U.S. Department of Justice
DUNS Data Universal Numbering System
E
EA Environmental Assessment
EIS Environmental Impact Statement
EMA Emergency Management Agency
EMAP Emergency Management Accreditation Program
EMI Emergency Management Institute
EMPG Emergency Management Performance Grants
EOC Emergency Operations Center
EOP Emergency Operations Plan
F
FAR Federal Acquisition Regulations
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
FICA Federal Insurance Contributions Act
FOIA Freedom of Information Act
FSR Financial Status Report
G
GAN Grant Adjustment Notice
GMS Grants Management System
H
HazMat Hazardous Materials
HHS U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
FY06 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE GRANTS
B-2
HRSA Health Resources and Services Administration
HSEEP Homeland Security Exercise and Evaluation Program
HSGP Homeland Security Grant Program
HSPD Homeland Security Presidential Directive
I
IAB InterAgency Board
ICS Incident Command System
L
LEP Limited English Proficient
LETPP Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention Program
LLIS Lessons Learned Information Sharing
LOCES Letter of Credit Electronic Certification System
M
M&A Management and Administrative
MIPT National Memorial Institute for the Prevention of Terrorism
MMRS Metropolitan Medical Response System
N
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act
NIC NIMS Integration Center
NIMS National Incident Management System
NRP National Response Plan
O
OC Office of the Comptroller
ODP Office for Domestic Preparedness
OJP Office of Justice Programs
OGO Office of Grant Operations
OMB Office of Management and Budget
P
PAPRS Phone Activated Paperless Request System
R
RKB Responder Knowledge Base
S
SAA State Administrative Agency
SHSP State Homeland Security Program
SPOC Single Point of Contact
T
TCL Target Capabilities List
U
UASI Urban Areas Security Initiative
UTL Universal Task List