Estimating the Value of Partner Contributions to Flood Mapping Projects 

Blue Book 

Version 1.1 
November 2006 


Blue Book 
Table of Contents 

1. Background .................................................................1
2. Purpose .......................................................................1
3. Overview of Approach ................................................2
4. Federal Matching Programs ......................................3
5. Methodology ................................................................3
6. Unit Costs ....................................................................5
7. Changes ......................................................................8
8. Definitions ...................................................................8

List of Tables 

Table 1. Unit Cost Factors............................................5
Table 2. Alphabetical Listing of Unit Cost Factors.....6


November 2006 
Blue Book 

1. Background 
In 1997, the Department of Homeland Securitys Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) created a Flood Map Modernization (Map Mod) Plan to modernize the flood hazard mapping effort and eliminate the backlog of outdated flood hazard maps. Since its development in 1997, the plan continues to evolve as FEMA creates new processes and product standards and updated information is gathered about community mapping needs. The Map Mod Plan outlines the following objectives: 

 Developing up-to-date flood hazard data nationwide for all floodprone areas 
 Providing maps and data in digital format 
 Integrating FEMA's community and State partners into the mapping process 
 Improving processes for faster map creation and updates 
 Improving customer service 

One of FEMAs key goals for Map Mod is to increase local involvement in the development and long-term maintenance of their flood hazard maps. To meet this objective, FEMA created the Cooperating Technical Partners (CTP) program. The CTP program allows communities, tribal nations, regional agencies, and State agencies that have the interest and capability to become active partners in FEMAs flood hazard mapping effort. Partners enter into formal agreements with FEMA to provide specific contributions to the flood hazard mapping effort for their communities. Through these partnerships, local knowledge and expertise are incorporated into the flood hazard maps, and partners contributions are maximized to leverage Federal funding to the fullest extent possible, while consistently maintaining national standards. 

FEMA has been tracking the extent to which its mapping funds have been leveraged through the CTP program since the first partnership agreements were signed in 1999. To estimate each partners contribution to ongoing mapping activities, FEMA has applied a series of unit costs that are indicative of FEMAs costs to produce a National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) map. While leverage is generally associated with the CTP Program, other partners who are not members of the CTP Program can provide FEMA with flood mapping-related data and thus leverage their data. 

2. Purpose 
The purpose of this document is to outline the unit cost approach FEMA uses in estimating the value of mapping activities contributed by communities, tribal nations, regional agencies and State agencies for updated Flood Insurance Rate Map production. 

The unit cost approach described in this document should only be used to determine the value of a partners contribution. Because the actual costs associated with individual projects may vary significantly, under no circumstances should these unit costs be used to estimate the cost of individual projects. Resources are available through FEMAs Regional Offices to assist in estimating the cost of individual projects. Please contact the appropriate FEMA CTP Regional Coordinator for more information (http://www.fema.gov/plan/prevent/fhm/ctp_key.shtm). 

The Blue Book is a living document. Because of changing conditions in technologies, processes, and the economy, this publication will be evaluated each fiscal year and FEMA will determine whether revisions are warranted. 

3. Overview of Approach 
FEMA documents the contributions of its mapping partners (primarily participants in the CTP program) by estimating the value of their contributions to the production of their flood hazard maps. The approach for evaluating partner contributions was originally developed for the CTP program by way of leveraged activity. This approach includes estimates of each partners contribution to ongoing mapping activities and the overall value of the partners mapping efforts relative to FEMAs investment in these mapping activities. The methodology uses a series of unit costs and applies them to the number of work units (i.e., linear miles of study or number of panels) to estimate the cost of various project elements in the map production process. 

FEMA developed these unit costs to ensure that the value of each map product reflects only the costs typically incurred by FEMA to produce them. Partners may choose to incur costs above and beyond what FEMA would normally expend for the same activity, and these additional costs should not skew the estimate of the projects value to FEMA. For example, a partner that plans to use the topographic data for additional purposes may choose to include data and information that FEMA would not normally include. Accordingly, the cost to collect and process such data should not be considered when evaluating the value of the topographic data. 

Moreover, by using uniform unit costs, the value of partnering with communities, tribal nations, regional agencies and State agencies can be estimated at any stage of a mapping project. FEMA can determine the extent to which it is leveraging Federal funds while projects are ongoing. This would not be the case if actual costs were used because the full costs would not be known until the project is complete. For example, although a preliminary Digital Flood Insurance Rate Map (DFIRM) may have already been produced for a partner, the costs incurred will likely change as a result of appeals and/or protests. 

FEMA intends to use the unit cost approach (or this Blue Book) to estimate only those partner contributions that will lead to the production of new or updated DFIRMs. It is also important to note that in order to be used and given credit, products submitted by partners must meet the requirements of FEMAs current Guidelines and Specifications for Flood Hazard Mapping Partners. Unit costs have been developed for the following mapping project elements: 

 Scoping 
 Field surveys 
 Topographic data (in square miles and panels) 
 Detailed riverine methods 
 Limited detailed riverine methods 
 Detailed coastal and alluvial methods 
 Approximate analyses 
 Redelineation of detailed study areas 
 Base map acquisition 
 Independent Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) activities 
 DFIRM production 
 Outreach 
 QA/QC Activities for Mapping Project Elements 

4. Federal Matching Programs 
The Federal Government has several matching grant programs available to partners, where the Government and the partner each agree to fund a certain percentage of the total cost of a given project. In these cases where a Federal financial contribution is met by a matching (whole or partial) financial contribution from the partner, and those monies are used to accomplish a flood mapping task, FEMA will evaluate the percentage of the unit cost attributed to the task that will be credited to the partner. The partner will not receive 100 percent of the credit for that task unless the task is completely non-Federally funded. For example, a Federal agency and the partner participate in an 80/20 grant program, where the Federal agency funds 80 percent of the project and the partner funds 20 percent of the project. In this example, the project entails completing field surveys for X miles. FEMA would consider the partners leverage to be 20 percent of the unit cost for X miles of the field survey activity. For the purposes of the CTP Program and leverage calculations for all mapping partners, only the 20 percent match would be credited for leverage. This does not mean that the CTP Program would become a grant program where fiscal matching was required. 

5. Methodology 
FEMAs Blue Book was first published in 2002. The unit costs in this original version of the document were developed for FEMAs Mapping Needs Update Support System. In 2003, there was the need to adjust these unit costs for inflation. An inflation rate of 2.2 percent was assumed and used to update the unit costs. Since then, it has become obvious to FEMA that the entire set of unit costs need to be updated using the best available data. This update was a thorough update and not merely based on inflation. The methodology to develop the updated unit costs follows. 

Data for this update was collected by the National Service Providers ten Regional Management Centers (RMCs), offices that assist FEMAs Regional offices with many tasks essential to the success of Map Mod. The data was reviewed for consistency and obvious errors, reformatted and merged into a single file. Data was also collected from the Mapping Information Platform (MIP), FEMAs workflow-based program management system. The data received from the MIP was sorted by State and county and was used as an index field to match the task and funding data from the MIP to the study miles and scope data provided by the RMCs. The matching was performed using the vlookup function in Microsoft Excel. 

Matching the task and funding data with the scope data created an aggregate database that associated study scope with the task and funding data. This aggregate database was reviewed for missing data and, in some cases, was supplemented with historical data retrieved from the Management Information for Contracted Studies database. After removing missing data points, the aggregate data was subdivided by task. For each task, the appropriate unit of study (i.e. stream miles, square miles, or number of panels) was identified. In some cases, such as the development of topographic data, the acquisition of base map data, or field surveys, the most representative unit of study was not clear, so unit costs were developed for two different units. 

Once the unit of study was identified for each task, the data was reviewed and further subdivided to determine whether the study units represented a single study type (such as detail, limited detail, approximate, or coastal) or multiple study types. For some tasks, such as preliminary panel production, post-preliminary processing, the development of topographic data, QA/QC, or the acquisition of base data, the study type was not viewed as indicative of unit costs. However, for the remaining tasks, such as hydraulic and hydrologic analyses, floodplain mapping, redelineation, and field surveys, the study type was seen as a key differentiator between study costs. In some cases, the task and funding data could be associated with a single study type, although the scope often indicated a mixture of study types. 

Once the study type was identified, the funding data was used to calculate a cost per unit for each data point within each task. The average, minimum, and maximum unit costs for each task and, in some cases, for each study type within the task, were computed. The Pivot-table function in Microsoft Excel was used to develop the unit costs summarized in Table 1. 

It is important to note that the unit costs provided in the following table are based on certain assumptions that reflect typical study conditions and may not accurately represent actual site-specific conditions. Under no circumstance should these unit costs be used to estimate the cost of individual projects. These figures are intended to provide an estimate of the value to FEMA, and not the actual cost incurred for the activity. 

Table 1 lists the updated unit costs sorted by type of study and task. Table 2 lists the  
same unit 
costs, sorted alphabetically. 

6. Unit Costs 
Table 1. Unit Cost Factors 

Project Element 
Unit 
Unit Cost ($/unit) 

Scoping 
Prescoping Panels $256 
Scoping Panels $620 

Field Surveys 
Field Surveys Linear miles $2,920 
QA/QC of Field Surveys Linear miles $71 

Topographic Data 
Topographic Data Square miles $59 
QA/QC of Topographic Data Square miles $11 

Detailed Riverine 
Hydrologic Analysis Linear miles $1,781 
Independent QA/QC of Hydrologic Analysis Linear miles $1,781 
Hydraulic Analysis Linear miles $3,730 
Independent QA/QC of Hydraulic Analysis Linear miles $680 
Floodplain Mapping Linear miles $3,663 
Independent QA/QC of Floodplain Mapping Linear miles $1,154 
Redelineation Linear miles $1,293 
QA/QC of Redelineation Linear miles $232 

Limited Detail Riverine 
Hydrologic Analysis Linear miles $402 
Independent QA/QC of Hydrologic Analysis Linear miles $402 
Hydraulic Analysis Linear miles $624 
Independent QA/QC of Hydraulic Analysis Linear miles $116 
Floodplain Mapping Linear miles $3,515 
Independent QA/QC of Floodplain Mapping Linear miles $1,146 

Detailed Coastal 
Coastal Analyses Linear miles $1,428 
QA/QC of Coastal Analyses Linear miles $318 
Floodplain Mapping Linear miles $1,119 
QA/QC of Floodplain Mapping Linear miles $791 

Detailed Alluvial 
Engineering Analyses Square miles $3,600 
Floodplain Delineation Square miles $5,200 

Approximate Analysis Hydrologic Analysis Linear miles $138 
Independent QA/QC of Hydrologic Analysis Linear miles $138 
Hydraulic Analysis Linear miles $261 
Independent QA/QC of Hydraulic Analysis Linear miles $47 
Floodplain Mapping Linear miles $598 
Independent QA/QC of Floodplain Mapping Linear miles $241 
Redelineation Linear miles $166 

Base Map Acquisition and Preparation 
Base Map Acquisition and Preparation Square miles $51 
QA/QC of Base Map Square miles $5 
Base Map Acquisition and Preparation Panels $553 
QA/QC of Base Map Panels $33 
1 meter Orthophoto Square miles $25 

DFIRM Production 
Preliminary DFIRM Production Panels $1,168 
QA/QC Preliminary DFIRM Production Panels $100 
Post-Preliminary DFIRM Production Panels $1,600 

Outreach 
Informational Mailing 1000 Brochures $2,900 
Community Meeting Meeting $5,000 
Web site Web site $20,000 
Multimedia Promotion Promotion $10,000 

**Please Note: Under no circumstance should these unit costs be used to estimate the cost of individual projects. These figures are intended to provide an estimate of the value to FEMA, and not the actual cost incurred for the activity.



Table 2. Alphabetical Listing of Unit Cost Factors 

Project Element 
Unit 
Unit Cost ($/unit) 
1 meter Orthophoto Square miles $25 
Approximate Analysis Floodplain Mapping Linear miles $598 
Base Map Panels $553 
Base Map Square miles $51 
Coastal Analysis Linear miles $1,428 
Coastal Floodplain Mapping Linear miles $1,119 
Detailed Floodplain Mapping Linear miles $3,663 
Field Survey - Detail Study Linear miles $2,920 
Field Survey - Limited Detail Study Linear miles $2,099 
Hydraulic Analysis - Approximate Study Linear miles $261 
Hydraulic Analysis - Detailed Study Linear miles $3,730 
Hydraulic Analysis - Limited Detailed Study Linear miles $624 
Hydrologic Analysis - Approximate Study Linear miles $138 
Hydrologic Analysis - Detailed Study Linear miles $1,781 
Hydrologic Analysis - Limited Detailed Study Linear miles $402 
Independent QA/QC of Approximate Floodplain Mapping Linear miles $241 


Table 2 (cont.). Alphabetical Listing of Unit Cost Factors 

Project Element Unit 
Unit 
Cost 
($/unit) 
Independent QA/QC of Coastal Floodplain Mapping Linear miles $791 
Independent QA/QC of Detailed Floodplain Mapping Linear miles $1,154 
Independent QA/QC of Hydraulic Analysis - Approximate Study Linear miles $47 
Independent QA/QC of Hydraulic Analysis - Detailed Study Linear miles $680 
Independent QA/QC of Hydraulic Analysis - Limited Detailed Study Linear miles $116 
Independent QA/QC of Hydrologic Analysis - Approximate Study Linear miles $138 
Independent QA/QC of Hydrologic Analysis - Detailed Study Linear miles $1,781 
Independent QA/QC of Hydrologic Analysis - Limited Detail Study Linear miles $402 
Independent QA/QC of Limited Detailed Floodplain Mapping Linear miles $1,146 
Limited Detail Floodplain Mapping Linear miles $3,515 
Outreach - Community Meeting Meeting $5,000 
Outreach - Informational Mailing 1000 brochures $2,900 
Outreach - Multimedia Production Promotion $10,000 
Outreach - Web Site Web site $20,000 
Post-Preliminary DFIRM Processing Panels $1,600 
Preliminary DFIRM Production Panels $1,168 
Prescoping Panels $256 
QA/QC Base Map Square miles $5 
QA/QC Base Map Panels $33 
QA/QC Field Survey - Detail Study Linear miles $71 
QA/QC of Coastal Analysis Linear miles $318 
QA/QC of Redelineation - Detail Study Linear miles $232 
QA/QC Preliminary DFIRM Production Panels $100 
QA/QC Topographic Data Square miles $11 
QA/QC Topographic Data Panels $58 
Redelineation - Approximate Study Linear miles $166 
Redelineation - Detail Study Linear miles $1,293 
Scoping Panels $620 

**Please Note: Under no circumstance should these unit costs be used to estimate the cost of individual projects. 
These figures are intended to provide an estimate of the value to FEMA, and not the actual cost incurred for the activity.

7. Changes 
Most of the unit costs are different from those published in the 2002 version of this document. As no data were available for the cost of detailed alluvial analyses and floodplain mapping or for outreach, these unit costs were not updated. The unit costs that were updated reflect the availability of current data. 

Another change since the 2002 version is the exclusion of limitations. The 2002 version of this document specified limitations to the amount of credit that could be given to a partner in such activities as topographic data and outreach. For the topographic data activity, a partner had to provide FEMA with the ability to redistribute the data in order to receive full credit. For outreach, a partner had to participate in at least four outreach activities to receive full credit. These restrictions were deleted to encourage partners to participate in these tasks and to fully value a partners contribution to the NFIP and Map Mod. 

A final change was the removal of one task. With the advent of the MIP, the information technology system task was deleted. The purpose of the Blue Book is to identify cost savings to the government. Therefore, the fact that a system is in place to address these program management needs disqualifies this activity as a savings. 

8. Definitions 
In order to provide users with the information to implement the unit costs associated with the Blue Book, there are some items that must be defined. First, topographic data should be limited to the are within the floodplain buffer. Leveraged topographic data should not encompass the entire area (i.e. county, community or map panel) unless that is actually the extent of the floodplain. 

Outreach is another warrants definition. The unit cost for a web site represents one entire site and not each page within the site. For multimedia productions, the unit costs represent each different multimedia project or promotion, not each aspect within the production. For meetings, the unit costs represent each meeting. And lastly, for mailings, the unit costs represent 1000 brochures. 

As stated throughout this document, under no circumstance should these unit costs be used to estimate the cost of individual projects. These figures are intended to provide an estimate of the value to FEMA, and not the actual cost incurred for the activity. 

Any questions about these or other unit costs should be presented to FEMA for consideration. If additional unit costs are warranted, suggestions and the associated data should be presented to FEMA for future versions of this document. 


November 2006 
Blue Book