Department of Homeland Security 

Office of Inspector General 

FEMA's Disaster Assistance 
 

Improvement Plan 
 

OIG-10-98 June 2010 
Office ofInspector General 

U.S. Department of Homeland Security 

Washington, DC 20528 

Homeland 

Security 

JUN 2 9 2010 

Preface 

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Office ofInspector General (OIG) was 

established by the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (Public Law 107-296) by amendment 

to the Inspector General Act of 1978. This is one of a series of audit, inspection, and 

special reports prepared as part of our oversight responsibilities to promote economy, 

efficiency, and effectiveness within the department. 

This report addresses the results of our audit of the Federal Emergency Management 

Agency's implementation of its Disaster Assistance Improvement Plan. It is based on 

interviews with employees and officials of relevant agencies and institutions, direct 

observations, and a review of applicable documents. 

The recommendations herein have been developed to the best knowledge available to our 

office, and have been discussed in draft with those responsible for implementation. We 

trust this report will result in more effective, efficient, and economical operations. We 

express our appreciation to all ofthose who contributed to the preparation of this report. 

L~~·~

Richard L. Skinner 

Inspector General 
Table of Contents/Abbreviations 
 

Executive Summary............................................................................................................ 1 
 

Background......................................................................................................................... 2 
 

Results of Review ............................................................................................................... 4 
 

Registering Disaster Survivors In a One-Stop Manner................................................. 4 
 

Recommendation .......................................................................................................... 8 
 

Management Comments and OIG Analysis ................................................................. 9 
 

Disaster Assistance Improvement Plan Internal Controls ............................................ 9 
 

Recommendation ........................................................................................................ 10 
 

Management Comments and OIG Analysis ............................................................... 10 
 

Coordination with State/Local Governments and Voluntary Organizations .............. 11 
 

Recommendation ........................................................................................................ 12 
 

Management Comments and OIG Analysis ............................................................... 12 
 

Appendices 

Appendix A: Purpose, Scope, and Methodology.......................................................13 
 

Appendix B: Management Comments to the Draft Report.......................................14 
 

Appendix C: Major Contributors to This Report ......................................................19 
 

Appendix D: Report Distribution ..............................................................................20 
 

Abbreviations 

DAIP Disaster Assistance Improvement Plan 
 

DHS Department of Homeland Security 
 

DoED Department of Education 
 

DSNAP Disaster Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program
 


DUA Disaster Unemployment Assistance 
 

FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency 
 

FOAs Forms of Assistance 
 

IAC Individual Assistance Center 
 

NEMIS National Emergency Management Information System
 


NVOAD National Voluntary Organization Active in Disaster 
 

OMB Office of Management and Budget 
 

PMO Program Management Office 
 

SBA Small Business Administration 
 

SSA Social Security Administration 
 

USDA United States Department of Agriculture 
 
OIG
 


Department of Homeland Security 

Office of Inspector General 

Executive Summary 

We audited the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s 

progress in improving the delivery of federal disaster assistance. 

Executive Order 13411, titled “Improving Assistance for Disaster 

Survivors” directed the Secretary of Homeland Security to lead an 

interagency task force with the mission of improving the 

promptness and efficiency with which disaster applicants obtain 

access to eligible federal disaster assistance. The Secretary 

established a Task Force Executive Steering Committee, 

comprised of several federal agencies, to develop a plan outlining a 

strategy for improving the delivery of federal disaster assistance. 

The strategy developed by the Committee, the “Disaster Assistance 

Improvement Plan,” was approved by the President on September 

14, 2007. 

FEMA faces challenges in implementing a “one-stop” disaster 

assistance application system because of the inability of partner 

agencies’ systems to interface with DisasterAssistance.gov, and 

partner agencies’ reluctance to provide funding to support the 

program. FEMA was in the process of drafting internal control 

standard operating procedures but had not yet developed, 

implemented, or strengthened controls. Further, the agency was in 

the process of coordinating with state, local, and voluntary 

organizations to integrate forms of assistance administered at the 

state and local level. 

The Federal Emergency Management Agency needs to implement 

a funding model to ensure that it is capable of supporting the entire 

Disaster Assistance Improvement Plan program to include current 

contributions made by partner agencies. Further, FEMA needs to 

develop, implement, and strengthen internal controls to prevent 

improper payments and other forms of fraud, waste, and abuse. 

Finally, FEMA needs to assist pilot states with integration 

capabilities to interface with the Disaster Assistance Improvement 

Plan. 

We are making three recommendations to improve the Federal 

Emergency Management Agency’s Disaster Assistance 

Improvement Plan. The agency agreed with our recommendations 

and has taken action to resolve them. 

FEMA’s Disaster Assistance Improvement Plan 

Page 1 
Background 

Following Hurricane Katrina, survivors encountered conflicting 

and confusing information when seeking Federal disaster 

assistance. On August 29, 2006, the President issued Executive 

Order 13411, titled “Improving Assistance for Disaster Survivors,” 

directing the Secretary of Homeland Security to lead an 

interagency task force with the mission of improving the 

promptness and efficiency with which disaster applicants obtain 

access to eligible federal disaster assistance. The Secretary of 

Homeland Security established a Task Force Executive Steering 

Committee, comprised of several federal agencies, to develop a 

plan outlining a strategy for improving the delivery of federal 

disaster assistance. The strategy developed by the Committee, the 

“Disaster Assistance Improvement Plan,” was approved by the 

President on September 14, 2007. The plan outlined a strategy to 

implement a consolidated and unified disaster application 

capability/system no later than December 31, 2008, subject to 

funding. There are seventeen federal partners (see Table 4) 

including Department of Homeland Security (DHS)/Federal 

Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) that provide over 50 

forms of assistance. FEMA launched the website 

DisasterAssistance.gov on December 31, 2008. 

The primary purpose of the Disaster Assistance Improvement Plan 

(DAIP) was to build a comprehensive system allowing disaster 

applicants to apply just once for various forms of assistance 

(FOAs). To achieve this, two existing systems: (1) 

GovBenefits.gov and (2) FEMA’s National Emergency 

Management Information System (NEMIS) Individual Assistance 

Center (IAC) were modified to facilitate the application process for 

disaster assistance and eliminate the need to develop a duplicative 

and costly new system. The DAIP Four Phase Implementation 

Schedule is shown in Table 1. 

Table 1. DAIP Four Phase Implementation Schedule 

Phase Description Timeline 

1 Initial Operating Capability October 15, 2007 to December 31, 2008 

2 Pilot Integration-Federally 

funded State/Local FOAs 

January 1, 2009 to March 31, 2010 

3 State and Local Integration April 1, 2010 to September 30, 2013 

4 Non-Disaster Specific FOAs, 

Federal, State, and Local 

October 1, 2013 to September 30, 20151 

Source: FEMA 

1

Additional phases beyond 2013 are representational and will be reviewed with the DAIP partnership in 

future revisions of the DAIP Strategic Plan. 

FEMA’s Disaster Assistance Improvement Plan 

Page 2 
The single application concept allows citizens to locate and 

identify disaster assistance programs and apply for assistance from 

multiple programs during a single application session. For other 

participating programs, the NEMIS IAC routes information to a 

data exchange point and then to partner agencies. Through an 

expanded GovBenefits capability, applicants will be able to locate 

and identify additional forms of assistance available from states, 

local jurisdictions, and voluntary agencies. During the process, the 

applicant’s information is verified using a commercial third party 

identity verification service. Figure 1 illustrates the federal 

disaster assistance application process. 

Figure 1. FEMA’s Disaster Assistance Application Process 

Source: FEMA 

FEMA’s Disaster Assistance Improvement Plan 

Page 3 
Disaster Assistance Registration 

FEMA has monitored disaster assistance registration phone calls and 

internet applications since the release of DisasterAssistance.gov. 

Over 33% of the total registrations during the period December 31, 

2008, through April 30, 2009, have been through internet 

registrations. FEMA also determined that the visitor count for the 

website totaled 176,050 visitors for this four month period. The total 

disaster assistance registrations for this period are shown in Table 2. 

Table 2. Disaster Assistance Registration as of April 30, 2009 

Disaster Assistance Registration 

Sites and Territories with 

Federally Declared 

Disasters 

California, Florida, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, 

Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Oklahoma, Puerto 

Rico, Texas, Washington, Wisconsin 

Call Center Registrations 12,610 

Internet Registrations 6,819 

Total Registrations 19,429 

Source: FEMA 

Disaster Assistance Applicant Satisfaction 

FEMA reported that overall satisfaction with DisasterAssistance.gov 

was excellent to good among a sample of respondents. Survey 

reports included 755 responses from applicants impacted by four 

declared disasters from December 31, 2008, through April 30, 2009. 

Survey topics included access to websites, the pre-screening 

questionnaire, the ability to browse information by category or 

agency, and the experience of completing an online registration. 

Some respondents wanted more concise and less complicated 

information, but the majority of respondents found the website to be 

very helpful. 

Results of Review 

Registering Disaster Survivors In a One-Stop Manner 

FEMA has made progress in implementing a disaster assistance 

application process that provides eligible disaster survivors with 

federal disaster assistance and successfully launched 

DisasterAssistance.gov on December 31, 2008. However, FEMA 

faces challenges in implementing a “one-stop” disaster assistance 

application system because of the inability of partner agencies 

FEMA’s Disaster Assistance Improvement Plan 

Page 4 
 

systems to interface with DisasterAssistance.gov, and partner 

agencies’ reluctance to provide funding to support the program. 

FEMA, as managing partner, and in collaboration with 16 federal 

partner agencies, launched DisasterAssistance.gov to provide 

access to eligible federal disaster assistance across multiple federal 

agencies on December 31, 2008. In Phase 1, FEMA implemented 

the capability to transfer data between FEMA and three other 

federal agencies: the Small Business Administration (SBA), the 

Social Security Administration (SSA), and the Department of 

Education (DoED). This means an applicant can apply for disaster 

assistance through DisasterAssistance.gov from these agencies 

without having to apply separately to each individual agency. 

However, when applicants need assistance from other federal 

agencies, applicants can visit the DAIP website and take the 

questionnaire to determine their eligibility for program benefits. 

Subsequently, applicants can then link to the appropriate federal 

agency to apply for assistance. The DAIP has strengthened the 

application process for applicants but FEMA faces challenges in 

implementing a comprehensive “one-stop” disaster assistance 

application system. 

DAIP Phase 1 Program Requirements 

The goal of Phase 1 was to include forms of assistance that delivered 

a disaster-related benefit to an individual at the federal level. The 

focus of Phase 1 of the DAIP was to make necessary infrastructure 

updates to the DHS/FEMA IAC application and GovBenefits.gov to 

support the DAIP requirements. The timeline for the initial 

operating capability was from October 14, 2007, to December 31, 

2008. 

The program requirements for Phase 1 were outlined in scope 

statement documents and included 32 requirements to be completed 

by December 31, 2008. The completion status of these requirements 

is shown in Table 3. 

Table 3. Completion Status of Phase 1 Program Requirements 

Status of Completion 

Number of 

Requirements 

Requirements to be completed by December 31, 2008 32 

Requirements completed by December 31, 2008 10 

Requirements deferred to Phase 2 (January 1, 2009 to 

March 31, 2010) 

22 

Requirements not completed as of April 30, 2009 22 

Source: OIG, based on information provided by FEMA 

FEMA’s Disaster Assistance Improvement Plan 

Page 5 
FEMA officials explained that requirements were deferred to 

Phase 2 so the website DisasterAssistance.gov could be launched 

on time. FEMA officials also explained that requirements were 

deferred for the following reasons: 

�	 

�	 

�	 

$1.4 million funding reduction impacted program management, 

design, and infrastructure updates. 

Five month delay (from January 2008 to May 2008) in securing 

a contract to begin design and implementation of the DAIP 

service oriented architecture environment. 

Three month delay in the DAIP development schedule. 

FEMA indicated that progress is being made to implement the 

deferred requirements. It should also be noted that three 

requirements were deferred to Phase 2 at the request of the partner 

agencies.2 

FEMA Challenges 

FEMA faces challenges in implementing a comprehensive “onestop” disaster assistance application system. These challenges 

include the inability of partner agencies systems to interface with 

DisasterAssistance.gov and the difficulty in obtaining funding to 

support the DAIP program. These challenges are further discussed 

as follows: 

Partner Agencies 

Partner agencies have been reluctant to push forward to full 

integration with DAIP due to the inability of systems to interface 

with the DAIP, concerns over security/privacy requirements, and a 

lack of funding. Due to technological and funding issues, some 

partner agencies do not possess a compatible interface with 

DisasterAssistance.gov. The following examples illustrate some of 

the difficulties partner agencies have faced and the impact on their 

ability to fully integrate FOAs into the DAIP program. 

�	 SSA. SSA officials did not anticipate receiving Information 

Technology Advisory Board approval for the two new FOAs that 

were previously accepted in the DAIP FOAs validation study. 

SSA was also concerned about exposing the SSA systems 

through an interface. SSA had additional concerns about adding 

FOAs as interfaces beyond the current change of address FOA 

2

 Partner agencies requesting deferral of FOAs were the US Department of Treasury, Housing and Urban 

Development, and the Small Business Administration. 

FEMA’s Disaster Assistance Improvement Plan 

Page 6 
and the main difficulty appeared to be the availability of 

resources. 

�

�

Treasury. Treasury officials deferred integration of the GoDirect 

program prior to the initial launch of DisasterAssistance.gov in 

2008 because of fiscal concerns. Treasury officials were 

concerned that the program would not be funded in future years 

unless it continued to show a return on investment. FEMA and 

Treasury officials agreed to include the GoDirect program as an 

informational referral with a web link in 2009 and to continue 

discussions for a full interface for later in 2009. 

US Department of Agriculture (USDA). USDA officials 

indicated that many of the USDA programs are paper-based or 

use antiquated computer technology and the cost of building new 

systems to enable an interface is considerable. USDA officials 

have discussed future possibilities with DAIP, but currently, 

USDA does not have the resources to redesign its systems to 

accept an interface with DAIP. 

DAIP Funding Concerns 

FEMA has faced challenges with obtaining the appropriate funding 

from its partner agencies. Partner agencies have been reluctant to 

push towards full online integration of their programs when it will 

involve increased costs. FEMA officials commented that when 

funding for development was not provided in a timely manner, the 

DAIP would not be fully implemented and the program would 

have limited capabilities. 

Partner agency contributions are currently determined by the 

number of FOAs the agency offers to disaster survivors for 

integration into DAIP. This model charges federal partners based 

on the number of FOAs an agency has, and the type of interface it 

is capable of supporting. FEMA officials commented that two of 

the biggest obstacles facing the DAIP are reaching agreement on 

an equitable funding formula, and collecting funds from partner 

agencies. FEMA officials also commented that if FEMA were to 

fund the entire program, FEMA would be better able to identify 

FOAs, build interfaces with partner agencies, and establish service 

level agreements across federal agencies. 

As managing partner, FEMA contributes approximately 80% of 

the overall funding and the remaining 20% is provided by the 

partner agencies. Funds received to support the DAIP in FYs 2008 

and 2009 are shown in Table 4. 

FEMA’s Disaster Assistance Improvement Plan 

Page 7 
Table 4. DHS/FEMA and Partner Agencies Funds Received in FYs 2008 and 2009 

DHS/FEMA and PARTNER AGENCIES FY 2008 FY 2009 

Department of Agriculture $696,866 $696,866 

Department of Commerce 74,811 61,111 

Department of Defense 315,000 61,111 

Department of Education 476,373 307,136 

Department of Health and Human Services 696,866 696,866 

Department of Housing and Urban Development 0 254,775 

Department of Interior 204,160 61,111 

Department of Justice 74,811 74,811 

Department of Labor 1,169,209 448,869 

Department of State 204,160 61,111 

Department of Transportation 74,811 61,111 

Department of Treasury 476,373 294,225 

Department of Veterans Affairs 476,373 279,162 

Office of Personnel Management 476,373 61,111 

Small Business Administration 204,160 204,160 

Social Security Administration 476,373 279,162 

Federal Emergency Management Agency/DHS 17,999,280 17,990,000 

TOTAL $24,095,999 $21,892,698 

Source: FEMA 

Conclusion 

FEMA has made progress in implementing a disaster assistance 

application process that provides eligible disaster survivors with 

federal disaster assistance and successfully launched 

DisasterAssistance.gov on December 31, 2008. However, FEMA 

faces challenges in implementing a “one-stop” disaster assistance 

application system because of the inability of partner agencies’ 

systems to interface with DisasterAssistance.gov, as well as, partner 

agencies’ reluctance to provide funding to support the program. 

Recommendation 

We recommend that the Administrator, Federal Emergency 

Management Agency: 

Recommendation #1: Implement a funding model to ensure that 

FEMA funds the entire DAIP program to include current 

FEMA’s Disaster Assistance Improvement Plan 

Page 8 
contributions being made by the partner agencies to enhance the 

development and integration of the DAIP. 

Management Comments and OIG Analysis 

The Office of Policy and Program Analysis concurred with this 

recommendation. FEMA responded that a new funding model for 

FY 2012 was presented to the DAIP Executive Steering Committee 

and ratified on April 7, 2010. FEMA has accepted a 94% funding 

commitment for the program from FY 2011 to 2012. The DAIP 

Program Management Office (PMO) and its Executive Sponsor will 

continue to pursue 100% FEMA funding with the Office of 

Management and Budget’s (OMB’s) FEMA Resource Manager and 

the FEMA Chief Financial Officer. We consider this 

recommendation resolved but open, pending review of corrective 

actions taken. 

FEMA also suggested that we update information in Tables 3 and 4 

of the draft report: 

Table 3, Completion Status of Phase 1 Program Requirements. We 

obtained documentation during the audit that supported our 

assessment that 10 of 32 program requirements were completed by 

December 31, 2008 as reported in Table 3. In written comments, 

FEMA stated that 25 of 30 requirements were completed and 5 

requirements were not completed by December 31, 2008; however, 

FEMA has not provided any documentation to support these figures. 

Table 4, DHS/FEMA, Partner Agencies Funds Received in FYs 

2008 and 2009 (as of April 30, 2009). FEMA recommended that 

Table 4 be revised to reflect updated funding contributions for FYs 

2008 and 2009. We concurred with FEMA’s request and updated 

this table. 

DAIP Internal Controls 

FEMA is required by Executive Order 13411 to include an 

approach to strengthen internal controls to prevent improper 

payments and other forms of fraud, waste, and abuse in the 

Disaster Assistance Improvement Plan. As of May 2009, FEMA 

was in the process of drafting internal control standard operating 

procedures for DAIP but had not yet developed, implemented, or 

strengthened the controls as outlined by the Executive Order. 

FEMA officials developed draft internal controls standard 

FEMA’s Disaster Assistance Improvement Plan 

Page 9 
operating procedures that included the internal control elements of 

control environment, risk assessment, control activities, 

information and communications, and monitoring. However, 

FEMA officials said that many of the planned activities outlined in 

the draft internal controls standard operating procedures have not 

yet been initiated. FEMA officials also commented that planned 

activities include: 

�

�

�

�

Developing a list of fraud indicators that FEMA has learned 

over the years of disaster survivors applying for assistance with 

fraudulent information. 

Developing an investigative queue for holding applications 

marked for manual review as they have triggered one or more 

of the fraud indicators. 

Proposing the development of a Fraud Awareness Training 

Plan. 

Developing plans to implement as many controls and monitors 

as practical. 

FEMA officials said that planned activities will continue to be 

refined in order to determine an approach for satisfying the 

requirement of the Executive Order. 

Conclusion 

FEMA was in the process of drafting internal control standard 

operating procedures but had not yet developed, implemented, or 

strengthened controls as required by the Executive Order. 

Recommendation 

We recommend that the Administrator, Federal Emergency 

Management Agency: 

Recommendation #2: Develop, implement, and strengthen internal 

controls to prevent improper payments and other forms of fraud, 

waste, and abuse. 

Management Comments and OIG Analysis 

The Office of Policy and Program Analysis concurred with this 

recommendation. In written comments, FEMA agreed that the 

statement was true with regard to DAIP, but is not true for FEMA as 

an agency and noted improved internal controls were implemented 

FEMA’s Disaster Assistance Improvement Plan 

Page 10 
 

 

following hurricanes Katrina and Rita.3

 We have revised this 

section to clarify that our assessment is limited to DAIP. DAIP has 

worked with the FEMA Fraud Investigation Branch Chief and 

Individual Assistance Audit Group to identify additional controls 

that could be implemented with the development of a flagging 

system and holding queue. We consider this recommendation 

resolved but open, pending review of corrective actions taken. 

Coordination with State/Local Governments and Voluntary 

Organizations 

FEMA’s efforts to coordinate the disaster assistance application 

process with state/local and voluntary organizations are underway 

as part of the DAIP Phase 2. FEMA analyzed federally funded 

state administered FOAs from six disaster prone states for 

integration with DisasterAssistance.gov. However, FEMA 

officials said that the pilot program is hindered by the lack of 

technological readiness on the part of the state administered 

programs to integrate and that efforts to integrate are not likely to 

succeed within the Phase 2 timeline. 

FEMA has initiated outreach to the non-profit community. In June 

2009, initial meetings were held with the leadership of the National 

Voluntary Organizations Active in Disaster (NVOAD), which is a 

consortium of 47 non-profit agencies that work in all phases of 

disasters. FEMA plans on briefing each NVOAD committee, in 

addition to setting up briefings through DAIP committee liaisons 

to brief the state VOADS as well. Some of the NVOAD members 

include; American Red Cross, Catholic Charities USA, Feed the 

Children, the Salvation Army, and United Way of America. 

According to FEMA officials, discussions with non-profit agencies 

should result in integration implementation beginning in Phase 4. 

DAIP Phase 2 Requirements 

The focus of Phase 2 was for FEMA to initiate a pilot program 

with the six most disaster-prone states in order to integrate 

federally funded FOAs at the state and local level. The timeline 

for the Phase 2 pilot integration extends from January 1, 2009, to 

March 31, 2010. We reviewed the DAIP in Phase 2 from January 

1, 2009, to April 30, 2009. 

3 We reported that FEMA had made improvements in internal controls since the 2005 Gulf Coast 

Hurricanes for FEMA’s Individuals and Households Program Registration Process. DHS-OIG, 

Improvements to Internal Controls for FEMA’s Individuals and Households Program Registration Process, 

(OIG-09-110, September 2009). 

FEMA’s Disaster Assistance Improvement Plan 

Page 11 
The pilot program focused on key disaster FOAs administered by 

six states: California, Florida, Louisiana, New York, Oklahoma, 

and Texas. These states have had the highest number of declared 

disasters. In 2007, 40.3% of FEMA disaster assistance 

applications were received from these six states. Within the six 

pilot states, FEMA identified six FOAs that were federally funded 

and administered at the state or local level. However, FEMA 

officials determined that the US Department of Agriculture’s 

Disaster Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (DSNAP), 

also called Food for Florida, was the only online application 

capable of integrating with DisasterAssistance.gov. FEMA 

officials noted that the Department of Labor’s Disaster 

Unemployment Assistance (DUA) Program presented possible 

opportunities for integration in four of the six states. 

Conclusion 

FEMA officials are in the process of coordinating with state, local, 

and voluntary organizations to integrate forms of assistance 

administered at the state and local level but those efforts are not 

likely to succeed within the Phase 2 timeline. 

Recommendation 

We recommend that the Administrator, Federal Emergency 

Management Agency: 

Recommendation #3: Assist pilot states with integration 

capabilities in order to interface with DAIP and expand the pilot 

program to include other states that have state administered 

programs and an online capability to integrate with 

DisasterAssistance.gov. 

Management Comments and OIG Analysis 

The Office of Policy and Program Analysis concurred with this 

recommendation. FEMA responded that the Food for Florida 

DSNAP program is scheduled for integration with 

DisasterAssistance.gov in June 2010. DAIP is developing a generic 

DSNAP interface that can be leveraged by other states. DAIP is also 

working toward developing a generic DUA interface that could be 

leveraged by states as they automate their DUA systems. We 

consider this recommendation resolved but open, pending review of 

corrective actions taken. 

FEMA’s Disaster Assistance Improvement Plan 

Page 12 
Appendix A 

Purpose, Scope, and Methodology 

The purpose of this audit was to determine the progress of 

FEMA’s disaster assistance improvement plan to: (1) register 

disaster survivors in a one-stop manner, (2) safeguard against 

waste, fraud, and abuse, and (3) coordinate with state and local 

governments and voluntary organizations. 

We interviewed FEMA officials at headquarters and Program 

Management Office officials in the field. We reviewed FEMA’s 

progress in implementing a disaster assistance application process 

and reviewed documentation related to the DAIP, the program 

charter, milestone status reports, Phase 1 and 2 scope statements, 

and other related documentation. Additionally, we obtained 

funding documents, customer satisfaction surveys, partner agency 

documentation, internal control documents, and meeting minutes. 

This report presents the status of implementation of Phase 1 and 

Phase 2 of the DAIP as of April 30, 2009. 

We began our review in February 2009 and completed it in July 

2009. 

We conducted this performance audit under the authority of the 

Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended, and according to 

generally accepted government auditing standards. These standards 

require that we perform the audit to obtain sufficient, appropriate 

evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our findings and 

conclusions. We believe the evidence obtained and used to develop 

the Results of Audit section provides a reasonable basis for our 

findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. 

FEMA’s Disaster Assistance Improvement Plan 

Page 13 
u_.;, 11'1""''''<"' ur lIunl<,."d !>t<u";,~,

500 C S,,,,,,•. SW

\\'"hlll,glon.IX: 2(l.1n

MAY 7 21110

MEMORANDUM FOR: Mall Jadacki

Deputy Inspcctor General

Office of Emergency Management Oversight

Office of Inspector General

FROM: David J. Kaufman N. /

Director

Office of Policy and

r

Program Analysis

SUBJECT: Comlllents on DIG Draft Report, F£MA's Disaster

AssiSlallce ImprOl'Cmelll PIal!

Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the Office of Inspector

General's (DIG's) subject draft audit report. As the Ft-deral Emcrgeney Management

Agency (FEMA) works toward refining its programs, the DIG's independent analysis of

program pcrfonnance greatly benefits our ability to continuously improve our activities,

The following arc comments regarding the audit's observations and conclusions which

are organi~ed below by the titled sections of your draft report:

DAIP Phase I Program Requirements

On page 4 ofthe draft report, Table 3: Complclion St({/IIS ojPJ/(/)"c f Program

RcquircmCIl/S is intended to outline infonnation regarding how well the Disaster

Assistancc Improvement Plan (DAIP) was implemented during Phase I to fulfill the need

for initial operating capability. The table docs not accurately depict the accomplishments

ofthe progmm during Phase l.

The Phase 1 Scope Statement outlines 30 program rcquirements across three broad

catcgories (DAIP Program Managcment Office, Individual Assistance Center and

GovBenclits.gov) and provides guidance to the program to implement interfaces with

foms of assistance (FOAs) in three of the live prob'l"am FDA emegories. Ofthe 30

requirements outlined in the Phase I Scope Statement, 25 were completed by December

31, 2008. The remaining live WCTC deferred to Phase 2 for completion.

Appendix B 

Management Comments to the Draft Report 

FEMA’s Disaster Assistance Improvement Plan 

Page 14 
Page 2

FEMA rCl:ommcnds that Table) be updated as follows:

Number (If

Stalus of Completi')D RequiremenlS or

Aetivilies

Re uirements 10 be com IctLxI b December) I. 2008 30

R uirements com leled b Decentber) I. 2008 25

Remainin 'R uiremenls as of December) I. 2008 5

PAll' Internal Controls

nte draft report indicales that FE:MA had not "developed. implemented or strengthened

conlrols as required by the Executive Order:' This statement, while true with regard to

PAIP, is not true for FEMA as an agency. Following Hurricanes Katrina and Rita,

FEMA implemented measufCS to tighten controls that would help prevent improper

payments and other forms of waste. fmud and abuse. These eomrols were implemented

prior to the Disaster Assistance Improvement Plait. At launch. DisasterAssistance.gov

leveraged the conlrols previously implementtxl by FEMA.

Some ofthe posl-Katrina contrvls thaI wcre continued under DAlP include automated

verification of key eligibility fC<juirements such as identity. occupancy and ownership. as

well as detcnnination ofthe validity of damaged dwelling :lddrt.'Sses. The registration

intake system also ineludLxI significant measures to prevent duplicate registrations

identified by duplicate Social Sc<;;urity Number, dumagLxI address. damuged phone und

Electronic Funds Transfer infonnation.

FEMA rCl:ommcnds that the second sentence of the SCl:tion be revised to refle<;t the

following:

"As of April 30. 2009. FEMA was in the process of drafting internal control standard

operating procedures but had not yet developed. implemented or strengthened controls as

required by the executive order beyond Ihose pre"ious!y imp"''''eJlled by the agelley

following Hurricanes Kmdna and Rita:'

In addilion. FEMA rc<;;ommends thaI Rccomlllendalion 112 be revised to reneet the

following:

"Develop. implement and strengthen internal controls to prevent improper payments and

other foons of fraud. waste and abuse beyolld Illosc prC";'JIlsly implementcd by Ille

agency fof{o\\'illg {-11".,kmws Klllri/w tlllIl Rita.

Appendix B 

Management Comments to the Draft Report 

FEMA’s Disaster Assistance Improvement Plan 

Page 15 
Page 3

pAIP Funding Concerns

On page 7, Table 4: DHS/FEMA and Par/ner Agency FUllds Received ill FYs 2008 alld

2009 reflects prognun funding reeeived as of April 30, 2009. The funding totals within

the table are not accurate and should be revised to reflect the COlTC<:t funding receipts as

of April 30, 2009.

In FY 2008, the Department of Defense (DOD) funding contribution was $31 5,000 in

addilion to in-kind services to be provided (estimated to be $161 ,373). The total

estimaled value is $476,373; however, the actual total FY 200g funding providod by

DOD was $315,000.

In addition, the funding contributions for DHSlFEMA for both FY 2008 and 2009 are

inaccurate. DHSlFEMA provided SI7,999,2800ffunding for FY 2008 and $17,990,000

in FY 2009.

As a result ofthe above corrections, the cumulative funding contributions for FY 2008

and FY 2009 should be revised. Total funding for FY 2008 should be 524,095,999, and

FY 2009, as of 4/3012009, should be S18,359,036.

FEMA recommends that Table 4 be revised to reflect the following funding receipts:

.. DOD FY 2008 funding contribution equaled S315,OOO

.. DHSIfEMA FY 2008 funding contribution equaled SI7,999,280

.. DHSIFEMA FY 2009 funding contribution equaled $17,990,000

.. Total FY 2008 funding contribution equaled $24,095,999

.. Total FY 2009 funding contribution, as of April 30, 2009, equaled $18,359,036.

FEMA concurs with the draft report's three recommendations and has taken actions to

implement them. While we will be providing corrective action plans in our 9O-day

response, we provide the following infonnation relative to the three recommendations:

Recommendation #1: Implement a funding model to ensure that DHSfFEMA funds the

entire DAIP program to include current contributions being made by the partner agencies

to enhance the development and integration ofthe DAIP.

Response: The DAIP Prognun Management Office (PMO) and the Partner Agency

Working Group members worked diligently from July 2009 to March 2010 to develop

and approve a funding model for the prognun that (I) promotes inter_agency cooperation;

(2) incentivizes partners to build interfaces with DisasterAssistance.gov; and (3)

equitably shares costs across all partners based on program metries collected during

2009. On March 25, 2010, the new funding model was presented to the DAIP Executive

SteeringCommittec (ESC), and on April 7, 2010 the FY 2012 funding model was

ratified. To ensure that all partners, including DHSIfEMA, saw an overall reduction in

Appendix B 

Management Comments to the Draft Report 

FEMA’s Disaster Assistance Improvement Plan 

Page 16 
Page 4

their respective contributions from FY 2011 to FY 2012, DHSlFEMA accepted 94% of

the funding commitment for the program. This reduced the collective partner

contribution to approximately $1 ,024,000 for IT 2012. Funding decisions beyond IT

2012 have not been made; however, the DAIP PMO and its Executive Sponsor continue

to pursue lOO"h DHSIFEMA funding with the Office of Management and Budget's

DHSlFEMA Resource Manager and the FEMA Chief Financial Officer.

Recommendation #2: Develop, implement, and strengthen internal controls to prevent

improper payments and other fonns offraud, waste, and abuse.

Response: Following Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, FEMA implemented controls to help

prevent improper payments and other fonns of waste, fraud and abuse prior to the

establishment ofthe Disaster Assistance Improvement Program Management Office.

When DisasterAssistance.gov was launched on ~ber 31, 2008, the controls

previously implemented by FEMA were leveraged. Since April 30, 2009, DAIP has

worked with the FEMA Fraud Investigation Branch Chief and Individual Assistance

Audit Group to identify additional controls that could be implemented with the

development of a flagging system and holding queue. The Fraud Indicator (FI) System

Operational Requirements Document has been created and implementation ofthe FI

system is being planned for the first stage of Phase 3, ending June 2011, with

enhancements throughout the remainder of Phase 3, which ends September 2013.

Recommendation #3: Assist pilot states with integration capabilities in order to

interface with DAIP and expand the pilot program to include other states that have state

administered programs and an online capability to integrate with DisasterAssistance.gov.

Response: The Food for Florida Disaster Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program

(DSNAP) is scheduled to be integrated with DisasterAssistance.gov in June 2010. DAIP

is developing a generic DSNAP interface that can be leveraged by other states. The

DAIP PMO is currently working with the State of Louisiana, as they build their DSNAP

system, so they will be able to leverage the generic interface under development. The

DAIP PMO is also awaiting a response from New York, Oklahoma and Ohio on their

abilities to leverage the generic DSNAP interface for their states.

In addition to DSNAP, the DAIP PMO is currently reviewing paper applications for

states administering Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DVA) to detennine the baseline

data collection requirements across all state DUA programs. Our program sponsors in

the Recovery Directorate have offered to help arrange meetings with the Department of

Labor to further energize efforts to implement a DUA interface or a DAIP-hosted

application that can be used by the states. During Phase 3, the DAIP PMO will work

toward developing a generic OUA interface that could be leveraged by states as they

automate their DUA systems.

Appendix B 

Management Comments to the Draft Report 

FEMA’s Disaster Assistance Improvement Plan 

Page 17 
PageS

Lastly, we will expand outreach and integration discussions across all states offering

federally funded, state-administered fOlms ofassistance.

Thank you again for the opportunity to comment on this draft report and we look forward

to working with you on other issues as we both strive to improve FEMA.

Appendix B 

Management Comments to the Draft Report 

FEMA’s Disaster Assistance Improvement Plan 

Page 18 
Appendix C 

Major Contributors to This Report 

Donald Bumgardner, Director 

Philip McDonald, Supervisory Auditor 

Stuart Josephs, Auditor 

Francine Barone, Auditor 

FEMA’s Disaster Assistance Improvement Plan 

Page 19 
Appendix D 

Report Distribution 

Department Of Homeland Security 

Secretary 

Deputy Secretary 

Chief of Staff 

Deputy Chief of Staff 

General Counsel 

Executive Secretariat 

Director, GAO/OIG Liaison Office 

Assistant Secretary for Office of Policy 

Assistant Secretary for Office of Public Affairs 

Assistant Secretary for Office of Legislative Affairs 

FEMA Audit Liaison (08-136-EMO-FEMA) 

Office of Management and Budget 

Chief, Homeland Security Branch 

DHS OIG Budget Examiner 

Congress 

Congressional Oversight and Appropriations Committees, as 

appropriate 

FEMA’s Disaster Assistance Improvement Plan 

Page 20 
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND COPIES 

To obtain additional copies of this report, please call the Office of Inspector General (OIG) at (202) 254-4100, 

fax your request to (202) 254-4305, or visit the OIG web site at www.dhs.gov/oig. 

OIG HOTLINE 

To report alleged fraud, waste, abuse or mismanagement, or any other kind of criminal or noncriminal 

misconduct relative to department programs or operations: 

• Call our Hotline at 1-800-323-8603; 

• Fax the complaint directly to us at (202) 254-4292; 

• Email us at DHSOIGHOTLINE@dhs.gov; or 

• Write to us at: 

DHS Office of Inspector General/MAIL STOP 2600, 

Attention: Office of Investigations - Hotline, 

245 Murray Drive, SW, Building 410, 

Washington, DC 20528. 

The OIG seeks to protect the identity of each writer and caller.