Department of Homeland Security
 

Inspection of FEMA’s Regional Offices – 

Region IX 

OIG-12-43 February 2012
 
Office of Inspector General 

U.S. Department of Homeland Security 

Washington, DC 20528 

Preface 

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Office of Inspector 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 strengths and weaknesses of the Federal Emergency Management

Agency’s Region IX Office. 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 of those who contributed to the preparation of this report. 

Anne L. Richards 

Assistant Inspector General for Audits 
Table of Contents/Abbreviations 

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

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

Results of Review ................................................................................................................6
 

Preparedness ..................................................................................................................6
 

Recommendations........................................................................................................11 


Management Comments and OIG Analysis ................................................................11 


Response ......................................................................................................................13
 

Recovery ......................................................................................................................16
 

Recommendation .........................................................................................................18 


Management Comments and OIG Analysis ................................................................18 


Mitigation .....................................................................................................................19
 

Grants...........................................................................................................................21
 

Recommendation .........................................................................................................24 


Management Comments and OIG Analysis ................................................................24 


Mission Support...........................................................................................................25 


Office of the Regional Administrator ..........................................................................27 


Recommendations........................................................................................................32 


Management Comments and OIG Analysis ................................................................32 


Conclusion ...................................................................................................................34
 

Appendices 

Appendix A: Purpose, Scope, and Methodology.......................................................35 


Appendix B: Management Comments to the Draft Report .......................................36 


Appendix C: Regional Responsibilities and Delegated Authorities..........................42 


Appendix D: FEMA Grant Programs ........................................................................43 


Appendix E: Major Contributors to this Report........................................................44 


Appendix F: Report Distribution ..............................................................................45 

Abbreviations 

ARRA American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 

BCA benefit cost analysis 

CFR Code of Federal Regulations 

CNMI Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands 

COTR contracting officer’s technical representative 

DHS Department of Homeland Security 

FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency 

FMAG Fire Management Assistance Grant 

FY fiscal year 

HMA Hazard Mitigation Assistance 

IMAT Incident Management Assistance Team 

OCFO Office of the Chief Financial Officer 

OCSP Office of Counterterrorism and Security Preparedness 

OIG Office of Inspector General 

PKEMRA Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act of 2006 

RAC Regional Advisory Council 

RECCWG Regional Emergency Communications Coordination Working Group 

RESP Regional Exercise Support Program 

RRCC Regional Response Coordination Center 
 

OIG
 

Department of Homeland Security 

Office of Inspector General 

Executive Summary 

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) maintains 

10 Regional Offices, which are responsible for implementing the 

agency’s programs and policies; preparing for, responding to, and 

recovering from disasters and emergencies; and mitigating against 

all hazards. Our primary objective was to determine whether 

FEMA’s Regional Offices are effectively meeting their 

responsibilities. This report focuses specifically on Region IX. 

Region IX has consistently engaged its stakeholders at the state, 

local, and tribal levels in order to identify and address regional 

priorities across all phases of the emergency management cycle. 

In general, Region IX has made great efforts to fulfill its legislated 

responsibilities and implement several delegated authorities, but 

we identified areas for improvement. 

Region IX faces both budgetary and staffing shortfalls across its 

divisions and programs. Region IX needs additional guidance in 

the area of preparedness, and needs further guidance or instruction 

on the roles and responsibilities of Region IX’s Protection and 

Prevention mission area. Improvements and assessments are still 

needed in the disaster grants closeout process to identify issues that 

may be causing extensive delays. Region IX is also limited in its 

ability to conduct financial and programmatic monitoring of 

disaster and nondisaster grant programs. 

The Regional Advisory Council has not been maintained; 

therefore, Region IX is missing opportunities to identify and 

remediate weaknesses or deficiencies in preparedness, protection, 

response, recovery, and mitigation activities. We are making eight 

recommendations that, when implemented, should improve the 

effectiveness of FEMA’s Region IX Office. 

Inspection of FEMA’s Regional Offices – Region IX 


Page 1
 
Background 

FEMA Regional Offices 

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) maintains 

10 Regional Offices (figure 1), each of which is led by a Regional 

Administrator who reports to the FEMA Administrator. The 

FEMA Administrator has said that he believes emergency 

management organizations are most responsive and effective when 

the authority to make operational decisions is delegated to the 

command levels in the field with “boots on the ground.” As a 

result, FEMA headquarters is developing the policies, or “rules and 

tools,” of the programs that the agency manages, while the 

Regional Offices are becoming increasingly responsible for 

implementing those programs in the field. 

Figure 1. FEMA Regions 

Source: FEMA 

Inspection of FEMA’s Regional Offices – Region IX 

Page 2 
 

Figure 2. FEMA Region IX 

FEMA Region IX Pacific Jurisdictions 

HI 

Pacific Area Office 

(Ft. Shafter, HI) 

2,500 Miles 

Guam 

5,800 miles 

American Samoa 

4,750 miles 

RMI 

4,625 miles 

CNMI 

5,700 miles 

FSM 

5,350 miles 

Nevada 

Region IX HQ 

Oakland, CA 

Pasadena AFO 

Arizona 

2 

Source: FEMA Region IX 

Region IX, whose Regional Office is in Oakland, California, works 

in partnership with the emergency management agencies of 

Arizona, California, Hawaii, and Nevada, as well as the territories 

of American Samoa and Guam, the Commonwealth of the 

Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI), the Republic of the Marshall 

Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia, and the Region’s 156 

federally recognized tribes. Region IX maintains a Pacific Area 

Office in Honolulu, Hawaii, and an Area Field Office in Pasadena, 

California. Region IX serves a culturally diverse population in 

excess of 36 million people and covers 386,000 square miles 

(figure 2). 

To accomplish its mission, Region IX maintains a workforce of 

171 permanent full-time employees. The Region’s most common 

disasters are earthquakes, wildfires, hurricanes, typhoons, and 

other storms that can cause flooding, flash flooding, and landslides. 

Regional Responsibilities 

The Regions’ mission parallels and augments the FEMA 

headquarters mission, which is to support citizens and first 

responders to ensure that the Nation works together to build, 

Inspection of FEMA’s Regional Offices – Region IX 

Page 3 
sustain, and improve our capability to prepare for, protect against, 

respond to, recover from, and mitigate against all hazards. The 

regional level is where FEMA engages most directly with state, 

local, and tribal partners, as well as disaster survivors, to deliver 

frontline services. The Regions also lead the federal response and 

recovery efforts for incidents across the spectrum of all-hazards 

events. 

Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act 

Although FEMA’s regional structure was in place prior to 

Hurricane Katrina, the Post-Katrina Emergency Management 

Reform Act of 2006 (PKEMRA) directed FEMA to develop and 

maintain robust Regional Offices and codified the following 

responsibilities for the Regional Offices: 

 Work with state, local, and tribal governments, emergency 

response providers, and other appropriate entities to 

identify and address regional priorities. 

 Ensure effective, coordinated, and integrated regional 

preparedness, protection, response, recovery, and 

mitigation activities and programs for natural disasters, acts 

of terrorism, and other manmade disasters (including 

planning, training, exercise, and professional development). 

 Assist in the development of regional capabilities needed 

for a national catastrophic response system. 

 Coordinate the establishment of effective regional operable 

and interoperable emergency communications capabilities. 

 Foster the development of mutual aid and other cooperative 

agreements. 

 Designate an individual responsible for the development of 

strategic and operational regional plans in support of the 

National Response Plan (referred to as the National 

Response Framework since 2008). 

 Staff oversee one or more strike teams to serve as the focal 

point of the federal government’s initial response efforts for 

natural disasters, acts of terrorism, and other manmade 

disasters within that Region, and otherwise build federal 

Inspection of FEMA’s Regional Offices – Region IX 

Page 4 
response capabilities to respond to natural disasters, acts of 

terrorism, and other manmade disasters within that Region. 

 Identify critical gaps in regional capabilities to respond to 

populations with special needs. 

 Maintain and operate a Regional Response Coordination 

Center or its successor. 

 Establish a Regional Advisory Council. 

Delegated Authorities 

In July 2009, and again in August 2010, the FEMA Administrator 

announced the delegation of additional authorities to the Regional 

Offices, intended to improve performance in the Regions and 

further empower Regional Offices. We conducted a limited 

inspection of Region IX’s implementation of the following 

delegated authorities: 

 Issue mission assignments in excess of $10 million. 

Review and approve funding for State Management 

Administrative Costs for the Public Assistance and Hazard 

Mitigation Grant Programs. 

 Approve Fire Management Assistance Grants. 

Approve 40-1 actions for nondisaster acquisitions. 

 Determine the annual grants monitoring requirements and 

schedule. 

 Fiscally oversee the (a) Emergency Management 

Performance, (b) Emergency Operations Center, and 

(c) Driver's License Security grant programs. 

 Oversee the Regional Exercise Support Program. 

 Contract for airlift. 

Inspection of FEMA’s Regional Offices – Region IX 

Page 5 
Results of Review 

Region IX has made great efforts to fulfill its legislated responsibilities and 

implement most delegated authorities. An overarching concern, however, is that 

Region IX does not have sufficient resources, particularly in the areas of staff and 

funding for travel and training, to carry out its responsibilities fully and effectively. 

Region IX officials expressed concerns that they would not be able to fulfill both 

preparedness and grants responsibilities if they do not receive additional resources. 

Regional empowerment requires staffing commensurate with the scope of 

responsibility and authority. In August 2010, FEMA allocated 84 vacant 

headquarters positions to the Regional Offices to facilitate emergency preparedness, 

coordination, and planning at the local level.1

 FEMA emphasized that these 

positions are an important step toward enabling the Regional Offices to take on 

increased responsibility and authority. Additionally, FEMA headquarters has 

provided the Regional Offices with increased funding for professional 

development and training. 

FEMA headquarters is taking steps in the right direction by allocating additional 

staff and resources to the Regional Offices; however, the steps so far are not 

sufficient to meet the overall needs of Region IX. 

Preparedness 

Preparedness Activities 

Region IX’s preparedness activities are guided by the National 

Preparedness Division, which utilizes the preparedness cycle 

(figure 3) to support the Region’s citizens and first responders by 

building, sustaining, and improving preparedness capabilities. 

Region IX strives to achieve preparedness through a continuous 

cycle of planning, organizing, equipping, training, exercising, 

evaluating, and improving. Region IX’s ongoing preparedness 

efforts are intended to ensure that emergency management and 

incident response activities are coordinated during times of crisis. 

1

 The allocated positions included attorneys, disability coordinators, budget coordinators, external affairs 

specialists, human capital specialists, security specialists, local business transition team leaders, operational 

planners, and permanent staffing assignments for Incident Management Assistance Teams. 

Inspection of FEMA’s Regional Offices – Region IX 

Page 6 
Figure 3. Preparedness Cycle 

Source: FEMA 

Region IX works continually with state, local, and tribal partners to 

identify priority areas throughout the Region. Region IX has 

hosted meetings and workshops, including biannual Preparedness 

Partnership meetings and exercise planning workshops, bringing 

together partners at the federal, state, local, and tribal levels. 

These meetings allow Region IX stakeholders to: (1) discuss 

emergency management preparedness programs; (2) share stateand territory-specific updates, best practices, and lessons learned; 

(3) conduct training and exercise planning workshops to review the 

state and territory homeland security strategy; and (4) develop and 

update the multiyear training and exercise plan. Region IX’s state 

partners said that the Preparedness Partnership meetings provide an 

excellent forum for “good, honest discussions.” 

Region IX has also been working with its partners to measure and 

assess preparedness capabilities. Region IX participated in the 

Inspection of FEMA’s Regional Offices – Region IX 

Page 7 
2010 Nationwide Plan Review.2

 Its staff reviewed the plans and 

certification matrices3

 submitted by entities within the Region and 

rated each plan on the basis of its adequacy, feasibility, and 

completeness to manage a catastrophic event. Region IX has also 

been involved in the completion of State Preparedness Reports, 

which track, among other things, statewide planning efforts and 

current preparedness capability levels. 

Recognizing the importance of training and exercising in the 

preparedness cycle, Region IX has led or participated in numerous 

activities and exercises designed to increase overall preparedness. 

Internally, Region IX has facilitated Lightning Strike Exercises, 

which are similar to the FEMA Administrator’s Thunderbolt 

Exercises. These small, no-notice exercises are consistent with the 

Homeland Security Exercise and Evaluation Program guidance. 

In addition, Region IX has worked with its partners to coordinate 

and conduct exercises designed to validate emergency response 

plans, policies, and procedures. For instance, in September 2010, 

Region IX participated in the Guam Emergency Operations 

Center/Incident Management Assistance Team Functional Exercise. 

The exercise was intended to validate Emergency Operations 

Center management training, the Guam All-Hazards Contingency 

Plan, and the Guam Catastrophic Typhoon Operations Plan. 

Furthermore, the Region participated in the activities leading up to 

the National Level Exercise 2010. Region IX built upon the work 

of federal, state, local, and private sector partners to develop an 

operations plan for state and federal response to an improvised 

nuclear device. Although the exercise was relocated to another 

Region, the operations plan was presented to senior staff at a 

Senior Leaders Seminar in Nevada. 

Finally, the Region participated in the 2011 Dark Zephyr Exercise. 

Region IX subject matter experts participated in a series of tabletop 

exercises focusing on the release of aerosolized anthrax in San 

Francisco, California. Throughout the exercise, Region IX 

coordinated with the U.S. Department of Health and Human 

2

 The 2010 Nationwide Plan Review was a legislatively mandated assessment of the catastrophic plans of 

all 50 states, the District of Columbia, territories, and 75 urban areas. 

3

 The certification matrix provided basic data about the jurisdiction’s plans and related appendices and 

annexes, including a self-assessment of each document’s adequacy, feasibility, and completeness using a 

five-point scale. 

Inspection of FEMA’s Regional Offices – Region IX 

Page 8 
Services, which serves as the lead federal agency for a public 

health emergency, to discuss the roles and responsibilities of each 

agency during an anthrax response. 

Preparedness Programs 

Although Region IX is engaged in numerous activities designed to 

improve the overall preparedness of the jurisdictions that it serves, 

it faces numerous challenges that hinder these efforts. Although 

FEMA and DHS leadership have cited Individual and Community 

Preparedness as the overarching priority for fiscal year (FY) 2011, 

Region IX does not have enough permanent staff to fulfill the roles 

and responsibilities of the Individual and Community Preparedness 

program initiative. According to the FY 2011 Regional-National 

Preparedness Annual Program Plan guidance from FEMA 

headquarters, each Region is responsible for increasing the 

preparedness of communities and individuals through the support 

and coordination of locally developed preparedness programs that 

have the greatest impact on communities within the Region. 

Only one individual, an employee contracted by FEMA 

headquarters, has been dedicated to the Individual and Community 

Preparedness program initiative in Region IX. Although FEMA 

headquarters is working with Region IX to convert the contract 

employee into a permanent full-time federal employee, Region IX 

officials said that there are too many core functions or activities for 

one person to focus on and accomplish within 1 year. Without the 

necessary resources, Region IX is limited in its ability to focus on 

and participate in a wide variety of Individual and Community 

Preparedness initiatives and events. 

Region IX also needs additional guidance from FEMA 

headquarters on how to implement its roles and responsibilities in 

the Protection and Prevention mission initiative. According to the 

FY 2011 Regional-National Preparedness Annual Program Plan 

from FEMA headquarters, each Region is responsible for 

(1) promoting information sharing; (2) increasing collaboration; 

and (3) facilitating relationships between emergency management 

and law enforcement entities to enhance protection and prevention 

capabilities in the Region. Although FEMA headquarters has 

recently provided several documents related to this mission 

initiative, Region IX officials said that the Region still does not 

have sufficient instructions to guide its Protection and Prevention 

activities. The Region has essentially interpreted the area itself. 

Inspection of FEMA’s Regional Offices – Region IX 

Page 9 
Staff have attended meetings and independently established 

relationships with participants, such as Fusion Center and local law 

enforcement officials. Region IX officials are concerned that 

without a FEMA-wide strategic approach to the Protection and 

Prevention mission, the level of information sharing and 

collaboration with the interagency community may be inconsistent 

from one Region to another. 

Regional Exercise Support Program 

Region IX needs more contract oversight to be able to fully 

implement the authority to oversee the Regional Exercise Support 

Program (RESP), which was designed to provide support to 

regionally coordinated exercise initiatives.4 The draft FEMA 

RESP Implementation Plan, dated October 2009, states that the 

Regional Offices are responsible for reviewing, approving, and 

managing exercise initiatives funded through the RESP. 

Additionally, the guidance states that FEMA headquarters is to 

maintain overall contractual responsibility for the RESP, to include 

writing statements of work and awarding contracts. Region IX 

officials contend that because they do not have contracting 

officer’s technical representative (COTR)5

 authority for RESP, 

they are unable to manage the contractor’s performance. Region 

IX would benefit from having a COTR or a task monitor6

 to 

provide local oversight of the RESP contractor. 

Conclusion 

Region IX needs additional permanent staff to fulfill its 

preparedness roles and responsibilities. Its current staffing level 

limits its ability to focus on and participate in a wide variety of 

preparedness initiatives and events. Furthermore, Region IX needs 

direction and guidance from FEMA headquarters that establishes 

the roles and responsibilities of the various stakeholders for the 

Protection and Prevention mission to ensure a coordinated effort 

across Regional Offices. Finally, Region IX needs additional 

4

 The RESP supports regional, state, territorial, federally recognized tribes, local, and Urban Area Security 

Initiative-designated metropolitan area exercise initiatives. Specifically, the RESP provides (1) facilitation 

of Training and Exercise Plan Workshops, (2) delivery of the Homeland Security Exercise and Evaluation 

Program Mobile Training Course, and (3) exercise support. 5 The COTR supports the contracting officer by administering and directing the agreement within the confines 

of the contract, monitoring performance, and ensuring that requirements meet the terms of the contract. 6

 Task monitors observe contractor performance and provide technical feedback to the COTR. 

Inspection of FEMA’s Regional Offices – Region IX 

Page 10 
contract oversight to fully implement the authority to oversee the 

RESP. 

Recommendations 

We recommend that the Deputy Administrator, Protection and 

National Preparedness, FEMA Headquarters: 

Recommendation #1: Address the Region’s request for staff 

dedicated to Individual and Community Preparedness initiatives 

and outreach. 

Recommendation #2: Provide further guidance or instruction on 

the roles and responsibilities of Region IX in the Protection and 

Prevention mission area. 

Recommendation #3: Coordinate with Region IX to develop a 

pilot program that allows regional staff to serve as either a 

contracting officer’s technical representative or a task monitor for 

the Regional Exercise Support Program. 

Management Comments and OIG Analysis 

Recommendation #1: FEMA concurred with this 

recommendation. The National Preparedness Directorate’s 

Individual and Community Preparedness program currently funds 

one contractor position in Region IX to develop and strengthen 

community preparedness efforts among Region IX states. 

FEMA recognizes the criticality of dedicating staff to this priority 

and plans to hire a federal employee to fulfill the requirements of a 

Community Preparedness Specialist in Region IX. As for additional 

positions dedicated to Individual and Community Preparedness, 

the Regional Administrators have the authority to realign positions 

with their offices based on their respective priorities. 

We consider this recommendation resolved because steps are being 

taken to implement it. However, it will remain open until evidence 

is provided that Region IX has sufficient permanent staff to fulfill 

the roles and responsibilities of the Individual and Community 

Preparedness program initiative. 

Recommendation #2: FEMA did not concur with this 

recommendation. In 2010, FEMA’s Protection and National 

Inspection of FEMA’s Regional Offices – Region IX 

Page 11 
Preparedness Office of Counterterrorism and Security 

Preparedness (OCSP) developed two guidance documents intended 

to provide the Regional offices with clarification and support in 

implementing and coordinating preparedness, prevention and 

protection mission area activities. OCSP developed the following 

documents: (1) Regional Prevention and Protection Roles and 

Responsibilities and (2) Regional Coordination Strategy – 

Prevention and Protection Mission Support. 

On August 12, 2010, OCSP released these documents to the 

Regional Federal Preparedness Coordinators. Region IX 

acknowledged receipt of these documents, as well as a joint memo 

that was issued in June 2011, and was encouraged by the updated 

guidance. 

We consider this recommendation unresolved and open because 

Region IX officials continue to express a need for further policy 

and guidance on roles and responsibilities particularly as they 

pertain to other DHS components and law enforcement agencies. 

A stronger understanding within the interagency community is 

needed to facilitate greater collaboration and information sharing. 

Recommendation #3: FEMA did not concur with this 

recommendation. FEMA headquarters officials said the Regions 

do not require COTR authority to manage and/or monitor 

contractor performance of the RESP because they already retain 

broad authority over the implementation of the RESP and the 

performance of contractors. 

FEMA headquarters officials also stated that the RESP contract 

has been administered by headquarters to maximize efficiency of 

resources and that a distributed RESP would create unnecessary 

redundancy of effort, negating current efficiencies realized through 

central contract management. 

FEMA headquarters officials said that they are transitioning to a 

new contracting model for exercise services that will allow 

tailoring of exercise support for the Regions. The new model 

requires multiple contracts, and it is not efficient for multiple 

contracts to be managed within each respective Region to support 

the same overarching program. 

As in some other areas, we see a disconnect between the perceptions 

of FEMA headquarters and Region IX officials. FEMA 

Inspection of FEMA’s Regional Offices – Region IX 

Page 12 
headquarters officials say that the Region has the authority it 

needs, but Region IX officials told us that the RESP contract could 

be more effectively managed if they had more oversight authority 

in the Region. We believe that assigning a COTR or task monitor 

in the Region, particularly on a pilot basis, is a reasonable step to 

ensure that the Region IX RESP is adequately managed. 

We consider this recommendation unresolved and open, and we 

will continue to work with FEMA officials in headquarters and 

Region IX to identify mechanisms for ensuring appropriate 

oversight of RESP contracts. 

Response 

Catastrophic Planning Initiatives 

Region IX has worked extensively with its state, local, and tribal 

partners to develop catastrophic planning initiatives. Past efforts 

have included earthquake planning in the San Francisco Bay area 

and in northwest Nevada, hurricane planning in Hawaii, typhoon 

planning in Guam, and planning for the detonation of an 

improvised nuclear device in Nevada. 

Most recently, Region IX worked cooperatively with more than 

1,500 representatives from federal, state, local, and tribal partners, 

non-governmental organizations, and the private sector to develop 

the Southern California Catastrophic Earthquake Response Plan. 

The plan provides for a coordinated federal/state response to a 

catastrophic earthquake on the Southern San Andreas Fault.7 

According to Region IX officials, the plan is scheduled to be tested 

in 2012 as a part of California’s Golden Guardian Annual Exercise 

Program. 

Regional Response Coordination Center/Incident Management 

Assistance Team 

Region IX has maintained a robust Regional Response 

Coordination Center (RRCC) as required by PKEMRA. A critical 

aspect of Region IX’s ability to respond to any emergency event is 

7

 The San Andreas Fault is the “master” fault of an intricate fault network that cuts through rocks of the 

California coastal region. The entire San Andreas Fault system is more than 800 miles long and extends to 

depths of at least 10 miles. 

Inspection of FEMA’s Regional Offices – Region IX 

Page 13 
the RRCC, a predesignated facility that consists of two watch 

centers that maintain 24/7 regional monitoring and a coordination 

center. Upon activation, the RRCC coordinates federal response 

efforts within the Region and maintains connectivity with State 

Emergency Operations Centers, state Fusion Centers, federal 

Executive Boards, and other federal and state operations and 

coordination centers that may contribute to situational awareness. 

The RRCC is staffed by FEMA personnel assigned to a Regional 

Support Team and, in some cases, Emergency Support Function 

representatives. 

Region IX also staffs and oversees three Incident Management 

Assistance Teams (IMATs) that are prepared to deploy to an 

incident site to provide support and assistance. Each team has four 

permanent positions: team leader, operations section chief, 

planning section chief, and logistics section chief. Six other 

positions are filled by collateral-duty staff whose normal day-today positions are elsewhere in the Regional Office. The teams 

rotate among three operational statuses on a month-to-month basis: 

(1) Primary—deployable and operational within 12 hours; 

(2) Alternate—prepared to deploy within 8 hours of notification; 

and (3) Off Call—subject to recall as necessary. 

To ensure that the Regional Support Team and the IMATs are 

prepared to assume their roles and responsibilities during an 

incident, Region IX facilitates half-day “all-hands” standdown 

training on a monthly basis and occasionally conducts Lightning 

Strike Exercises. The half-day “all-hands” standdown training 

focuses on response activities for specific scenarios and the 

development of core capabilities. For example, the standdown 

training that Region IX facilitated on March 9, 2011, coincidentally 

2 days before the earthquake and tsunami in Japan, focused on four 

scenarios, including one in which a tsunami impacted the northern 

shores of the Hawaiian Islands. 

Although Region IX has not had to deploy an IMAT for an actual 

incident within its jurisdiction, it has deployed an IMAT to 

participate in several exercises, as well as to Vermont to provide 

support in preparation for Hurricane Earl. Region IX, as part of 

the September 2010 Guam exercise, deployed an IMAT to Guam 

and staffed the RRCC. Region IX officials said that deployments 

such as these have greatly enhanced the preparedness of the 

Region’s IMATs. 

Inspection of FEMA’s Regional Offices – Region IX 

Page 14 
 

Operable and Interoperable Emergency Communications 

Region IX is responsible for establishing effective regional 

operable and interoperable emergency communications 

capabilities. To integrate disaster emergency communications 

capabilities, Region IX has worked extensively with state, local, 

and tribal governments to develop Emergency Communications 

Plans. These plans describe the primary and backup 

communications systems used by federal, state, local, and tribal 

governments for emergency response efforts. Additionally, the 

plans identify resources that stakeholders may request during a 

catastrophic event to support emergency responders. 

To further enhance the Region’s efforts to integrate disaster 

emergency communications, Region IX has established a Regional 

Emergency Communications Coordination Working Group 

(RECCWG). The RECCWG is responsible for (1) assessing 

Region IX’s emergency communications capabilities, 

(2) facilitating disaster preparedness through the promotion of 

multijurisdictional and multiagency emergency communications 

networks, and (3) coordinating with regional stakeholders. The 

RECCWG hosts monthly meetings, which Region IX officials said 

have been instrumental in bringing together state, local, and tribal 

governments to discuss operable and interoperable communications 

issues and best practices. The RECCWG has also identified areas 

where the Region needs to make improvements, such as ensuring 

that tribes, as well as the Pacific Islands, have effective 

communication capabilities. 

Conclusion 

Region IX has worked extensively with stakeholders to develop 

numerous catastrophic planning initiatives. In accordance with 

federal legislation, Region IX has also: (1) maintained a robust 

RRCC that coordinates federal response efforts within the Region; 

(2) maintained three IMATs that are prepared to deploy to an 

incident site to provide support and assistance; and (3) worked to 

establish effective regional operable and interoperable emergency 

communications capabilities. 

Inspection of FEMA’s Regional Offices – Region IX 

Page 15 
Recovery 

Recovery Activities 

Region IX works closely with its state, local, and tribal partners to 

identify regional recovery priorities. Region IX regularly hosts 

emergency management workshops on the Public Assistance and 

Individual Assistance Programs, in which discussions are held on 

topics such as debris removal, disaster housing, and disaster 

closeout. For instance, Region IX hosted a number of summits on 

mass care and emergency assistance that were held in Hawaii, 

American Samoa, CNMI, and Guam between July and September 

2010. Specialists from Region IX participated in discussions of 

logistics, mass care, functional needs support services, and feeding. 

The goal of the meetings was to assist state and local emergency 

managers in identifying specific actions required to support and 

enhance their emergency assistance plans. 

Region IX has actively incorporated recovery activities into 

numerous catastrophic planning initiatives. For instance, during 

the planning efforts for the Southern California Catastrophic 

Earthquake Plan, Region IX provided support and subject matter 

expertise for Emergency Support Function #6—Mass Care, 

Emergency Assistance, Housing, and Human Services. The 

Region also worked closely with local and national branches of the 

American Red Cross, other nonprofit organizations, and state and 

local officials to coordinate mass care activities. Region IX 

officials said that this marked the first time Emergency Support 

Function #14—Long-Term Community Recovery—was included 

in catastrophic planning efforts. 

Fire Management Assistance Grant Program 

In an effort to enhance the effectiveness and responsiveness of the 

Fire Management Assistance Grant (FMAG) Program, the FEMA 

Administrator delegated the authority to approve or deny requests 

for fire management assistance to the Regional Administrators. 

FMAGs are made available to state and local applicants, as well as 

tribes, to minimize immediate adverse effects and to manage and 

control wildland fires that threaten to cause major disasters. To 

obtain FMAG assistance, a state is required to submit, and FEMA 

must review and approve, a fire management assistance declaration 

request. Prior to the delegation of authority, all fire management 

assistance declaration requests were processed by each Regional 

Inspection of FEMA’s Regional Offices – Region IX 

Page 16 
 

 

Office but approved by FEMA headquarters. Now the approval 

process is completed at the regional level. Since this authority was 

delegated to the Regions in August 2010, Region IX has received 

and approved numerous requests under the FMAG program. 

To ensure that the fire management assistance requests are 

processed consistently and uniformly, Region IX developed a set 

of standard operating procedures. The standard operating 

procedures provide instructions for activities that occur 

predeclaration, postdeclaration, and in follow-up. The Region has 

met on a regular basis with the Principal Advisors8

 and the states to 

ensure the effectiveness of the standard operating procedures under 

the FMAG Program. 

Disaster Grant Closeouts 

Region IX has made progress in the area of disaster closeouts; 

however, challenges remain. DHS OIG reported in January 20109 

that delays in FEMA’s disaster closeout process start at the grantee 

level and continue through final processing at FEMA headquarters. 

Region IX has the authority to mandate that disaster grants are 

closed out at the grantee level. 

The terms of the FEMA/State Agreement require grantees to 

comply with the provisions of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster 

Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (Stafford Act) and FEMA’s 

regulations in Title 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 

for the declared disaster assistance programs. According to 44 CFR 

13.50, the federal agency will close out the award when it 

determines that all applicable administrative actions and all 

required work of the grant have been completed. Within 90 days 

of the expiration or termination of the grant, the grantee must 

submit all financial, performance, and other reports as a condition 

of the grant. 

Region IX is not consistently enforcing the terms and conditions 

listed in the FEMA/State Agreements. This allows grantees to 

move at a slow pace, resulting in extremely long delays in the 

disaster closeout process. Thus, FEMA continues to incur 

administrative costs associated with monitoring open disasters that 

8

 A Principal Advisor is a federal employee who represents FEMA in verifying the information provided on 


the fire management assistance declaration request form.


9 Opportunities to Improve FEMA’s Disaster Closeout Process (OIG-10-49), January 2010.
 

Inspection of FEMA’s Regional Offices – Region IX 

Page 17 
 

 

should have been closed long ago. In addition, disaster funds that 

the grantee does not need are not deobligated in a timely manner, 

which would allow the funds to be put to better use. 

Because Region IX perceives that it does not have the authority to 

compel states to comply with closing out disasters within a specific 

timeframe, it generally is not using the enforcement provisions in 

the federal regulations. According to 44 CFR 13.43, remedies for 

noncompliance include: (1) temporarily withholding cash payments; 

(2) suspending or terminating the current program award; and 

(3) withholding further awards for the program. FEMA 

headquarters needs to coordinate with its Regional Offices to 

ensure that they are adhering to the FEMA/State Agreements and 

enforcing the federal regulations for disaster grant closeouts. 

Conclusion 

Region IX continues to work closely with its state, local, and tribal 

partners to identify regional recovery priorities, as well as engage 

in numerous activities designed to improve its recovery capabilities. 

In addition, Region IX has implemented the delegated authority for 

approving FMAGs. Improvements in the area of disaster grant 

closeouts are still needed. 

Recommendation 

We recommend that the Chief Financial Officer, FEMA 

headquarters: 

Recommendation #4: Ensure that the FEMA Regional Offices 

are enforcing the terms and conditions of FEMA/State agreements 

and using the remedies for noncompliance under the federal 

regulations to improve the timeliness of the disaster grant closeout 

process. 

Management Comments and OIG Analysis 

Recommendation #4: FEMA concurred with this 

recommendation. As part of the larger Grant Management 

remediation activity in FY 2012, FEMA will be addressing the 

internal control weaknesses affecting disaster grant closeout. 

We consider this recommendation resolved because steps are being 

taken to implement the planned corrective action. However, it will 

Inspection of FEMA’s Regional Offices – Region IX 

Page 18 
remain open until evidence is provided that FEMA is enforcing the 

terms and conditions of the FEMA/State agreements. 

Improvements are needed to address the major delays in FEMA’s 

disaster grant closeout process. 

Mitigation 

Mitigation Activities 

Region IX’s Mitigation Division is responsible for promoting safer 

communities through mitigation programs that reduce the loss of 

lives and properties. The Mitigation Division has actively engaged 

its state, local, and tribal partners to identify and address regional 

priorities. Region IX’s stakeholders have identified three top 

priority areas: (1) moving from flood mapping to multihazards 

mapping; (2) developing Risk-Based Plans; and (3) developing a 

plan of action to address Region IX’s aging levee system. 

Currently, Region IX and its state, local, and tribal partners base 

their mitigation activities on maps that only indicate flood zones. 

Multihazards maps, which identify multiple disaster threats such as 

floods, earthquakes, tornadoes, tsunamis, or other potential 

disasters, can increase the Region’s abilities to focus mitigation 

activities on the full range of disaster threats, not just flooding. 

Region IX and its stakeholders have identified transitioning to 

multihazards mapping as one of their top priorities. 

Under section 322 of the Stafford Act, to receive an increased 

federal share for hazard mitigation grant funding, a state must have 

an approved mitigation plan, also called a State Plan, in place prior 

to a disaster. A state can also submit a more enhanced Risk-Based 

Plan that takes into account more variables, such as population, 

topography, and any unique situation that might affect the state’s 

mitigation needs. Region IX is working with stakeholders to 

approve State Plans and Risk-Based Plans to ensure that grantees 

receive the maximum federal assistance available after a disaster. 

The third mitigation priority area for Region IX is the levee 

systems. Certain areas in Region IX rely on levees to mitigate the 

risk of flooding. However, the Region’s levee infrastructure is 

aging, and Region IX officials expressed concern that many levees 

have not been properly maintained. This equates to an increased 

risk of a catastrophic disaster should these levees fail. Region IX 

Inspection of FEMA’s Regional Offices – Region IX 

Page 19 
is working with its stakeholders to focus on the development of 

mitigation plans to address the aging levees. 

Assessing Cost-Effectiveness 

Region IX provides Hazard Mitigation Assistance10 (HMA) to its 

state, local, and tribal partners to help fund projects designed to 

reduce or eliminate the risks associated with natural hazards. 

Before providing HMA, Region IX works with its partners to 

validate the cost-effectiveness of mitigation projects. According to 

the Hazard Mitigation Assistance Unified Guidance, mitigation 

projects must be cost-effective to be eligible for HMA funding, as 

demonstrated by a FEMA-validated benefit cost analysis (BCA). 

The BCA, which is performed at either the applicant or 

subapplicant levels, evaluates the future benefits of the mitigation 

project in relation to the project costs. 

In the past, Region IX has also conducted loss avoidance 

methodology studies to quantitatively assess the benefits of a 

completed project in terms of its performance during an actual 

event. The goal of the loss avoidance studies was to answer the 

question, “How much damage could have occurred if the 

mitigation project had not been in place?” The results of these 

studies were used to demonstrate the effectiveness of projects and 

to promote the value of investing in future mitigation measures. 

However, Region IX officials said that although the loss avoidance 

methodology studies have proved to be a powerful tool from which 

Region IX could benefit, the studies were deemed too expensive to 

continue. 

State Management Administrative Costs 

Region IX has successfully implemented the authority to review 

and approve funding for State Management Administrative Costs 

for the Public Assistance and Hazard Mitigation Grant Programs. 

This authority transferred the approval of State Management 

Administrative Costs from FEMA headquarters to the Regional 

Offices. Under section 324 of the Stafford Act, management costs 

are any indirect costs, administrative expenses, and any other 

expenses not directly chargeable to a specific project. 

10 Hazard Mitigation Assistance is available through five programs: (1) Hazard Mitigation Grant Program, 

(2) Pre-Disaster Mitigation, (3) Flood Mitigation Assistance, (4) Repetitive Flood Claims, and (5) Severe 

Repetitive Loss. 

Inspection of FEMA’s Regional Offices – Region IX 

Page 20 
According to federal regulation 44 CFR 207.5, the State 

Management Administrative Costs ceiling is calculated by a flat 

percentage rate for Public Assistance—3.34% for major disaster 

declarations and 3.90% for emergencies. The Hazard Mitigation 

rate is 4.89% for major disaster declarations. However, before 

claimed costs can be reimbursed to the grantee, Region IX 

personnel must determine if such expenses are eligible. Region IX 

receives a request for reimbursement package from the grantee 

along with supporting documentation such as the types of supplies 

requested, description, and primary use of equipment. Region IX 

reviews the State’s request for reimbursement package and 

supporting documentation to determine the reimbursable amount 

based on the terms of the State Administrative Plan. Once the 

review is completed and the reimbursable costs are accepted, 

Region IX can approve and obligate the requested funds for 

reimbursement. Region IX officials said that this authority has 

helped to streamline the approval process and has allowed the 

Region to directly serve the needs of grantees, thus giving the 

states more immediate access to needed funds. 

Conclusion 

Region IX is working with partners to identify and address 

mitigation priorities and has successfully implemented the review 

and approval of State Management Administrative Costs. 

Grants 

Grant Program Activities 

FEMA uses grant programs to help state, local, and tribal 

governments, as well as nonprofit organizations, prepare for and 

recover from emergencies and disasters. FEMA headquarters’ 

Grant Programs Directorate, along with its Regional Offices, 

administers grants in the areas of disaster assistance and 

operations, homeland security, mitigation, and national 

preparedness. 

FEMA headquarters and its Regional Offices are responsible for 

ensuring the integrity of the use of federal grant funds through 

oversight activities, which include both financial and programmatic 

monitoring. A primary goal of FEMA’s financial monitoring is to 

ensure grantee compliance with applicable federal regulations. 

Inspection of FEMA’s Regional Offices – Region IX 

Page 21 
Programmatic monitoring focuses on progress toward achieving 

goals and objectives of the grant programs. FEMA headquarters 

and its Regional Offices are working to find effective ways to 

incorporate financial and programmatic oversight activities for a 

more comprehensive review of how each grantee is using federal 

funds. 

In an effort to enhance the effectiveness and responsiveness of 

disaster and nondisaster grant programs, the FEMA Administrator 

delegated the responsibility for determining the annual grants 

monitoring requirements and schedule to the Regional Offices. In 

FY 2009, FEMA headquarters transferred the responsibility for 

financial and programmatic oversight of five grant programs to the 

Regional Offices. At the time of our review, Region IX was 

responsible for the financial monitoring of approximately 73 grant 

programs, and FEMA headquarters was responsible for the 

financial monitoring of 4 grant programs (appendix D). Region IX 

is responsible for the programmatic monitoring of five grant 

programs, including the Driver’s License Security Grant Program 

(Real ID), Emergency Management Performance Grant Program, 

and Emergency Operations Centers Grant Program. The Grant 

Programs Directorate provides programmatic monitoring oversight 

for the remaining disaster and nondisaster grant programs, and is 

responsible for business operations, systems, training, policy, and 

procedures supporting all FEMA grant programs. 

Grants Monitoring Requirements and Schedule 

Region IX has made significant progress in standardizing and 

streamlining the financial monitoring requirements applicable to its 

grant programs; however, the Region faces challenges in 

conducting financial and programmatic oversight activities for 

many grant programs. 

The Grant Programs Directorate developed a Financial Monitoring 

Plan that was last issued on November 19, 2010. The Financial 

Monitoring Plan is issued annually and requires each Regional 

Office to conduct financial monitoring on its designated grantees 

and incorporate the requirements set forth in the Financial 

Monitoring Plan into the annual monitoring schedule and 

activities. 

According to Region IX, it is a challenge to conduct financial and 

programmatic monitoring of disaster and nondisaster grant 

Inspection of FEMA’s Regional Offices – Region IX 

Page 22 
 

programs because of (1) the magnitude of the workload, (2) the 

Region’s geographical size, (3) limited staffing, and (4) budget 

restrictions (i.e., travel funds). Additionally, Region IX does not 

have sufficient access to the grant specialists at FEMA 

headquarters who are subject matter experts in various grant 

programs needed to conduct programmatic reviews. In July 2009, 

Region IX was delegated the authority to “fiscally oversee”11 the 

Driver’s License Security Grant Program (Real ID), the 

Emergency Management Performance Grant Program, and the 

Emergency Operations Centers Grant Program. Region IX was 

unable to adequately conduct the programmatic monitoring for 

these grant programs or to provide technical assistance site visits to 

a number of grantees because of insufficient resources. Therefore, 

Region IX’s primary focus was attempting to meet the financial 

monitoring plan requirements, which reviewed certain grantees 

identified as high-risk or high-dollar grant recipients. Given the 

resource challenges, Region IX officials are concerned that they 

will not be able to fully meet the requirements of the financial 

monitoring plan for this fiscal year. 

For example, the Pacific Islands require a great deal of grants 

oversight and technical assistance. To provide an adequate level of 

monitoring and technical assistance, personnel from Region IX 

must travel to the islands, which is extremely expensive and affects 

the Region’s overall monitoring efforts. Region IX has to rely 

more on desk reviews for its monitoring process, rather than onsite 

reviews during which officials would be able to provide guidance 

to the grantee in person. In FY 2011, the Region IX Grants 

Division received a budget of approximately $52,000, but its actual 

needs were projected to be approximately $92,000 for the year. 

Region IX officials believe they can be more effective now that 

they have the authority to determine the annual grants monitoring 

requirements and schedule; however, the Region needs additional 

resources to adequately oversee the grant programs. Without 

adequate oversight, grant funds are at risk of waste, fraud, abuse, 

or mismanagement. To address these challenges, Region IX’s 

Grants Division has developed planning documents detailing 

future projected grant activity and additional staffing positions. In 

addition, Region IX’s Grants Division has met with and expressed 

its concerns to the Regional Administrator and FEMA headquarters’ 

11 The term “fiscally oversee” involves both financial and programmatic monitoring. 

Inspection of FEMA’s Regional Offices – Region IX 

Page 23 
 

Grant Programs Directorate, and they have discussed potential 

solutions to those issues. 

Conclusion 

To fully implement the authority to determine the annual grants 

monitoring requirements and schedule and to fiscally oversee the 

Driver’s License Security Grant Program (Real ID), Emergency 

Management Performance Grant Program, and Emergency 

Operations Centers Grant Program, Region IX should continue to 

coordinate with the Regional Administrator and FEMA headquarters 

to acquire the resources it needs to ensure adequate oversight of its 

grant programs. 

Recommendation 

We recommend that the Regional Administrator, FEMA Region IX: 

Recommendation #5: Realign staffing and resources to ensure 

that Region IX’s Grants Division can properly conduct financial 

and programmatic monitoring of disaster and nondisaster grant 

programs. 

Management Comments and OIG Analysis 

FEMA concurred with this recommendation. FEMA said that the 

Region IX Grants Management Division was tentatively identified 

as a pilot for regionalization of Homeland Security Grant Programs 

that are currently being managed by the FEMA Grant Programs 

Directorate. According to FEMA, the pilot may provide additional 

resources to support the existing and increased workload assigned 

to the Region. The pilot project requires an implementation plan 

that includes an assessment to determine the additional resources 

needed by the Region. FEMA projected that the assessment will 

be completed in December 2011. 

We consider this recommendation resolved because steps are being 

taken to implement it. However, it will remain open until evidence 

is provided that the implementation plan was completed and the 

necessary additional resources have been provided to the Region. 

Inspection of FEMA’s Regional Offices – Region IX 

Page 24 
Mission Support 

40-1 Actions for Nondisaster Acquisitions 

The FEMA Administrator delegated the authority to approve 

FEMA Form 40-1 actions for nondisaster acquisitions to the 

Regional Administrators. The FEMA Form 40-1, Requisition and 

Commitment for Services and Supplies, provides a detailed 

description of goods and services, the recommended source(s) of 

supply, and an estimated dollar amount needed to complete an 

activity. The form is typically used to acquire supplies, equipment, 

and services ranging from general office supplies to flu vaccinations 

for employees. Prior to the delegation of this authority, the process 

required the Region to forward all FEMA Form 40-1s to the Office 

of the Chief Financial Officer (OCFO) at FEMA headquarters for 

processing, which delayed the commitment of funds. 

FEMA’s OCFO provided the Policy for the Limited Delegation of 

Funds Certification Authority to FEMA Components to guide the 

Regional Offices in approving FEMA Form 40-1 actions. The 

policy delegated to all FEMA components, including the Regional 

Offices, the authority to certify funds and make commitments for 

all nondisaster acquisitions below $500,000. 

Region IX has trained and formally designated three personnel to 

have funds certification and commitment authority on behalf of the 

Region, in accordance with FEMA and OCFO guidance. Region 

IX routinely exercises this authority, but it has not been used for 

any acquisitions nearing the $500,000 threshold. The ability to 

approve FEMA Form 40-1 actions has allowed the Region to 

expedite time-sensitive acquisitions. 

Contract for Airlift 

In 2009, FEMA headquarters delegated to the Regional 

Administrators the authority to contract for or issue mission 

assignments to provide airlift support. FEMA contracts or mission 

assigns airlift support to rapidly transport people and response 

supplies in the event of a disaster. Historically, FEMA 

headquarters has maintained authority to contract for airlift 

services. During an emergency or response situation, the Regional 

Offices would contact FEMA headquarters, which would attempt 

to find a contractor close to the Region in need. This process was 

time-consuming and provided little visibility to the Regions. With 

Inspection of FEMA’s Regional Offices – Region IX 

Page 25 
the delegated authority, the Regional Offices can quickly contract 

for airlift services, as long as the contract is within the contracting 

officer’s warrant limitations. 

Within Region IX, three personnel have warrant authority to 

contract for airlift services. They have received sufficient training 

and have access to the Federal Acquisition Regulation, the DHS 

Acquisitions Manual, and the Automated Acquisition Management 

System. 

In December 2010, Region IX exercised this authority for the first 

time by entering into a contract with an airlift provider in Arizona. 

The airlift capabilities allowed Region IX to provide recovery 

support for the Sovereign Tribal Nation of the Havasupai Tribe 

following severe storms and flooding. 

Mission Assignments 

A mission assignment is a work order issued by FEMA to another 

federal agency that directs the completion of a specific task to meet 

urgent, immediate, and short-term needs. In July 2009, the FEMA 

Administrator delegated unlimited authority to the Regional 

Administrators to approve mission assignments. The Regional 

Administrators are responsible for providing monthly reports on 

the status of mission assignments exceeding $25 million to the 

Chief Financial Officer, who is responsible for consolidating and 

providing reports to FEMA leadership. Region IX’s Mission 

Support Division is responsible for obligating the funds used to 

support mission assignments. According to a FEMA official, this 

authority has not yet been used; however, Region IX believes it 

will be extremely effective during a major disaster because there 

will be no delays in issuing mission assignments. 

Conclusion 

The delegated mission support authorities will allow Region IX to 

streamline its processes and respond more quickly to disaster 

situations. Region IX has trained personnel to approve 40-1 

acquisitions, contract for airlift, and issue mission assignments. 

Inspection of FEMA’s Regional Offices – Region IX 

Page 26 
Office of the Regional Administrator 

Individuals With Access and Functional Needs 

Region IX’s Disability Coordinator has worked extensively to 

identify critical gaps in Region IX’s capabilities to respond to the 

population with access and functional needs. However, Region IX 

needs to improve its coordination with that community and its 

training of FEMA personnel. In August 2010, the FEMA 

Administrator assigned a Disability Coordinator position to each 

Regional Office. The responsibilities of the Disability Coordinator 

are as follows: 

(1) providing guidance and coordination on matters related to 

individuals with access and functional needs in emergency 

planning requirements and relief efforts; 

(2) consulting with organizations that represent the interests 

and rights of individuals with disabilities about their needs in 

emergency planning requirements and relief efforts; 

(3) coordinating and disseminating best practices and model 

evacuation plans for individuals with disabilities; and 

(4) ensuring the development of training materials and a 

curriculum for training emergency response providers; state, 

local, and tribal government officials; and others on the needs 

of individuals with disabilities. 

A particular focus for Region IX is ensuring that those with access 

and functional needs are integrated into planning efforts from the 

start, instead of as an annex to plans. The FEMA Administrator 

has said, “My experience tells me if we wait and plan for people 

with disabilities after we write the basic plan, we fail.” 

Incorporating those with access and functional needs into planning 

requires a significant amount of coordination and outreach, 

especially since it is estimated that up to 20% of Region IX’s 

population has such needs. Region IX has engaged in numerous 

outreach efforts with emergency managers, as well as stakeholders 

from the access and functional needs community. In addition to 

speaking at various conferences, webinars, teleconferences, 

tabletop exercises, and meetings, Region IX’s Disability 

Coordinator participated as an observer in the full-scale 

Inspection of FEMA’s Regional Offices – Region IX 

Page 27 
Radiological Emergency Preparedness Program exercise at the 

Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station in Arizona. 

Although Region IX has taken steps to improve its outreach 

efforts, it struggles to facilitate relationships among state, local, 

and tribal jurisdictions and other qualified stakeholders from the 

access and functional needs community. Region IX officials said 

that this situation stems from a breakdown in communication 

between leaders of the access and functional needs community and 

emergency managers. The leaders need to better communicate 

their challenges and viable solutions to emergency managers, and 

emergency managers need to work with the leaders to develop and 

implement solutions. 

Region IX’s Disability Coordinator discussed the need for 

mandatory training for all FEMA personnel on how to incorporate 

the access and functional needs community into all aspects of 

emergency management. 

Training 

The FEMA Administrator has said that employee development is a 

top priority for the agency. To ensure that the Regional Offices are 

able to “grow their own talent,” FEMA provides funding for 

training at the regional level. From FY 2009 to FY 2010, Region 

IX’s training budget was increased from approximately $40,000 to 

$235,000 (figure 4). Region IX is working to create a single 

division or office with overall responsibility for training and a 

coordinated approach to the expenditure of training funds. 

Inspection of FEMA’s Regional Offices – Region IX 

Page 28 
Figure 4. Region IX Training Funds 

Source: FEMA - A Region IX Approach to Internal Training. 

Currently, there is no regional approach to training for Region IX. 

Decision making resides in each division, and there is no forum to 

collectively balance the competing demands of the Region’s 

multiple divisions and offices. To remediate this issue, in 

November 2010 Region IX’s National Preparedness Division 

developed a white paper entitled A Region IX Approach to Internal 

Training, which outlined a strategy to identify, conduct, and track 

applicable training related to employee development and disaster 

support roles, while ensuring senior management oversight. 

The white paper also recommended the development of a Regional 

Training Program and Regional Training Working Group. The 

Regional Training Program will establish opportunities for 

professional development and enhance the level of preparedness 

for a wide range of potential emergency incidents to ensure 

mission success. The Regional Training Working Group is chaired 

by the Regional Deputy Administrator and consists of Division 

Directors, a union representative, and the Regional Training 

Manager. The working group meets monthly and focuses on 

coordinating training to ensure that Region IX is using training 

funds effectively. 

Inspection of FEMA’s Regional Offices – Region IX 

Page 29 
The Regional Training Working Group sent Region IX personnel a 

survey inquiring about training needed to perform their duties. The 

results indicated that personnel desired training that is tailored to 

their specific duties and programs, as well as basic professional 

development (e.g., public speaking and computer skills). The 

survey results gave the working group a better knowledge of the 

Region’s training needs. 

Region IX manages core training requirements through several 

different portals hosted by DHS and FEMA, which makes training 

more difficult to track. Most of Region IX’s divisions indicated a 

desire for a centralized training portal with a standardized 

curriculum. This would streamline training, especially for new 

employees. 

Regional Advisory Council 

Region IX established a mandated Regional Advisory Council 

(RAC) in 2007; however, it has not been maintained. The RAC, 

which is chaired by the Regional Administrator and consists of 

members representing a wide variety of major stakeholders and 

different disciplines, was designed to do the following: 

(1) Advise the Regional Administrator on emergency 


management issues specific to the Region; 


(2) Identify geographic, demographic, or other characteristics 

peculiar to any state, local, or tribal government within the 

Region that might make preparedness, protection, response, 

recovery, or mitigation more complicated or difficult; and 

(3) Advise the Regional Administrator of any weaknesses or 

deficiencies in preparedness, protection, response, recovery, 

and mitigation for any state, local, and tribal government 

within the Region. 

The RAC convened on a number of occasions, but most recently in 

July 2008. Bringing together all of the RAC members has proved 

to be a challenge. According to Region IX officials, the Region 

faces “unique challenges,” including its geographical size and 

cultural differences. Region IX covers 386,000 square miles and 

spans eight time zones, making it difficult and cost-prohibitive to 

schedule face-to-face meetings. The use of teleconferences and 

Inspection of FEMA’s Regional Offices – Region IX 

Page 30 
video chats for meetings has not been successful because of the 

multiple time zones. 

Region IX officials said that changes in administrations, such as 

the election of a new state Governor, have resulted in personnel 

turnover throughout the emergency management community, 

requiring the Region to regularly replace “anchor” members of the 

RAC. These issues led to the decision to postpone RAC meetings 

for a year to avoid seating new council members while the Region 

was unable to hold recurring meetings. 

Despite a lengthy postponement of RAC activity, Region IX 

officials have continued to interact with stakeholders throughout 

the Region. For instance, Region IX has brought together 

members of the Regional Interagency Steering Committee. The 

Regional Interagency Steering Committee exists to coordinate 

interagency and intergovernmental issues related to disaster 

planning and operations. Federal agencies designate 

representatives to serve on the committee and participate in 

regional preparedness activities. Additionally, state emergency 

management agencies are encouraged to send representatives to 

committee meetings and to participate in regional exercise and 

training activities. Even so, Region IX officials agreed that 

the RAC needs to be reinvigorated. A senior official said that the 

Region is in the process of seating new council members and had 

hoped to be able to reconvene RAC meetings in May 2011. 

Conclusion 

Despite the addition of a Disability Coordinator and increased 

outreach to the access and functional needs community, Region IX 

needs to integrate the access and functional needs community more 

effectively into disaster planning. Furthermore, Region IX needs 

to continue to support efforts to standardize and coordinate its 

training curriculum to ensure the most effective and efficient use of 

training funds. Finally, Region IX needs to maintain its Regional 

Advisory Council to identify and remediate weaknesses or 

deficiencies in preparedness, protection, response, recovery, and 

mitigation activities. 

Inspection of FEMA’s Regional Offices – Region IX 

Page 31 
Recommendations 

We recommend that the Regional Administrator, FEMA Region IX: 

Recommendation #6: Coordinate, engage, and consult with 

qualified stakeholders from the access and functional needs 

community to completely integrate their needs into regionwide 

disaster planning efforts. 

Recommendation #7: Complete the Regional Training Program, 

developing a standardized or coordinated training curriculum that 

includes training to incorporate those with access and functional 

needs into disaster planning. 

Recommendation #8: Reconvene the Regional Advisory Council 

and identify alternative methods to facilitate meetings with council 

members. 

Management Comments and OIG Analysis 

Recommendation #6: FEMA concurred with this 

recommendation. FEMA stated that at the time of the OIG’s visit 

to Region IX, regional offices were just beginning to integrate 

Regional Disability Integration Specialists into regional activities 

and responsibilities. Since that time, the Region IX Regional 

Disability Integration Specialist has made significant progress in 

coordinating Functional Needs Support Services–related 

interactions across a broad array of jurisdictions and operational 

areas with an emphasis on larger, more heavily populated 

jurisdictions. In turn, these stakeholders and the jurisdictions 

provide the Regional Disability Integration Specialist with 

feedback on successes, challenges, and concerns. 

Region IX has further driven the outreach initiative by forming 

FEMA's first Regional Functional Needs Working Group that met 

for the first time in late October 2011. Although travel budgets 

that allow for greater interaction and visibility continue to be an 

issue, the senior leadership in Region IX remains supportive of 

Regional Disability Integration Specialist efforts to coordinate the 

needs of the functional needs community with the realities of 

emergency management officials. 

We consider this recommendation resolved because steps are being 

taken to implement it. However, it will remain open until evidence 

Inspection of FEMA’s Regional Offices – Region IX 

Page 32 
is provided that Region IX established the Functional Needs 

Working Group and is making progress in ensuring that the needs 

of the access and functional needs community are met regionwide. 

Recommendation #7: FEMA concurred with this 

recommendation. Region IX has implemented "standdown 

training days," consolidated the selection of courses and meeting 

schedules to maximize participation, and developed methods to 

prioritize trainees. Though internal training thus far has not 

specifically targeted courses that teach methods for including those 

with access and functional needs into disaster planning activities, 

this topic will be proposed to the Regional Training Working 

Group for incorporation into future training opportunities. 

We consider this recommendation resolved because steps are being 

taken to implement it. However, it will remain open until evidence 

is provided that Region IX established and put into effect a 

standardized or coordinated training curriculum that includes 

training for how to incorporate those with access and functional 

needs into disaster planning. 

Recommendation #8: FEMA concurred with this 

recommendation and said that on August 2, 2011, Region IX held 

a meeting of its RAC at the regional office in Oakland, California. 

In addition to the regional senior management team, new members 

that had recently been appointed by the Regional Administrator 

participated. The agenda included discussions of the six priorities 

of the Regional Administrator for FY 2011 and presentations on 

the Whole Community, Presidential Policy Directive #8 - National 

Preparedness, and the National Disaster Recovery Framework. 

Cognizant of the geographical and logistical challenges of meeting 

quarterly in person, RAC members discussed alternative measures 

to enhance dialog. RAC members agreed that there will be two inperson meetings in Oakland, California, and two or more video 

conference and teleconference discussions to effectively carry out 

its mission. A video conference for RAC members was scheduled 

for late November 2011. Region IX will also be communicating 

routinely with RAC members by email, forwarding appropriate 

draft documents or policies for their review and providing 

information documents. 

We consider this recommendation resolved because steps are being 

taken to implement it. However, it will remain open until evidence 

Inspection of FEMA’s Regional Offices – Region IX 

Page 33 
is provided that RAC has continuously held meetings and 

maintained frequent dialogue. 

Conclusion 

Overall, Region IX is making significant progress toward fulfilling its 

legislated responsibilities and implementing the recently delegated 

authorities. However, staffing shortages continue to be a major 

impediment to accomplishing all of the regional responsibilities. 

Even though FEMA headquarters filled 84 vacancies across the 10 FEMA 

Regions, Region IX officials repeatedly expressed concern about staffing 

shortages, specifically in the Grants Division and the Individual and 

Community Preparedness program initiative. Considering the reduced 

workload for FEMA headquarters since the regionalization of 

responsibilities, it may be appropriate for FEMA headquarters to transfer 

additional positions to the Regional Offices. 

Inspection of FEMA’s Regional Offices – Region IX 

Page 34 
Appendix A 

Purpose, Scope, and Methodology 

The objective of our review was to determine whether FEMA’s 

Regional Offices are effectively meeting their legislated 

responsibilities and implementing several delegated authorities. 

This report is limited to our review of FEMA Region IX. 

To accomplish our objective, we reviewed and analyzed the Robert 

T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, the 

Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act of 2006, prior 

DHS OIG and Government Accountability Office reports relevant 

to our review, and documents provided by FEMA headquarters and 

Region IX, as well as other applicable documents. 

We interviewed officials from FEMA headquarters, FEMA Region 

IX, and selected officials from state, local, and tribal jurisdictions. 

We conducted these interviews at FEMA headquarters in 

Washington, D.C.; Region IX offices in Oakland, California; and 

various state, local, and tribal offices in California and Nevada. 

We conducted this performance review between November 2010 

and June 2011 pursuant to the Inspector General Act of 1978, as 

amended, and according to the Quality Standards for Inspections 

issued by the Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and 

Efficiency. 

Inspection of FEMA’s Regional Offices – Region IX 


Page 35
 
Appendix B 

Management Comments to the Draft Report 

L.S. Ol'partment uf Homeland S4tcur·il~

~t>O C Streel. SW

\\ aslunglon. ))(. :!U4 7

NOV 23 2011

MEMORAND M FOR: Chade K. Edwards

Acting Inspector General

Office orthe l~ector General

~? or c;k.-/ fiJ/'-/

FROM: David J. Kaufman

Director

Office of Policy and Program Analysis

SUBJECT: FEMA's Response to OIG Draft Report, Inspectiol/ of

FEMA's Regiol/ol Offices-Region IX (O[G Project No.

II-008-EMO-FEMA)

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on your draft report. The findings in the report will be

used to strengthen the effectiveness and efticiency of how we execute and measure our

programs. We recognize the need to continue to improve our processes. including addressing the

recommendation' raised in this report. Our resl onses to your nine recommendations are a

follows:

Recommendation # I: Address the Region's request for staff dedicated to Individual and

Community Preparedness initiatives and outreach.

FEMA Response: FEMA concurs with thi recommendation.

The ational Preparedness Directorate's Individual and Community Preparedness Division

((CPO) currently funds one contractor position in Region IX to develop and strengthen

community preparedness efforts among Region IX states. Respon ibilities include providing

technical assistance to State Citizen Corps and Community Emergency Response Team program

managers, coordinating with internal FEMA and external partners to promote the importance of

whole community planning and participation, a sisting States in managing strategic inve trnent

for individual and commumty preparedness, and advancing the priority ofinvolving the publie in

emergency management initiative and activities.

We recognize the criticality of dedicating staffto this priority. Therefore, [CPO is working to

sustain the individual and community preparedness position/capability by in-sourcing the

Inspection of FEMA’s Regional Offices – Region IX 


Page 36
 
Appendix B 

Management Comments to the Draft Report 

contract position. Once that position transitions, FEMA can proceed with posting, interviewing

and hiring a federal employee to fulfill the requirements of a community preparedncss specialist

in Region IX.

With regards to additional positions dedicated to individual and community preparedness, the

Regional Administrators have authority to re-align positions within their offices based on their

respective priorities.

FEMA believes this satisfies the intent of the recommendation and requests that this

recommendation be resolved and closed.

Recommendation #2: Provide further guidance or instruction on lhe roles and responsibilities of

Region IX in the Protection and Prevention mission area.

FEMA Response: FEMA non-concurs with this recommendation.

During the summer of201 0, FEMA's Protection and National Preparedness (PNP)/Office of

Counterterrorism and Security Preparedness (OC5P) developed two guidance documents

intended to provide FEMA Regional Offices with clarification and support in implementing and

coordinating preparedness prevention and protection mission area activities. More specifically=

OCSP developed the following documents: "Regional Prevention and Protection Roles and

Responsibilities," and "Regional Coordination Strategy - Prevention and Protection Mission

Support."

These documents were coordinated with, and reviewed by, the DHS Office of Intelligence and

Analysis, DHS Office for Infrastructure Protection, and the FEMA Office of Chief Security

Officer. On August 12,2010, OCSP released these documents to the Regional Federal

Preparedness Coordinators (FPCs).

In addition to the development, coordination and provision of these intemal guidance documents,

OCSP worked with PNP's Office of Preparedness Integration and Coordination (OPIC) to

incorporate the protection and prevention mission areas into the Annual Program Plan (APP)

guidance provided to the regions -- in order to encourage the implementation and coordination of

prevention and protcction mission area activities.

OCSP has endeavored to provide increased support, guidance and information sharing to the

FEMA Regional Offices. OCSP participates in quarterly strategic meetings and discussions with

all ofthe Regional FPCs in order to better understand and support their unique regional needs,

goals and objectives, and to ensure there are no barriers in infonnation sharing between OCSP

and the FEMA Regional Offices.

FEMA believes this satisfies the intent ofthe recommendation and requests that this

recommendation be resolved and closed.

2

Inspection of FEMA’s Regional Offices – Region IX 


Page 37
 
Appendix B 

Management Comments to the Draft Report 

Recommendation #3: Coordinate with Region IX to develop a pilot program that allows

regional staff to serve as either a contracting officer's technical representative or a task monitor

for the Regional Exercise Support Program.

FEMA Response: FEMA non-concurs with this recommendation.

The Regions do not require contracting officer representative (COTR) authority to manage

and/or monitor contractor perfomlance of the Regional Exercise Support Program (RESP). Like

all FEMA Regions, Region IX already retains broad authority over the implementation oftile

RESP and the perfomlance ofrespective contractors to include: approving/dcnying RESP

applications, developing and approving the contractor work plan, overseeing the perfonnance of

the work, monitoring contractor engagement with state and local officials, and conducting all

follow-up required. Per the RESP Implementation Plan roles and responsibilities. Section 2.1.2;

the Regional Offices "Assume contractual responsibilities for the RESP to include

approval/signatory authority for contractor work plans." The RESP contract has been

administered by FEMA Headquarters to maximize efficiency of resources. A distributed RESP

would create unnecessary redundancy of effort and FEMA would lose current efficiencies

realized through central contract management. Additionally, after soliciting them for feedback

on this issuc, most of the regions preferred that the RESP contract bc centrally managcd.

Finally, FEMA Headquarters is transitioning to a new contracting model to provide functionalbased exercise serviccs to allow tailoring of exercise support for the NEP and Regions. This

model requires multiple contracts and it is not feasible or efficient for multiple contracts to be

managed within each respective Region to support the same overarching program. FEMA

Headquarters will continue to work with the Regions to refine processes and procedures while

ensuring centralized coordination to enable execution of the NEP and promote consistency, best

practices and lessons learned throughout all FEMA Regions.

FEMA believes this satisfies the intent of the recommendation and requests that this

recommendation be resolved and closed.

Recommendation #4: Ensure that the FEMA Rcgional Offices are enforcing the tenns and

conditions of FEMA/State agreements and using the rcmedics for noncompliance under thc

federal regulations to improve the timeliness of the disaster e1oseoul process.

FEMA Response: FEMA concurs with this recommendation.

As part ofthe larger Grant Management remediation activity in FY 2012, FEMA will be

addressing the internal control weakness around closeout.

FEMA requests that this recommendation be resolved and open pending implementation ofthe

stated corrective action.

Recommendation #5: Realign staffing and resources to ensure Region IX's Grants Division can

properly conduct the financial and programmatic monitoring of disaster and non~disaster grant

programs.

3

Inspection of FEMA’s Regional Offices – Region IX 


Page 38
 
Appendix B 

Management Comments to the Draft Report 

FEMA Response: FEMA concurs with this recommendation.

Region IX Grants Management Division has been identified tentatively as a pilot for

regionalization of Homeland Security Grant Programs that are currently being managed by

FEMA Grants Program Directorate. The pilot would potentially provide additional resources to

support the existing and increased workload assigned to the Region. The pilot project requires

all implementation plan that includes an assessment to detennine the additional resources needed

by the Region. The projected completion for the assessment is December 20 [ I.

FEMA believes this satisfies the intent of the recommendation and requests that this

recommendation be resolved and closed.

Recommendation #6: Coordinate, engage, and consult with qualified stakeholders from the

access and functional needs community to completely integrate their needs into region~wide

disaster planning efforts.

FEMA Response: FEMA concurs with this recommendation.

At the time ofthe Inspector General visit to Region IX, all FEMA regional offices were just

integrating their Regional Disability Integration Specialist into regional activities and

responsibilities. Since that time, the Region IX Regional Disability Integration Specialist (RDIS)

has made significant progress in coordinating Functional Needs Support Services (FNSS) related

interactions across a broad array ofjurisdictions and operational areas with an emphasis on our

larger, more heavily populated jurisdictions. In tum, these stakeholders and the jurisdictions

provide the RDIS with feedback on successes, challenges, and concerns.

Region IX has further driven the outreach initiative by fonning FEMA's first Regional

Functional Needs Working Group (FNWG) that met for the first time in late October 2011.

While travel budgets that would allow for greater interaction and visibility continue to be an

issue, the senior leadership in FEMA Region IX remains supportive of RDIS efforts to

coordinate the needs of the functional needs community with the realities of emergency

management officials. The Region feels increased coordination of intcmal regional training that

embraces Functional Needs awareness and planning is essential. Divisional support 10 achieve

RDIS integration into planning and exercises within FEMA Region IX continues successfully.

FEMA believes this satisfies the intent of the recommendation and requests that this

recommendation be resolved and closed.

ReconunendatioD #7: Complete the Regional Training Program, developing a standardized or

coordinated training cumculwn that includes training for how to incorporate those with access

and functional needs into disaster planning.

FEMA Response: FEMA concurs with this recommendation.

During Fiscal Year 20 I0, and prior to the visit of the Inspector General, FEMA Region IX

recognized the need for a plan to properly manage training funds, and provide guidance on

course identification and selection. In October 2010, the Regional Administrator approved the

4

Inspection of FEMA’s Regional Offices – Region IX 


Page 39
 
Appendix B 

Management Comments to the Draft Report 

establishment of the Regional Twining Working Group (RTWG), comprised of regional senior

leadcrship. The goal ofthe RTWG, chaired by thc Deputy Regional Administrator and stafTed

by the Division Directors. is to establish opportunities for professional development and enhance

the level of preparedness needed for a wide range of potential incidents 10 ensure mission

success.

The RTWG proposed a strategy to identify. conduct, and track applicable training related to

employee developmcnt and disaster support roles. while ensuring senior management oversight

and directed regional training staff to conduct a training needs assessment (TNA). The TNA was

developed and implemented using free onlinc tools and metrics. and has proven to be a valuable

tool to justify and focus on the region's training priorities and align program objectives with

available funding.

As a result, Region IX has implemented ··stand·down training days," consolidated the selection

of courses and meeting schedules to maximize participation, developed methods to prioritize

trainees, and realized a sib'llificant cost saving to FEMA. The "stand- down training days" in

particular, incorporates all staff and includes an open discussion of issues particular to the needs

of our various stakeholders, including those with special needs.

I.n addition Region IX. through the direction ofthe FEMA Administrator, is also in the process of

integrating the Radiological Emergency Preparedness PrOb1fam into the larger world of

emergency management - thereby increasing its scope and the integration ofthose with special

needs into the Program, which includes on.the-spot educational training for issues that emerge

during the off-site portions of the exercises. This was true this past year as our own Disability

Integration Specialist and his service animal were run through the decontamination process.

Finally. disaster planning currently being conducted by the Response Division incorporates the

"whole community" initiative and seeks participation across the full spectrum of conullunity.

This outreach is intended to strengthen the assets, institutions, and social processes that work

well in a community to improve resilience and emergency management outcomes. Though

intemal training thus far has not specifically targeted courses that teach methods for including

those with access and functional needs into disaster planning activities, this topic will be

proposed to the RTWG for incorporation into future training opportunities.

FEMA believes this satisfies the intent oftile recommendation and requests that this

recommendation be resolved and closed.

Recommendation #8: Reconvene the Regional Advisory Council and identify aitemative

methods to facilitate meetings with council members.

FEMA Response: FEMA concurs with this reconunendation.

On August 2, 2011, Region IX held a meeting of its Regional Advisory Council (RAe) at the

regional office in Oakland, Califomia. In addition to the regional senior management team.

pmticipating were new members that had recently been appointed by the Regional

Administrator. The agenda induded discussions ofthe six priorities ofthe Regional

Administrator for Fiscal Year 2011 and presentations on Whole Community, Presidential Policy

Directive

5

Inspection of FEMA’s Regional Offices – Region IX 


Page 40
 
Appendix B 

Management Comments to the Draft Report 

#8- National Preparedness and the National Disaster Recovery Framework. Cognizant oflhe

geographical and logistical challenges ofl11eeting quarterly in person, RAC members discussed

at len!:,'th measures to be taken to allow for very frequent dialogue. Members agreed that there

will be two in-person meetings in Oakland. California and two or more video conference and

teleconference discussions to effectively carry out its mission. A videoconference for RAC

members is scheduled for late November 20 II. Region IX will also be communicating routinely

with RAC members by email, forwarding appropriate draft documents or policies for their

review and providing infom18tion documents.

FEMA believes this satisfies the intent oftbe recommendation and requests that this

recommendation be resolved and closed.

Recommendation #9: Realign resources to ensure that Region IX has the necessary resources to

fulfill its mission, including its legislated responsibilities and delegated authorities.

FEMA Response: FEMA non-concurs with this recommendation.

FEMA will continue to take into consideration the specific needs of Region IX, including the

Report's findings, but must also consider the current budget challenges and the competing needs

across the agency.

FEMA believes this satisfies the intent of the recommendation and requests that this

recommendation be resolved and closed.

We thank you, again, for the opportunity to provide our comments to your recommendations

contained in your draft report. Should you have further questions regarding our response, please

do not hesitate to call FEMA's Chief Audit Liaison, Brad Shefka, at 202-646-1308.

6

Inspection of FEMA’s Regional Offices – Region IX 


Page 41
 
Appendix C 

Regional Responsibilities and Delegated Authorities 

Regional Responsibilities and Delegated Authorities 

Regional Division R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6 R7 R8 R9 R10 A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A6 A7 A8 

Office of Administrator X National Preparedness X X X X X X X X 

Recovery X X X X X 

Response X X X X X X X X X X 

Mitigation X X X 

Mission Support X X X X X X 

Grants X X X 

R1: Work with state, local, and tribal governments, emergency response providers, and other appropriate entities to identify and address regional 
priorities. 
R2: Ensure effective, coordinated, and integrated regional preparedness, protection, response, recovery, and mitigation activities and programs for
 

natural disasters, acts of terrorism, and other manmade disasters (including planning, training, exercise, and professional development). 
R3: Assist in the development of regional capabilities needed for a national catastrophic response system.
 R4: Coordinate the establishment of effective regional operable and interoperable emergency communications capabilities.
 R5: Staff and oversee one or more strike teams to serve as the focal point of the federal government’s initial response efforts for natural disasters, acts 


of terrorism, and other manmade disasters within that Region, and otherwise build federal response capabilities to respond to natural disasters, acts of 


terrorism, and other manmade disasters within that Region.
 R6: Designate an individual responsible for the development of strategic and operational regional plans in support of the National Response Plan 


(referred to as the National Response Framework since 2008). 
R7: Foster the development of mutual aid and other cooperative agreements. 
R8: Identify critical gaps in regional capabilities to respond to populations with special needs. 


R9: Maintain and operate a Regional Response Coordination Center or its successor. 
R10: Establish a Regional Advisory Council. 
A1: Issue mission assignments in excess of $10 million. 
A2: Contract for airlift. 
A3: Approve Fire Management Assistance Grants.
 A4: Approve 40-1 actions for nondisaster acquisitions. 
A5: Determine the annual grants monitoring requirements and schedule. 


A6: Fiscally oversee the (a) Emergency Management Performance, (b) Emergency Operations Center, and (c) Driver’s License Security grant 


programs. 
A7: Oversee the Regional Exercise Support Program. 
A8: Review and approve funding for State Management Administrative Costs for the Public Assistance and Hazard Mitigation Grant Programs.
 

Inspection of FEMA’s Regional Offices – Region IX 


Page 42
 
Grant Programs Designated for Financial Monitoring by FEMA Regional Offices 

Disaster Assistance

Alternative Housing Pilot Program ARRA – Emergency Food and Shelter National Board 

Crisis Counseling Fire Management Assistance 

Debris Removal Insurance Individuals and Households – Other Needs 

Disaster Assistance Project-Direct Loans Katrina Case Management 

Disaster Donations Management Public Assistance

Emergency Food and Shelter National Board United Methodist Committee on Relief 

Disaster Operations

Urban Search and Rescue Cooperative Agreement (Activations) 

Urban Search and Rescue Cooperative Agreement (Preparedness) 

 Grant Programs 

Buffer Zone Protection Program Mississippi Interoperable Communications Grant Program 

Driver’s License Security Grant Program (Real ID) Operation Stonegarden 

Emergency Management Performance Grant Program Port Security Grant Program 

 Emergency Operations Centers ARRA – Port Security Grant Program 

Freight Rail Security Grant Program Public Safety Interoperable Communications Program 

Homeland Security Grant Program: Transit Security Grant Program 

– Citizen Corps Program Tribal Homeland Security Grant Program 

– Metropolitan Medical Response System Grants ARRA – Transit Security Grant Program 

– State Homeland Security Grant Program Trucking Security Program 

Intercity Bus Security Grant Program Urban Areas Security Initiative Nonprofit Security Grant 

Intercity Passenger Rail Security Program 

Interoperable Emergency Communication Grants 

Mitigation

Community Assistance Program – State Support Services Hazard Mitigation Grant Program 

Element Map Modernization Management Support 

Cooperating Technical Partners National Dam Safety 

Earthquake Consortium National Emergency Management Association 

Earthquake State Assistance Pre-Disaster Mitigation Competitive 

Earthquake Technology Transfer Pre-Disaster Mitigation JES Earmark FY10

Flood Insurance Rate Maps Repetitive Flood Claims 

Flood Mitigation Assistance Severe Repetitive Loss

National Preparedness

Chemical Stockpile Emergency Preparedness Program Homeland Security Preparedness Technical Assistance

Citizen Corps Program: Program 

– International Association of Chiefs of Police National Exercise Program 

– National Volunteer Fire Council National Incident Management System 

Competitive Training Grant National Training Program 

Evaluations and Assessment Regional Catastrophic Preparedness Grant Program 

Systems Support Grant Program 

USFA 

Degrees at a Distance Training Assistance PARADE Grants

Firefighter Emergency Medical Services Outreach, Residential Fire Safety & Fire Sprinkler Technology

Technology Transfer, Information Dissemination and Safe Kids

Technical Assistance State Fire Training Systems Grants 

Fire Service Hazardous Materials TRADE Grants 

International Association of Fire Fighters John P. Redmond Volunteer Fire and Emergency Medical Services 

Symposium Resource Initiative

National Fallen Firefighter Memorial Program National Fire Academy Educational Program 

Appendix D 

FEMA Grant Programs 

Grant Programs Designated for Financial Monitoring by FEMA Headquarters 

Assistance to Firefighters 

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 – Station Construction Grants 

Fire Prevention and Safety 

Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response 

Inspection of FEMA’s Regional Offices – Region IX 

Page 43 
Appendix E 

Major Contributors to this Report 

Amy Hall, Director 

Modupe Akinsika, Audit Manager 

Soraya Vega, Audit Manager 

Ryan Hartong, Program Analyst 

Erica Stern, Program Analyst 

Ken Valrance, Auditor 

Stuart Josephs, Referencer 

Inspection of FEMA’s Regional Offices – Region IX 

Page 44 
Appendix F 

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 

DHS Audit Liaison 

Federal Emergency Management Agency 

Administrator 

Assistant Administrator 

Regional Administrator, Region IX 

Deputy Regional Administrator, Region IX 

FEMA GAO/OIG Liaison 

Office of Management and Budget 

Chief, Homeland Security Branch 

DHS OIG Budget Examiner 

Congress 

Congressional Oversight and Appropriations Committees, as 

appropriate 

Inspection of FEMA’s Regional Offices – Region IX 


Page 45
 
 

 

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 e-mail your request to 

our OIG Office of Public Affairs at DHS-OIG.OfficePublicAffairs@dhs.gov. For 

additional information, visit our OIG website at www.oig.dhs.gov or follow us on Twitter 

@dhsoig. 

OIG HOTLINE 

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

or noncriminal misconduct relative to Department of Homeland Security programs and 

operations: 

• Call our Hotline at 1-800-323-8603 

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

• E-mail us at DHSOIGHOTLINE@dhs.gov; or 

• Write to us at: 

DHS Office of Inspector General/MAIL STOP 2600, 

Attention: Office of Investigation - Hotline, 

245 Murray Drive SW, Building 410 

Washington, DC 20528 

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