Local Mitigation

Planning Handbook

March 2013
About the Cover: Rainsville, Alabama citizens share their ideas for rebuilding their community during a meeting at the Tom Bevill 

Enrichment Center in Rainsville. Three tornadoes destroyed a large portion of Rainsville on April 27, 2011. Currently the FEMA 

ESF#14 team is working closely with Rainsville to rebuild the community to be better and stronger than before.
i

Contents

D

Contents

Introduction .....................................................................................................................I-1

Hazard Mitigation ................................................................................................................................................... I-1

Mitigation Planning ................................................................................................................................................. I-2

Guiding Principles for Plan Development ............................................................................................................ I-2

Handbook Organization .......................................................................................................................................... I-3

Task 1 – Determine the Planning Area and Resources .......................................................1-1

Establish the Planning Area..................................................................................................................................1-1

Multi-Jurisdictional Plan Coordination .................................................................................................................1-2

Leading the Planning Process ..............................................................................................................................1-3

Technical Assistance ..............................................................................................................................................1-3

Conclusion ...............................................................................................................................................................1-4

Task 2 – Build the Planning Team .....................................................................................2-1

Identify Planning Team Members ........................................................................................................................2-1

Engage Local Leadership .....................................................................................................................................2-2

Promote Participation and Buy-In ........................................................................................................................2-2

Multi-Jurisdictional Planning Team ......................................................................................................................2-3

Initial Steps for the Planning Team......................................................................................................................2-4

Documentation of the Planning Process – Planning Team .............................................................................2-6

Conclusion ...............................................................................................................................................................2-6

Task 3 – Create an Outreach Strategy ..............................................................................3-1

Outreach Strategy Framework .............................................................................................................................3-1

How to Develop Your Outreach Strategy .............................................................................................................3-3

Continuing Public Outreach over Time ................................................................................................................3-8

Coordinating a Multi-Jurisdictional Outreach Strategy ......................................................................................3-8

Documentation of the Planning Process – Stakeholder and Public Involvement .......................................3-9

Conclusion .............................................................................................................................................................3-10

Task 4 – Review Community Capabilities ..........................................................................4-1

Capability Assessment...........................................................................................................................................4-1

Types of Capabilities ..............................................................................................................................................4-1

National Flood Insurance Program ......................................................................................................................4-4

Documentation of Community Capabilities ........................................................................................................4-5

Conclusion ...............................................................................................................................................................4-5
ii Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Contents

D

Task 5 – Conduct a Risk Assessment ..............................................................................5-1

Defining Risk Assessment.....................................................................................................................................5-1

Steps to Conduct a Risk Assessment ..................................................................................................................5-2

Documentation of the Risk Assessment ...........................................................................................................5-20

Conclusion .............................................................................................................................................................5-20

Task 6 – Develop a Mitigation Strategy ............................................................................6-1

The Mitigation Strategy: Goals, Actions, Action Plan .......................................................................................6-1

Mitigation Goals .....................................................................................................................................................6-2

Mitigation Actions...................................................................................................................................................6-3

Action Plan for Implementation ...........................................................................................................................6-8

Updating the Mitigation Strategy .......................................................................................................................6-11

Communicating the Mitigation Action Plan......................................................................................................6-12

Conclusion .............................................................................................................................................................6-13

Task 7 – Keep the Plan Current .......................................................................................7-1

Plan Maintenance Procedures ..............................................................................................................................7-1

Continue Public Involvement ................................................................................................................................7-2

Conclusion ...............................................................................................................................................................7-3

Task 8 – Review and Adopt the Plan .................................................................................8-1

Local Plan Review ..................................................................................................................................................8-1

State and FEMA Plan Review ..............................................................................................................................8-1

Local Adoption of the Plan....................................................................................................................................8-2

Additional Considerations......................................................................................................................................8-3

Celebrate Success ..................................................................................................................................................8-3

Task 9 – Create a Safe and Resilient Community ..............................................................9-1

Challenges to Achieving Mitigation Goals ...........................................................................................................9-1

Recommendations for Success ............................................................................................................................9-1

Funding and Assistance.........................................................................................................................................9-3

Conclusion ...............................................................................................................................................................9-6

Appendices

Appendix A: Planning Process Worksheets

Appendix B: Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool

Appendix C: Additional Resources
Introduction
About the Cover: Collage of local hazard mitigation plan covers.
I-1

Introduction

D

Introduction

The Local Mitigation Planning Handbook is a tool for local governments 

to use in developing or updating a local hazard mitigation plan. 

The purpose of the Handbook is the following:

1. To provide guidance to local governments on developing or 

updating hazard mitigation plans to meet the requirements 

of Title 44 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) §201.6 for 

FEMA approval and eligibility to apply for FEMA Hazard 

Mitigation Assistance grant programs;1

 and

2. To offer practical approaches and examples for how 

communities can engage in effective planning to reduce 

long-term risk from natural hazards and disasters. 

The Handbook is a companion to the Local Mitigation Plan Review 

Guide2

 released by FEMA in 2011. While the Plan Review Guide 

is intended to help State and Federal officials review and 

approve local hazard mitigation plans, the Handbook is intended 

to help local officials develop these plans. 

Hazard Mitigation

Disasters can cause loss of life; damage buildings and 

infrastructure; and have devastating consequences for a 

community’s economic, social, and environmental well-being. 

Hazard mitigation reduces disaster damages and is defined as 

sustained action taken to reduce or eliminate the long-term risk 

to human life and property from hazards. Outreach programs 

that increase risk awareness, projects to protect critical facilities, 

and the removal of structures from flood hazard areas are all 

examples of mitigation actions. Local mitigation actions and 

concepts can also be incorporated into land use plans and 

building codes. 

Local governments have the responsibility to protect the health, 

safety, and welfare of their citizens. Proactive mitigation policies 

and actions help reduce risk and create safer, more disasterresilient communities. Mitigation is an investment in your 

community’s future safety and sustainability. Consider the critical importance of mitigation to:

• Protect public safety and prevent loss of life and injury.

• Reduce harm to existing and future development.

• Prevent damage to a community’s unique economic, cultural, and environmental assets.

1 For more information on FEMA Hazard Mitigation Assistance grant programs, see http://www.fema.gov/hazard-mitigation-assistance.

2 The Local Mitigation Plan Review Guide, as interpretation and explanation for the mitigation planning regulation in Title 44 Code of Federal 

Regulations (CFR) Part 201, is FEMA’s official source for defining the requirements of original and updated local mitigation plans. The Guide 

represents FEMA’s interpretation of a statutory or regulatory requirement. By itself, the Guide does not impose legally enforceable rights 

and obligations, but sets forth a standard operating procedure or agency practice that FEMA employees follow to be consistent, fair, and 

equitable in the implementation of the agency’s authorities. http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=4859.

Emergency Management 

Activities

Mitigation. Sustained actions taken to reduce or 

eliminate long-term risk to life and property from 

hazards.*

Prevention. Actions necessary to avoid, prevent, 

or stop an imminent threat or actual act of 

terrorism.** 

Protection. Actions necessary to secure the 

homeland against acts of terrorism and manmade 

or natural disasters.**

Preparedness. Actions taken to plan, organize, 

equip, train, and exercise to build and sustain the 

capabilities necessary to prevent, protect against, 

mitigate the effects of, respond to, and recover 

from those threats that pose the greatest risk to 

the security of the Nation.**

Response. Actions necessary to save lives, 

protect property and the environment, and 

meet basic human needs after an incident has 

occurred.**

Recovery. Actions necessary to assist 

communities affected by an incident to recover 

effectively.** 

* Source: 44 CFR §201.2 Mitigation Planning - 

Definitions.

** Source: National Preparedness Goal, First Edition. 

September, 2011, FEMA. http://www.fema.gov/pdf/

prepared/npg.pdf
I-2 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Introduction

D

• Minimize operational downtime and accelerate recovery of government and business after disasters.

• Reduce the costs of disaster response and recovery and the exposure to risk for first responders. 

• Help accomplish other community objectives, such as leveraging capital improvements, infrastructure 

protection, open space preservation, and economic resiliency.

“Instead of repeated damage and continual demands for federal disaster assistance, resilient communities proactively protect 

themselves against hazards, build self-sufficiency, and become more sustainable.”3

Mitigation Planning

Mitigation is most effective when it is based on a 

comprehensive, long-term plan that is developed before a 

disaster occurs. The purpose of mitigation planning is to 

identify local policies and actions that can be implemented 

over the long term to reduce risk and future losses from 

hazards. These mitigation policies and actions are identified 

based on an assessment of hazards, vulnerabilities, and risks and 

the participation of a wide range of stakeholders and the public 

in the planning process. Benefits of mitigation planning include:

• Identifying actions for risk reduction that are agreed upon 

by stakeholders and the public.

• Focusing resources on the greatest risks and vulnerabilities.

• Building partnerships by involving citizens, organizations, 

and businesses.

• Increasing education and awareness of threats and hazards, 

as well as their risks.

• Communicating priorities to State and Federal officials.

• Aligning risk reduction with other community objectives.

Guiding Principles for Plan Development

The mitigation plan belongs to the local community. While FEMA has the authority to approve plans in order for 

local governments to apply for mitigation project funding, there is no required format for the plan’s organization. 

When developing the mitigation plan, keep the following guiding principles in mind: 

• Focus on the mitigation strategy. The mitigation strategy is the plan’s primary purpose. All other sections 

contribute to and inform the mitigation strategy and specific hazard mitigation actions. 

• Process is as important as the plan itself. In mitigation planning, as with most other planning efforts, the plan 

is only as good as the process and people involved in its development. The plan should also serve as the written 

record, or documentation, of the planning process.

• This is your community’s plan. To have value, the plan must represent the current needs and values of the 

community and be useful for local officials and stakeholders. Develop the mitigation plan in a way that best 

serves your community’s purpose and people. 

3 Godschalk, David R., Adam Rose, Elliott Mittler, Keith Porter, and Carol Taylor West. 2009. “Estimating the Value of Foresight: Aggregate 

Analysis of Natural Hazard Mitigation Benefits and Costs.” Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 52(5):739-56.

Disaster Mitigation Act 

of 2000

The purpose of the Stafford Act, as amended by 

the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000, is “to reduce 

the loss of life and property, human suffering, 

economic disruption, and disaster assistance 

costs resulting from natural disasters.”

Section 322 of the Act specifically addresses 

mitigation planning and requires state and local 

governments to prepare multi-hazard mitigation 

plans as a precondition for receiving FEMA 

mitigation project grants. 
I-3

Introduction

D

Handbook Organization

The Handbook is organized into nine recommended tasks for developing or updating a local hazard mitigation plan 

as illustrated in Figure I-1. Some of the tasks can be completed concurrently, while others depend on completing 

preceding tasks. Tasks 1-3 discuss the process and people needed to complete the remaining mitigation planning 

tasks and the best ways to document the process in the plan. Tasks 4-8 cover the specific analyses and decisions that 

need to be completed and recorded in the plan. Task 9 provides suggestions and resources for implementing your 

plan to reduce risk.

Figure I-1: Local Mitigation Planning Handbook Tasks.

The Handbook also includes the following appendices:

• Appendix A: Planning Process Worksheets. Provides worksheets referenced throughout the Handbook to help 

complete parts of the planning process. 

• Appendix B: Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool. Provides the document used by State and FEMA mitigation 

planners to evaluate whether the plan meets Federal requirements for approval and to provide feedback to the 

community.

• Appendix C: Additional Resources. Provides links to additional online resources for mitigation planning. 

Federal Planning Regulations

The requirements of 44 CFR §201.6 Local Mitigation Plans are highlighted throughout the Handbook to 

provide clear guidance on the Federal regulations that must be met before FEMA will approve a local 

hazard mitigation plan. Sidebars are used to reference the specific section of the regulation and the 

associated element in the Local Mitigation Plan Review Guide and Tool.

Mitigation Plan Updates

The Handbook is applicable to new and updated mitigation plans. A community must review and revise 

an existing plan to reflect changes in development, progress in local mitigation efforts, and changes in 

priorities and resubmit it for approval within 5 years to continue to be eligible for FEMA mitigation 

project grant funding. Plan update recommendations and requirements are addressed within each task and 

highlighted in the text. 

Examples and Special Topics

Sidebars also are used throughout the Handbook to illustrate concepts using examples from actual local 

plans and to provide additional information on topics important to mitigation planning. 
I-4 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Introduction

D

Multi-Jurisdictional Plans

FEMA may accept multi-jurisdictional plans, which must meet all of the requirements of 44 CFR §201.6. The 

Handbook tasks describe how to meet the requirements in a multi-jurisdictional planning effort and are relevant 

to each participating jurisdiction, whether the plan is for a single or multiple jurisdictions. Federally recognized 

Tribes may choose to participate in a multi-jurisdictional plan; however, they must meet the requirements for tribal 

mitigation planning specified in 44 CFR §201.7.4

4 Tribal mitigation planning requirements were created under 44 CFR §201.7 to give Tribes more flexibility and the ability to meet the eligibility 

requirements of a grantee or subgrantee for FEMA’s Hazard Mitigation Assistance programs.
Task 1

Determine the Planning Area and Resources
About the Cover: Planning area map from the Howard County, Missouri Hazard Mitigation Plan 2012.
1-1

Task 1

Determine the Planning Area and Resources

Task 1 – Determine the Planning Area and Resources

Once your community has decided to develop or update its hazard mitigation plan, the first task is to determine 

the overall scope of the planning project. Task 1 describes how to determine the planning area and the participating 

jurisdictions, as well as who will lead the plan and the resources needed to support the planning process. Your 

community can develop its own single jurisdiction plan or work with neighboring jurisdictions on a multijurisdictional plan. 

Establish the Planning Area

The planning area refers to the geographic area covered by the plan. Generally, the planning area follows local 

government1

 jurisdictional boundaries, such as cities, townships, counties, or planning districts. However, planning 

areas also may be defined by watersheds or other natural features, particularly where hazards create similar risks 

across jurisdictional boundaries. A jurisdiction’s boundaries may also cross over or encompass other jurisdictions, 

such as a fire protection district or a utility district. 

The State Hazard Mitigation Officer (SHMO)2

 or State emergency management agency can help communities 

determine the appropriate planning area. This determination may be based on State planning goals and planning 

grant funding priorities. 

Mitigation Plan Updates 

If you are updating your community’s plan, determine if the planning area defined in the previously approved 

plan is still appropriate. Review any lessons learned in the previous planning process. Consider whether your 

community’s mitigation planning needs were met by the previous planning effort or whether your community 

would benefit from adjusting the planning area and the participating jurisdictions. 

Existing Partnerships and Planning Efforts

There are many possible options for the planning area based on existing planning projects, relationships, and 

partnerships. Consider whether your community currently collaborates with regional organizations, councils of 

government, or other established multi-jurisdictional partnerships for planning activities related to comprehensive 

planning, watershed protection, or transportation. Counties may provide emergency management or development 

review services to jurisdictions within their boundaries. These activities coordinate well with the goals of mitigation 

planning, so a countywide plan can be a good approach.

Prior to beginning the planning process, determine if other planning efforts could be aligned or integrated with the 

mitigation plan to save time and money and create better outcomes for your community. For instance, mitigation 

plan development could be integrated into a community’s process for updating their comprehensive plan. Or, if 

your community participates in the Community Rating System (CRS),

3

 you could design the mitigation planning 

process to maximize CRS credit for floodplain management planning. A FEMA program, CRS rewards communities 

that go beyond the minimum standards for floodplain management under the National Flood Insurance Program 

1 “Local government is any county, municipality, city, town, township, public authority, school district, special district, intrastate district, council 

of governments (regardless of whether the council of governments is incorporated as a nonprofit corporation under State law), regional or 

interstate government entity, or agency or instrumentality of a local government; any Indian tribe or authorized tribal organization, or Alaska 

Native village or organization; and any rural community, unincorporated town or village, or other public entity.” (44 CFR §201.2, Definitions.)

2 State Hazard Mitigation Officer is the official representative of State government who is the primary point of contact with FEMA, other Federal 

agencies, and local governments in mitigation planning and implementation of mitigation programs and activities required under the Stafford 

Act. (44 CFR §201.2, Definitions.)

3 For more information on the Community Rating System, see 

http://www.fema.gov/national-flood-insurance-program-2/community-rating-system.
1-2 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Task 1

Determine the Planning Area and Resources

(NFIP)4 by providing flood insurance premium discounts for policy holders in the community. Appendix A includes 

a worksheet that cross-references the CRS and mitigation planning requirements (see Worksheet 1.1). 

Multi-Jurisdictional Plan Coordination

Both single and multi-jurisdictional plans have benefits and 

challenges. Single jurisdiction plans offer sole discretion and 

autonomy in how the community will conduct its planning 

process and can be suitable for any community, large or small. 

If you determine that participating in a multi-jurisdictional 

planning effort is the best option for your community, then 

identify whether it is appropriate to join an existing planning 

effort underway or take the lead on initiating a multijurisdictional plan. Multi-jurisdictional planning is most 

effective when jurisdictions face the same threats or hazards of 

concern, operate under the same authorities, have similar needs 

and capabilities, and have successfully partnered in the past. 

You may look to partner with neighboring jurisdictions 

and quasi-governmental agencies, such as school districts, 

transportation authorities, and utility or service districts. 

Special districts have a vested interest in reducing threat and 

hazard impacts, particularly if they provide services critical 

to recovery efforts. In states where ice storms, tornadoes, and 

wind storms are common, rural electrical cooperatives and 

municipal electrical utilities are often mitigation partners. A 

Federally recognized Indian Tribal government5

 may also choose 

to participate in a multi-jurisdictional plan; however, the Tribe 

must meet the requirements specified in 44 CFR §201.7, Tribal 

Mitigation Planning. Most importantly, identify those jurisdictions 

that will help maximize the benefits of multi-jurisdictional 

plans as described in the sidebar.

After identifying the planning area and participating 

jurisdictions, it is helpful to secure a level of commitment from 

all participants. Ask the jurisdictions to sign a Memorandum 

of Understanding or Letter of Intent at the beginning of 

the planning process that outlines requirements for each 

participating jurisdiction. A sample Memorandum of Agreement for a multi-jurisdictional planning team can be 

found in Appendix A (see Worksheet 1.2). 

Any jurisdiction or organization may participate in the planning process. However, to request FEMA approval, each 

of the local jurisdictions must meet all of the requirements of 44 CFR §201.6. In addition to the requirement for 

participation in the process, the Federal regulation specifies the following requirements for multi-jurisdictional 

plans: 

4 For more information on the National Flood Insurance Program, see http://www.fema.gov/national-flood-insurance-program.

5 Indian Tribal government means any Federally recognized governing body of an Indian or Alaska Native Tribe, band, nation, pueblo, village, 

or community that the Secretary of Interior acknowledges to exist as an Indian Tribe under the Federally Recognized Indian Tribe List Act of 

1994, 25 U.S.C. 479a. This does not include Alaska Native corporations, the ownership of which is vested in private individuals. (44 CFR 

§201.2, Definitions.)

Multi-Jurisdictional Benefits 

and Challenges

Multi-jurisdictional planning processes can offer 

the following benefits:

• Improves communication and coordination 

among jurisdictions and other regional 

entities

• Enables comprehensive mitigation 

approaches to reduce risks that affect 

multiple jurisdictions 

• Maximizes economies of scale by leveraging 

individual capabilities and sharing costs and 

resources

• Avoids duplication of efforts

• Provides an organizational structure that 

local jurisdictions may find supportive

While offering these potential benefits, a multijurisdictional planning process can also present 

the following challenges:

• Reduces individual control and ownership 

over the mitigation planning process

• Involves coordinating participation of multiple 

jurisdictions, which may have different 

capabilities, priorities, and histories working 

together

• Requires specific information on local risks 

and mitigation actions for each jurisdiction

• Requires the organization of large amounts 

of information into a single plan document
1-3

Task 1

Determine the Planning Area and Resources

• The risk assessment must assess each jurisdiction’s risk where they may vary from the risks facing the 

entire planning area. (44 CFR §201.6(c)(2)(iii)) 

• There must be identifiable action items specific to the jurisdiction requesting FEMA approval or credit 

of the plan. (44 CFR §201.6(c)(3)(iv))

• Each jurisdiction requesting approval of the plan must document that is has been formally adopted. (44 CFR 

§201.6(c)(5))

The mitigation plan must clearly list the jurisdictions that participated in the plan and are seeking plan approval. It is 

also helpful to include a map showing the jurisdictional boundaries of the planning area. 

Leading the Planning Process

Whether your community is developing a single jurisdiction plan or is participating in a multi-jurisdictional 

planning process, strong leadership is needed throughout the planning process. Assigning the agency or individual 

that will lead the mitigation planning effort is an important initial decision.

Many local agencies have interest and responsibility in mitigation and should be included in the planning process. 

For example, both the emergency management and community planning and development staff in local government 

have unique knowledge and experience to make them natural leaders for a mitigation planning process. Local 

emergency management staff has an understanding of local threats and hazards, risks, and consequences and may 

have more experience working with State and Federal agencies on mitigation projects and activities. Community 

planning staff is familiar with zoning and subdivision regulations, land use plans, economic development initiatives, 

and long-term funding and planning mechanisms to implement mitigation strategies, and they may be trained to 

facilitate public outreach, conduct meetings, and develop a plan document. 

Both community development and emergency management departments, among others, are capable of providing 

leadership in the development of a local hazard mitigation plan. When determining leadership, consider who has 

the time and resources to commit to the entire planning process. In addition, in multi-jurisdictional plans, each 

participating jurisdiction identifies a lead representative to coordinate their community’s planning process. 

Technical Assistance

Mitigation planning takes time and effort. Be aware of the available resources—human, technical, and financial—

that your jurisdiction has to complete this planning effort. Combining resources with other jurisdictions through a 

multi-jurisdictional planning effort as described previously may save time and money, or may leverage subject matter 

expertise. Alternatively, specific parts of the planning process or plan preparation may require technical assistance. 

If outside technical assistance is needed to help develop the plan, consider how to leverage this assistance to build 

long-term community capabilities. 

Although developing a hazard mitigation plan does not require formal training in community planning, 

engineering, or science, it may be helpful to get outside expertise in some areas. For instance, you could seek 

assistance with:

• Identifying hazards, assessing vulnerabilities, and understanding significant risks.

• Facilitating planning team meetings, public involvement, and decision making activities.

• Creating an organized and functional plan document, including maps or other graphics.

There are several different options when considering outside assistance for plan development. Consider contracting 

with your regional planning agency or working with a local university with planning or emergency management 

degree programs. You may also contact another community that has already completed the planning process for 

suggestions. Before enlisting outside assistance from any of these sources, consider the scope of work, the extent of 
1-4 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Task 1

Determine the Planning Area and Resources

assistance required, and the level of interaction between the consulting service providers and other members of the 

planning team. 

Private consultants are an additional resource available to assist in the coordination, facilitation, and execution of 

the mitigation planning process. If your community decides to hire a consultant, consider looking for a professional 

community planner who:

• Recognizes the unique demographic, geographic, technical, and political considerations of each participating 

community.

• Demonstrates knowledge or experience with land use and community development.

• Understands all the applicable policies and regulations as they apply to the mitigation plan, including Federal 

law, FEMA guidance, and state and local ordinances.

• Recognizes that community input and public participation are integral to any successful mitigation plan.

• Exhibits familiarity with emergency management and multi-hazard mitigation concepts.

• Provides past performance information and references.

Additional information on hiring and working with a planning consultant can be found on the American Planning 

Association website.

6

Conclusion

Determining the planning area and overall scope of the planning project is up to your community. Building on 

existing planning efforts or working with other jurisdictions are common approaches to defining the planning area. 

Identifying the plan’s local lead and the need for outside technical assistance are important first steps in organizing 

your resources. Whether a single or multi-jurisdictional plan, all jurisdictions share the same commitment to 

developing a plan to reduce risks from hazards in their communities. Task 2 describes how to form a planning team 

to guide the planning process.

6 Choosing a Consultant, a revised and edited excerpt from Selecting and Retaining a Planning Consultant: RFPs, RFQs, Contracts, and Project 

Management by Eric Damian Kelly, FAICP, available from the American Planning Association: http://www.planning.org/consultants/choosing/.

Technical Assistance

In the development of their Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan, Saline County, Illinois established 

a planning team that included representatives from various county departments, cities and 

towns, and public and private utilities. The County partnered with nearby Southern Illinois 

University at Carbondale for planning assistance, as well as the Polis Center at Indiana 

University-Purdue University Indianapolis for technical assistance in conducting the risk 

assessment.
Task 2

Build the Planning Team
About the Cover: FEMA representatives meet with Puyallup Tribal representatives to discuss Tribal Mitigation NFIP and floodplain 

issues as they relate to the Puyallup Indian Reservation.
2-1

Task 2

Build the Planning Team

Task 2 – Build the Planning Team

A second critical task at the beginning of the planning process is to assemble a planning team of representatives 

from each jurisdiction and partner organization. These planning partners have the expertise to develop the plan, and 

their organizations have the authority to implement the mitigation strategy developed through the planning process. 

This is the core group of people responsible for developing and reviewing drafts of the plan, creating the mitigation 

strategy, and submitting the final plan for local adoption. Task 2 describes how to identify potential planning team 

members, communicate the importance of their participation, and kick off the planning process. 

Identify Planning Team Members

When building the planning team, start with existing community organizations or committees if 

possible. For mitigation plan updates, reconvene the team from the previous planning process along 

with any additional individuals or organizations. A committee that oversees the comprehensive plan or 

addresses issues related to land use, transportation, or public facilities can be a good foundation for your 

mitigation planning team. You may consider how threats and hazards impact economic development, housing, 

health and social services, infrastructure, or natural and cultural resources to determine what agencies and offices 

to include. You could also build on your community’s existing Local Emergency Planning Committee (LEPC).

1

This group deals with hazardous materials safety and may 

also address other threats and natural hazards issues. In small 

communities, LEPCs may be comprised of the same people and 

organizations that are needed for the mitigation planning team. 

Representatives from agencies involved in hazard mitigation 

activities, agencies with the authority to regulate development, 

and offices responsible for enforcing local ordinances are 

important members of the planning team. These agencies are 

likely to be assigned responsibility and have the expertise for 

implementing mitigation actions. Examples of partner agencies 

are listed in the sidebar. Appendix A also includes a checklist of 

potential agencies and organizations to consider when you are 

building the planning team (see Worksheet 2.1). 

It is important to distinguish between those who should serve 

as members of the planning team and other stakeholders. 

Stakeholders are individuals or groups that are affected by a 

mitigation action or policy and include businesses, private 

organizations, and citizens. Unlike planning team members, 

stakeholders may not be involved in all stages of the planning 

process, but they inform the planning team on a specific 

topic or provide input from different points of view in the 

community. Task 3 – Create an Outreach Strategy provides ideas about 

how and when to involve stakeholders in the planning process.

1 For more information on LEPCs, visit the Environmental Protection Agency’s Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) 

Local Emergency Planning Requirements: http://www.epa.gov/oem/content/epcra/epcra_plan.htm. 

Partners Involved in Hazard 

Mitigation Activities

• Building Code Enforcement 

• Emergency Management 

• Fire Department/Districts 

• Floodplain Administration

• Geographic Information Systems (GIS)

• Parks and Recreation

• Planning/Community Development 

• Public Information Office

• Public Works 

• Stormwater Management

• Transportation (Roads/Bridges)

• State Emergency Management Office 

• Regional Planning Agency

Partners with Authority to 

Regulate Development

• City Council/Board of Commissioners

• Planning Commission

• Planning/Community Development 

• Regional/Metropolitan Planning 

• Special Districts
2-2 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Task 2

Build the Planning Team

Certain stakeholders must be given the opportunity to be on the 

planning team or otherwise involved in the planning process, 

including:

• Local and regional agencies involved in hazard mitigation 

activities.

• Agencies that have the authority to regulate development.

• Neighboring jurisdictions.

• Businesses, academia, and other private and nonprofit 

interests. 

Engage Local Leadership 

Local elected officials and staff must provide strong leadership 

throughout the planning process. Leadership from elected officials 

with an interest in improving safety and disaster resiliency ensures 

the planning process has visibility and encourages stakeholder participation. 

Equally important is the role of a strong advocate or local champion for mitigation on the planning team, who 

helps enlist the support and participation of local officials and community leaders and leads the hazard mitigation 

planning effort. If one has not already been established, the planning team may select a leader, or chairperson, to 

oversee and help manage the planning process. This person does not need to be a professional planner or expert in 

hazard mitigation, but must be able to communicate the purpose and importance of the mitigation plan, convene 

the planning team, and facilitate the completion of tasks required for the mitigation plan to be finished on schedule. 

Promote Participation and Buy-In

Identifying potential planning team members may be fairly straightforward; however, persuading individuals with 

competing priorities to invest time and energy in the mitigation planning process can be challenging. 

It is important to determine what planning team members are expected to contribute, as well as how they will be 

invited to participate. While updating a plan, you should consider what worked well or did not during the previous 

planning process. The following are approaches for recruiting potential team members that have worked for 

communities in the past:

• After sending an email or letter invitation, follow it up with a phone call to emphasize why participation is 

needed and to answer any questions.

• Send a formal invitation signed by the mayor, elected official, or department head. 

• Plan the initial meeting at a convenient time and location for everyone.

• Provide beverages or food at meetings to bolster attendance and attention spans.

The people invited to participate want to know what is expected of their participation and why their presence is 

important. The purpose and importance of various contributors includes the following:

• Local community planners can help the planning team understand past, current, and future community 

development trends, the policies or activities that affect development, and the relationship between hazards and 

development.

• Emergency managers are first responders to disasters, have information on past occurrences and existing 

preparedness measures, and have a direct line of communication with the State emergency management agency. 

Element A2

The planning process shall include 

an opportunity for neighboring 

communities, local and regional 

agencies involved in hazard mitigation 

activities, and agencies that have the 

authority to regulate development, as 

well as businesses, academia and 

other private and non-profit interests 

to be involved in the planning 

process.

44 CFR §201.6(b)(2)
2-3

Task 2

Build the Planning Team

• GIS specialists can analyze and map data to support the planning process and communicate complex 

information, such as the locations of assets at risk in threat- or hazard-prone areas and estimates of damage for a 

particular disaster scenario. 

• Public works/engineering staff can help identify current or projected problems for the community’s 

infrastructure that can be addressed through capital improvements supported by the mitigation plan.

• Elected and executive officials are mindful of the community as a whole and communicate how the mitigation 

plan can support other social, economic, or environmental goals for the community. 

• Floodplain administrators provide information on your community’s flood hazard maps, floodplain ordinance, 

repetitive loss properties, and actions to continue compliance with the National Flood Insurance Program and 

reduce flood losses. 

• State and Federal partners provide available data, understand how to identify and leverage resources across 

agencies, and can identify state and Federal programs with complementary missions.

Planning efforts can be more successful if the team is designated with some official authority to develop the 

mitigation plan. Therefore, the planning team can obtain official recognition in the form of a council resolution or a 

Memorandum of Agreement (MOA). This demonstrates community support, increases commitment to the process, 

and improves the likelihood that mitigation actions identified in the plan will be implemented successfully. An 

example MOA for a multi-jurisdictional planning team is included in Appendix A (see Worksheet 1.2).

Multi-Jurisdictional Planning Team

If you are developing a multi-jurisdictional plan, creating a planning team structure that allows for coordination 

and accountability among and within the jurisdictions is important (see Figure 2.1). Each jurisdiction will have 

at least one representative on the planning team. This representative will need to report back to their community 

on a regular basis, as well as gather feedback and input for the plan. Another planning team model may include a 

core group of individuals from each jurisdiction participating on the planning team. The method of representation 

should be based on each community’s size and the level of effort required to assess unique risks and develop specific 

mitigation actions. 

Figure 2.1: Multi-jurisdictional planning team
2-4 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Task 2

Build the Planning Team

Initial Steps for the Planning Team

The mitigation planning process generally includes a series of meetings or work sessions. For example, the first 

meeting of the planning team, or the plan kickoff meeting, may focus on introducing team members, describing 

the overall purpose of the plan, defining the team’s responsibilities, validating the project scope and schedule, and 

brainstorming who else should be involved in the planning process. Some suggested outcomes of a planning team 

kickoff meeting are the following: 

1. Confirm plan purpose 

The planning team may start by agreeing on 

the overall purpose of the planning process 

and the outcome that the community seeks to 

accomplish as the plan is implemented. Some 

communities develop a mission statement 

that drives the process and describes in a 

short, simple statement the intended outcome. 

This helps unite the planning team around a 

common purpose and provides a foundation for 

the rest of the planning process. This also helps 

Multi-Jurisdiction Planning Team 

The Multi-jurisdictional Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan for Monmouth County, New Jersey included 53 municipalities that 

required an organizational structure to facilitate inter- and intra-governmental coordination. The overall Planning Committee 

was divided into one Core Planning Group and 53 separate Jurisdictional Assessment Teams—one for each participating 

jurisdiction. 

Core Planning Group 

The Core Planning Group (CPG) was made up of County Steering Committee members and leaders from each Jurisdictional 

Assessment Team. CPG members were typically representatives of their local emergency management, engineering, 

planning, GIS, administration, public works, building, or highway departments. The CPG managed the overall plan activities 

and directly contributed to the decision making process. 

Jurisdictional Assessment Teams 

The Jurisdictional Assessment Teams (JAT) were headed by a Team Leader who served and represented their interests on 

the CPG. JATs included broader representation from within the individual jurisdictions, and many chose to align their JAT 

with an existing Local Emergency Planning Committee (LEPC). The JATs were responsible for local community involvement 

and were required to:

• Coordinate and facilitate local efforts.

• Attend meetings.

• Provide information and feedback.

• Involve the public and community stakeholders in the planning process.

• Assess mitigation alternatives.

• Select a course of action to be followed for their communities. 

• Adopt the plan.

• Implement the plan and monitor its progress.

This organizational structure was successfully implemented for the County’s initial plan development and is maintained for 

plan updates.

Mission Statements

Create a disaster resilient Marion County (Marion County, Oregon 

Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan).

Through partnerships and careful planning, identify and reduce 

the vulnerability to natural hazards in order to protect the health, 

safety, quality of life, environment, and economy of the communities 

within Somerset County (Somerset County, New Jersey All Hazards 

Mitigation Plan).
2-5

Task 2

Build the Planning Team

to communicate the reason for the plan to stakeholders, elected officials, and the public. If you received a mitigation 

planning grant from FEMA, the grant may include language regarding the overall purpose of the plan that could be 

incorporated. The plan’s scope of work often includes more information on the background and objectives of the 

planning project, as well.

2. Review the current mitigation plan

If updating your mitigation plan, a general review of your community’s previously approved plan can 

provide a good starting point for identifying ideas for improvement and areas that may require more time 

and resources. This can impact the plan’s scope and schedule.

3. Refine plan scope and schedule

The kickoff meeting is a good time for the planning team to agree upon the overall scope of work and schedule 

for developing or updating the mitigation plan and review the requirements of a hazard mitigation plan for FEMA 

approval. If you received a grant to develop the plan, the scope of work and schedule may already be developed, or 

the grant may serve as the starting point for a more detailed work plan. It is important that everyone walks away 

from the kickoff meeting with an understanding of the overall project purpose, schedule, and tasks, as well as the 

agendas and goals for future planning team meetings. The remaining tasks in this Handbook can help you to establish 

a schedule and agenda items for future meetings. A sample schedule is also available in Appendix A (see Worksheet 

2.2).

4. Establish responsibilities

The planning team can establish roles and 

responsibilities at the beginning of the planning 

process. The planning team members should 

have a clear understanding of their roles and 

responsibilities, as well as how much time 

they may need to dedicate to the project. This 

can help you to identify any potential gaps or 

shortfalls in resources needed to complete the 

mitigation plan early in the planning process.

5. Develop an outreach strategy

One critical task of the planning team is 

determining who else needs to be involved in 

the mitigation planning process and how. An 

outreach strategy identifies the stakeholder groups that are important to involve in the process and how to engage 

them. The planning team also develops ideas for how to involve the general public in the planning process. Task 3 – 

Create an Outreach Strategy describes how to develop a comprehensive approach to engaging stakeholders and the public 

in the mitigation planning process. 

Planning Team Responsibilities 

Wilson County, Kansas Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee 

(2008)

• Provide facilities for meetings

• Attend meetings

• Collect data

• Manage administrative details

• Make decisions on plan process and content

• Submit mitigation action implementation worksheets

• Review drafts

• Coordinate and assist with public involvement and plan 

adoptions
2-6 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Task 2

Build the Planning Team

Documentation of the Planning Process – Planning Team 

The plan document is the written record of the planning 

process and must describe how the plan was prepared for 

each jurisdiction including the schedule and activities that 

made up the plan’s development, as well as who was involved 

in the process. The plan can also document how the planning 

team members were selected and what each team member 

contributed to the planning effort. 

Multi-jurisdictional plans must identify who represented each 

jurisdiction, including the person’s position or title and agency, 

at a minimum. Since the plan is intended to provide a resource 

for the community, the planning process provides enough detail 

to allow those updating the plan to identify and coordinate with those agencies that were involved in the process. 

Plan updates must include documentation of the current planning process undertaken to update the plan. 

Conclusion

Task 2 describes how to identify and engage a planning team, including planning teams that represent multiple 

jurisdictions. The planning process is as important as the plan itself, and the planning team helps shape and guide 

that process. Task 3 describes how the planning team can involve other stakeholders and the public. 

Element A1

The plan shall document the planning 

process used to develop the plan, 

including how it was prepared, who 

was involved in the process, and how 

the public was involved.

44 CFR §201.6(c)(1)
Task 3

Create an Outreach Strategy
About the Cover: Members of the Louisiana Family Recovery Corps participate in a “Neighbor Helping Neighbor” workshop.
3-1

Task 3

Create an Outreach Strategy

Task 3 – Create an Outreach Strategy

A key element in the mitigation planning process is the discussion it promotes among community members about 

creating a safer, more disaster-resilient community. A plan that accurately reflects the community’s values and 

priorities is likely to have greater legitimacy and “buy-in” and greater success in implementing mitigation actions 

and projects to reduce risk.

Federal regulation for mitigation plan approval requires that stakeholders and the general public are given 

opportunities to be involved during the planning process and in the plan’s maintenance and implementation. 

Community members can therefore provide input that can affect the content and outcomes of the mitigation plan. 

Task 3 builds on the idea of an outreach strategy introduced in Task 2 – Build the Planning Team. An outreach strategy 

identifies what you want to accomplish through your outreach 

efforts, who to involve in the process, and how and when to 

effectively engage the community. 

Outreach Strategy Framework 

Think of the outreach strategy for the plan as having three tiers: 1) 

planning team, 2) stakeholders, and 3) the public, as illustrated in 

Figure 3.1. The timing, method, and level of engagement or effort 

are different for each tier. Task 2 of the Handbook discussed how to 

engage the planning team. Task 3 focuses on involving stakeholders 

and the public. 

Stakeholders

A stakeholder is any person, group, or institution that can affect 

or be affected by a course of action. Involving stakeholders in the 

planning process helps to develop support for the plan and identify 

barriers to implementation. In addition, mitigation planning 

incorporates information from scientific and technical sources and 

subject matter experts. 

At a minimum, the stakeholders that must be included in the 

planning process are neighboring communities, local and 

regional agencies involved in hazard mitigation activities, and 

agencies that have the authority to regulate development, as well 

as businesses, academia, and other private and nonprofit interests. 

Task 2 discussed the importance of involving local and regional 

agencies involved in hazard mitigation activities and agencies 

that have the authority to regulate development on the planning 

team. Unlike planning team members, stakeholders need not be 

involved in all stages of the planning process, but may inform the 

planning team on a specific topic or provide input from different 

points of view in the community. 

Element A2

The planning process shall include 

an opportunity for neighboring 

communities, local and regional 

agencies involved in hazard mitigation 

activities, and agencies that have the 

authority to regulate development, as 

well as businesses, academia and 

other private and non-profit interests 

to be involved in the planning 

process.

44 CFR §201.6(b)(2)

Figure 3.1: Outreach strategy framework
3-2 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Task 3

Create an Outreach Strategy

You must also invite stakeholder participation from neighboring 

communities that are not part of the planning area and 

participating jurisdictions. These may be adjacent counties 

and municipalities, such as those that are affected by similar 

threat or hazard events or may be partners in mitigation and 

response activities. For example, you could involve neighboring 

communities in the planning process by issuing an invitational 

email or letter to the emergency managers or local officials of 

the adjacent counties inviting their participation in outreach 

activities and their input on the draft mitigation plan.

Other interested stakeholders may be defined by each jurisdiction 

depending on the unique characteristics and resources of 

the community. The following stakeholders are important in 

mitigation planning: 

• Elected officials and planning commission members.

Elected officials have the responsibility to protect the health, safety, and welfare of their constituents and 

typically are the governing bodies that adopt the plan prior to FEMA approval. The level of support that the 

elected officials provide to the mitigation plan’s goals and actions largely determines the plan’s progress and 

implementation, and ultimately, the resilience of the 

community.

• Business leaders and large employers. Economic resiliency 

drives a community’s recovery after a disaster. A key 

component of mitigation planning is identifying those 

economic assets and drivers whose losses and inability 

to operate would severely impact the community and 

its ability to recover from a disaster. Involving economic 

development officials, the local chamber of commerce, and 

business leaders in the planning process and educating them 

about local risks and vulnerabilities can make them partners 

in future mitigation initiatives. More information on 

determining your community’s economic assets is included 

in Task 5 – Conduct a Risk Assessment.

• Regional, State, and Federal agencies. Public agencies, such 

as regional planning agencies, geological surveys, forestry 

divisions, emergency management offices, dam safety agencies, and weather service offices, at the regional, 

State, and Federal government levels are key resources for data and technical information, as well as financial 

assistance. These agencies may have programs that complement your mitigation planning goals.

• Cultural institutions. Cultural institutions, such as museums, libraries, and theatres, often have unique 

mitigation needs. For example, they may be located in a historic building or house collections that require 

special protection from natural hazards. These institutions also may keep records and collections of historic 

information on natural disasters in your community, particularly floods, fires, and earthquakes. For more 

information, see Integrating Historic Property and Cultural Resource Considerations into Hazard Mitigation Planning (FEMA 

386-6).1

• Colleges and universities. Like public agencies, academic institutions have valuable resources to assist with the 

planning efforts, such as natural hazards data, GIS mapping and analysis, or research on successful methods to 

reduce risk. The planning team may be able to collaborate with a local college or university to engage students in 

1 http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=1892

Successful Outreach 

• Informs and educates about hazards and 

risks

• Invites interested parties to contribute their 

views and ideas for mitigation

• Identifies conflicts and incorporates different 

perspectives and priorities early in the 

process

• Provides data and information that improves 

overall quality and accuracy of the plan

• Ensures transparency and builds trust

• Maximizes opportunities for implementation 

through greater consensus and acceptance

Professional designers, urban planners, 

architects, and community members participate 

in an outreach and information meeting.
3-3

Task 3

Create an Outreach Strategy

the planning process or to complete research and analysis needed for the mitigation plan. Consider partnering 

with the urban planning, geology, emergency management, geography, or environmental studies departments. 

Participating in the mitigation planning process can also help local colleges and universities understand and 

reduce threat and hazard risks on their campuses.

• Nonprofit organizations. These groups often act as advocates for citizens and can be important in public 

outreach, information sharing, and getting support for the mitigation actions developed in the plan. Nonprofit 

organizations might include disaster preparedness and 

response organizations, such as the local Red Cross; 

parks, recreation, or conservation organizations; historic 

preservation groups; church organizations; and parentteacher organizations.

• Neighborhood groups. Many communities have existing 

neighborhood associations and homeowners’ associations 

that are active and engaged in community activities. These 

groups can provide valuable information about local risks 

and possible mitigation solutions in specific areas. They can 

also help with dissemination of information via newsletters 

and periodic meetings. Also, consider contacting people 

involved in Community Emergency Response Teams (CERT), 

since they are knowledgeable about threats and hazards, and 

they are interested in making the community more disaster 

resilient.

In any of these categories, consider how organizations that serve persons with access and functional needs should 

be included to ensure equal access and meaningful participation of all individuals with disabilities, without 

discrimination. 

Because many possible stakeholders could be involved in the planning process, an outreach strategy helps to identify 

the appropriate contacts and desired contributions for each stakeholder or group. Depending on the needs of your 

community and timeline for plan development, you may prioritize which stakeholders you contact directly and 

which you include in the outreach to the general public.

Public

The general public must also be given an opportunity to be 

involved in the planning process. More than just informing the 

public of the plan’s development, a good public outreach effort 

educates the public and motivates them to take action. Many 

mitigation actions affect private property; therefore, the public 

should be engaged early to understand community priorities. In 

addition, although members of the public may not be technical 

experts, they can help identify community assets and problem 

areas, describe issues of concern, narrate threat and hazard 

history, prioritize proposed mitigation alternatives, and provide 

ideas for continuing public involvement after plan adoption.

How to Develop Your Outreach Strategy

The public relations or public information official (PIO), if available in your community, provides valuable services 

by helping to generate messages, work with the media, and coordinate public information sharing throughout the 

Group exercise designed to help citizens express 

needs for reducing hazard risks in their 

community.

Element A3

The planning process shall include an 

opportunity for the public to comment 

on the plan during the drafting stage 

and prior to plan approval.

44 CFR §201.6(b)(1)
3-4 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Task 3

Create an Outreach Strategy

mitigation planning process. With or without a designated PIO, the planning team can develop an effective outreach 

strategy through the following steps:

1. Brainstorm outreach activities

The planning team can conduct a brainstorming session to identify stakeholders during the project kickoff 

meeting, as well as to determine when and how to conduct outreach activities. If completing a plan 

update, the planning team should evaluate the stakeholders and the outreach activities involved in the 

previous planning process and identify any necessary changes.

2. Determine public outreach objectives and schedule 

What input do you need from stakeholders? What input do you want from the public? How can stakeholders and 

the public contribute to the development of the capability review, risk assessment, and mitigation strategy? These 

questions can help determine the objectives of your outreach strategy. As the project kicked off, the planning team 

confirmed a schedule of tasks and meetings for completing the plan or plan update. Revisit this schedule and 

identify the times when it is important to inform and seek input from stakeholders and the public. For example, 

a good time to invite public involvement is after the risk assessment is complete and the planning team begins to 

create the mitigation strategy. Involving the public at this stage provides the opportunity to educate them on the 

risk assessment findings, collect input on any data inaccuracies, and understand their ideas and priorities for various 

mitigation actions. 

3. Identify appropriate outreach methods 

What are the best methods for reaching out to stakeholders and the public? This may be driven by planning needs, 

schedule, and budget as defined by the planning team. Stakeholders should be engaged using targeted methods 

for specific input. Online surveys, one-on-one briefings, phone interviews, roundtable discussions, presentations 

to specific groups, and personal invitations to public outreach activities are all potential methods to involve 

stakeholders.

If your community has recently been affected by a disaster event, the public may have a heightened interest in 

hazards and mitigation. Use this interest to get community members engaged in finding ways to avoid the impacts 

of future events. A public meeting that primarily focuses on hazard mitigation may not be well attended, if the 

community has not recently been affected by hazard events. Use the planning team to help identify what methods 

of public involvement have previously worked well in your community. It helps to reach out to people instead 

of asking them to come to you. For example, setting up a booth at a popular community event or getting on the 

agenda of a scheduled meeting could reach a greater number of people than a meeting that solely discusses hazard 

mitigation. 

A variety of informational materials and methods, such as news media, social media, fliers, surveys, and websites, 

are useful for reaching out to the public during the planning process. Consider messages for Twitter and content for 

sharing on Facebook. Public involvement activities should include methods designed to improve public awareness 

by presenting information (one-way communication), as well as to solicit input to inform the plan’s content 

(two-way communication). 

As with all public outreach materials and activities, ensure equal access and meaningful participation of all 

individuals with access and functional needs, including individuals from racially and ethnically diverse backgrounds, 

with and without limited English proficiency, seniors, children, and members of underserved populations. 

Table 3.1 provides examples of how communities have successfully used different types of outreach methods in 

mitigation planning. 
3-5

Task 3

Create an Outreach Strategy

Table 3.1: Example Outreach Methods in Mitigation Planning

Outreach Method Community Example

Community 

Events

At the annual fair in Howard County, Maryland, the Office of Emergency Management has a booth to educate 

residents on preparing for natural hazards. Brochures and fliers on related topics are distributed to visitors.

Interviews The focus of the hazard mitigation planning process for Oakland County, Michigan was a series of structured 

discussions with County officials, municipal officials, affected stakeholders, and the general public. This broad 

outreach effort included telephone and face-to-face interviews with leaders and representatives from each of the 

County’s 62 communities, 28 public schools districts, and 2 public universities to identify hazards of concern 

and potential mitigation measures.

News Media The mitigation planning process in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina included extensive outreach to local 

media outlets. In response, the local television, radio and print media partners prepared stories to help promote 

widespread public involvement. Through the City of Charlotte’s Corporate Communications & Marketing Office, 

“e-blasts” soliciting input on draft plan documents as well as public meeting attendance were sent out using 

distribution lists that included government agencies, businesses, and civic organizations. Public meeting 

information was sent to all City and County employees, posted to the community’s online public events calendar, 

added to live tickers that scrolled across the bottom of the local government access television channel, and 

shared through C-Mail (bi-weekly e-newsletter for City of Charlotte news and events). In addition, live television 

coverage of public input meetings was provided with the ability for citizens to submit their questions or 

comments by e-mail.

Presentations 

to Governing 

Bodies

During the development of a Multi-jurisdictional Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan for Garfield County, Colorado 

the Steering Committee made several presentations to the Board of County Commissioners about the status of 

the plan. These meetings were public and announcement of the plan agenda item was included along with the 

announcement of the public meeting.

Questionnaires/

Surveys

In completing its first hazard mitigation plan, Catawba County, North Carolina used a survey to capture 

information from people who might not have been able to attend the public meetings or participate through 

other means in the mitigation planning process. Copies of the survey were distributed by local officials and 

made available for residents to complete at local county and municipal offices, and an electronic version was 

posted on their websites. Nearly 250 respondents to the survey provided input for the County’s planning team to 

consider in developing their mitigation strategy.

Roundtables/

Forums 

In order to solicit ideas from citizens on how to reduce the risk of natural hazards, the City of Everett, Washington 

sponsored a public forum titled the “Safe and Sound Summit: Help Everett Master Disaster.” Attended by more 

than 80 residents of the community, this was the primary public event designed to both educate the public and 

to empower citizens to contribute to the hazard mitigation plan’s action items. The meeting format was adapted 

from The World Café method, a conversational process designed to bring people together to discuss “questions 

that matter” through small group discussions that rotated between tables on different topics. The resulting ideas 

helped the City’s planning team to identify risks, strengths, weaknesses, and opportunities in Everett.

Social Media Clark County, Kansas (population 1,950) used computer technology to obtain public input by creating the Clark 

County, Kansas Hazard Mitigation Plan Facebook page. They included small video clips with community leaders 

talking about the importance of mitigation planning. Additionally, the Facebook page was used to hold a drawing 

for an Apple iPod Shuffle 2GB MP3 Player posting that “all those that participate and provide feedback via this 

Facebook page will be entered in the drawing.”

Area-specific 

Meetings

The City of Tulsa, Oklahoma holds small, area-specific meetings on a semi-annual basis at public libraries and 

other public venues. These meetings are used to distribute literature and educate citizens on actions they can 

take to mitigate natural hazards, save lives, and prevent property damage. Input also is solicited about how the 

mitigation process can be more effective.

Website Pinal County, Arizona used their website to promote the mitigation plan by providing a definition of hazard 

mitigation planning, a list of who is involved in the local planning process, a description of how the plan update 

process works, and information about upcoming stakeholder meetings and opportunities for public involvement. 

Point of contact information was also provided for questions or comments. Downloads available from the site 

include copies of the existing plan, the plan update, public notices, and press releases.
3-6 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Task 3

Create an Outreach Strategy

4. Develop clear and consistent messages that align with community values

Consider the overarching goals and values of the community and how they align with reducing the impacts of 

future hazards and disasters. Then, personalize talking points for discussions with different audiences and develop 

messages that appeal to them. For example, if a gold-medal trout stream or historic downtown is important to a 

community’s identity and economy, then frame mitigation messages to emphasize these assets and the need for their 

long-term protection. 

5. Evaluate and incorporate feedback from outreach activities

The feedback you receive through outreach activities, such as completed questionnaires and surveys, comments at 

meetings, and comments on plan drafts, should be evaluated and incorporated into the planning team’s decision 

making process and the final plan. During the outreach process, clearly communicate to stakeholders and the public 

how the planning team uses their feedback to inform the plan. Develop a process for organizing and evaluating the 

comments received, as well as documenting them in the final plan.

6. Provide an opportunity for public review of the final draft plan

The public must be given the opportunity to review and comment 

on the final draft plan prior to its adoption. This may be done by 

providing copies of the draft plan in the local library, city hall, 

or community center, as well as posting it on the community’s 

website. Consider allowing at least four weeks for review and 

comment and providing some guidance on the type of comments 

and feedback that you are seeking. For instance, it is helpful to 

get feedback from the public on the identification of community 

assets and the prioritization of the mitigation actions in the plan. 

Inform the public through a press release in the local newspaper 

and on the community’s website when a draft is available for review and how they may provide comment. Some 

jurisdictions have policies in place for the public review of documents prior to adoption, which should be followed 

for the final comment period for the mitigation plan. 

Element A3

The planning process shall include an 

opportunity for the public to comment 

on the plan during the drafting stage 

and prior to plan approval.

44 CFR §201.6(b)(1)
3-7

Task 3

Create an Outreach Strategy

News Release
3-8 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Task 3

Create an Outreach Strategy

Continuing Public Outreach over Time

The outreach strategy should address both the planning process and how to keep people engaged after the plan’s 

adoption. Ongoing outreach continues the discussion with the community about hazards and risks, builds support 

for implementation of mitigation activities, and informs the outreach strategy for the next plan update process. 

The plan must describe how the jurisdictions will continue 

public participation during the plan’s implementation and 

maintenance. 

The outreach activities conducted during the planning process, as 

described above, are a good source of ideas for how to continue 

to involve stakeholders and the public during plan maintenance 

and implementation. Consider repeating successful outreach 

events annually. Other examples of activities for continued 

public participation include periodic presentations on the plan’s 

progress to elected officials, schools, or other community groups; 

annual questionnaires or surveys; postings on social media and 

email lists; and interactive websites. You may help build capabilities throughout the planning area by assigning the 

responsibility for coordinating these activities to a staff member in each jurisdiction. 

Coordinating a Multi-Jurisdictional Outreach Strategy

If you are developing a multi-jurisdictional plan, the outreach strategy creates a mechanism for coordination and 

accountability among the jurisdictions. For each jurisdiction seeking plan approval, the plan must document how 

they were involved in the planning process, including how they provided opportunities for the involvement of their 

stakeholders and the public. 

Task 2 describes ways that the representatives on multi-jurisdictional planning teams can share information with 

their respective community stakeholders and citizens. Specific stakeholders may be identified for each participating 

jurisdiction, and public involvement activities should be designed to reach citizens throughout the planning area. 

The planning team may develop one set of outreach materials, which each jurisdiction is responsible for distributing 

or hosting to reach their stakeholders and citizens. Another good approach is to develop one presentation, or a series 

of presentations on the plan’s progress, that jurisdictional representatives can deliver at a regularly scheduled open 

meeting of their city council or governing body. This is a good method to keep elected officials informed of the 

planning project and to give the public an opportunity to be informed and provide comments. 

Element A5

The plan maintenance process 

shall include a discussion on how 

the community will continue public 

participation in the plan maintenance 

process. 

44 CFR §201.6(c)(4)(iii)

Multi-Jurisdictional Coordination 

The Luzerne and Lackawanna Counties, Pennsylvania Hazard Mitigation Plan provides a good example of a multijurisdictional outreach strategy. The bi-county planning process included 40 municipalities in Lackawanna County and 

76 municipalities in Luzerne County. In addition to steering committee meetings, input was solicited through municipal 

workshops and open houses held throughout the planning area. Municipalities were required to fill out the ‘Intent to 

Participate’ form, attend workshops, provide data/maps, complete questionnaires, and review the draft plan. The open 

houses provided an avenue for public to comment on the plan during the drafting stage.
3-9

Task 3

Create an Outreach Strategy

Documentation of the Planning Process – Stakeholder and 

Public Involvement 

It is important to document the planning process to: 1) inform the public and other readers about the overall 

approach to the plan’s development and 2) serve as a permanent record of who was involved and how decisions 

were made. This record is also useful for the next plan update. 

There are several requirements related to documentation of stakeholder and public involvement opportunities 

during the planning process:

• The plan must document how it was prepared and who was 

involved in the planning process for each jurisdiction. This 

includes the schedule or timeframe and activities that made 

up the plan’s development. 

• The plan must identify all planning team members and 

stakeholders who were involved or given an opportunity to 

be involved in the planning process, including the agency/

organization and the person’s position or title within the 

agency. 

• The plan must document how the public was given the 

opportunity to be involved in the planning process and 

how their feedback was incorporated into the plan. The 

opportunity for participation must occur during the plan’s 

development, which is prior to the comment period on the 

final plan and prior to plan adoption and approval. 

Element A1

The plan shall document the planning 

process used to develop the plan, 

including how it was prepared, who 

was involved in the process, and how 

the public was involved.

44 CFR §201.6(c)(1)

Element A2

The planning process shall include 

an opportunity for neighboring 

communities, local and regional 

agencies involved in hazard mitigation 

activities, and agencies that have the 

authority to regulate development, as 

well as businesses, academia and 

other private and non-profit interests 

to be involved in the planning process.

44 CFR §201.6(b)(2)

Element A3

The planning process shall include an 

opportunity for the public to comment 

on the plan during the drafting stage 

and prior to plan approval.

44 CFR §201.6(b)(1)
3-10 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Task 3

Create an Outreach Strategy

• The plan must describe how the jurisdiction(s) will continue 

public participation in the plan maintenance process.

Plan updates must include documentation of the current planning process undertaken to update the plan. 

A simple narrative of the planning process can meet these requirements. It is also helpful to provide other 

forms of documentation, such as copies of meeting minutes, agendas, sign-in sheets, and newspaper articles, to help 

inform the reader. This type of documentation could be included as an appendix to the plan.

The mitigation plan should include a description of the planning process that answers the questions “who, what, 

when, where, and how” of the plan’s development. A good description could easily be developed by integrating 

the outreach strategy into the scope of work and schedule confirmed by the planning team and incorporating this 

information into the plan. Overall, the plan document should provide enough information to tell the story of how 

the community developed the plan. 

Conclusion

Task 3 describes how the planning team can involve stakeholders and the public. An open public involvement process 

is essential to the development of an effective plan. The documentation of these efforts ensures that the whole 

community understands how decisions were reached. Task 4 guides the planning team on how to assess existing 

authorities, policies, programs, and resources. 

Element A5

The plan maintenance process 

shall include a discussion on how 

the community will continue public 

participation in the plan maintenance 

process. 

44 CFR §201.6(c)(4)(iii)
Task 4

Review Community Capabilities
About the Cover: At the Douglas County Dog River Reservoir, FEMA and County staff confer during inspection of the dam which 

failed during the September 2009 severe storms and flooding. FEMA Public Assistance funds have been requested to pay a 

share of repair costs.
4-1

Task 4

Review Community Capabilities

Task 4 – Review Community Capabilities

The previous three tasks in the Handbook focused on the process of mitigation planning, including who must be 

involved and how to involve them. Beginning with Task 4, the remaining tasks describe what is accomplished during 

the planning process. Task 4 describes the critical step of assessing your community’s existing authorities, policies, 

programs, and resources available to accomplish mitigation.

Capability Assessment

Each community has a unique set of capabilities, including 

authorities, policies, programs, staff, funding, and other 

resources available to accomplish mitigation and reduce longterm vulnerability. By reviewing the existing capabilities in each 

jurisdiction, the planning team can identify capabilities that 

currently reduce disaster losses or could be used to reduce losses 

in the future, as well as capabilities that inadvertently increase risks 

in the community. This is especially useful for multi‐jurisdictional 

plans where local capability varies widely. Task 6 describes how to 

leverage capabilities for long-term vulnerability reduction in your 

mitigation strategy.

The planning team collects and reviews information on community 

capabilities. The plan must describe each jurisdiction’s existing 

authorities, policies, programs, and resources available to accomplish hazard mitigation. To review capabilities, begin 

by reviewing existing plans, reports, and information and interviewing local departments and agencies to gain a 

better understanding of relevant programs, regulations, resources, and practices. One approach is to distribute a 

capabilities worksheet for each planning team member’s community or agency to complete. Appendix A includes an 

example capabilities worksheet (see Worksheet 4.1). 

Types of Capabilities

The primary types of capabilities for reducing long-term 

vulnerability through mitigation planning are the following:

• Planning and regulatory

• Administrative and technical 

• Financial

• Education and outreach

The planning team also may identify additional types of 

capabilities relevant to mitigation planning. 

Planning and Regulatory

Planning and regulatory capabilities are based on the 

implementation of ordinances, policies, local laws and State statutes, and plans and programs that relate to guiding 

and managing growth and development. Examples of planning capabilities that can either enable or inhibit 

mitigation include comprehensive land use plans, capital improvements programs, transportation plans, small area 

development plans, disaster recovery and reconstruction plans, and emergency preparedness and response plans. 

Plans describe specific actions or policies that support community goals and drive decisions. Likewise, examples of 

Element C1

The plan shall include a mitigation 

strategy that provides the 

jurisdiction’s blueprint for reducing 

the potential losses identified in the 

risk assessment, based on existing 

authorities, policies, programs, and 

resources, and its ability to expand 

on and improve these existing tools.

44 CFR §201.6(c)(3)

Safe Growth Audit

One way to assess the impact of planning and 

regulatory capabilities is to complete a safe 

growth audit.* The purpose of the safe growth 

audit is to analyze the impacts of current policies, 

ordinances, and plans on community safety from 

hazard risks due to growth. Basic safe growth 

audit questions are included in Appendix A (see 

Worksheet 4.2).

* Godschalk, David R., Practice Safe Growth Audits; 

Zoning Practice, Issue Number 10, October 2009; 

American Planning Association. http://www.planning.

org/zoningpractice/open/pdf/oct09.pdf
4-2 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Task 4

Review Community Capabilities

regulatory capabilities include the enforcement of zoning ordinances, subdivision regulations, and building codes 

that regulate how and where land is developed and structures are built. Planning and regulatory capabilities refer not 

only to the current plans and regulations, but also to the community’s ability to change and improve those plans and 

regulations as needed.

Administrative and Technical 

Administrative and technical capability refers to the community’s staff and their skills and tools that can be used 

for mitigation planning and to implement specific mitigation actions. It also refers to the ability to access and 

coordinate these resources effectively. Think about the types of personnel employed by each jurisdiction, the public 

and private sector resources that may be accessed to implement mitigation activities in your community, and the 

level of knowledge and technical expertise from all of these sources. These include engineers, planners, emergency 

managers, GIS analysts, building inspectors, grant writers, floodplain managers, and more. For jurisdictions with 

limited staff resources, capacity should also be considered; while staff members may have specific skills, they may 

not have the time to devote to additional work tasks. 

The planning team can identify resources available through other government entities, such as counties or special 

districts, which may be able to provide technical assistance to communities with limited resources. For example, a 

small town may turn to county planners, engineers, or a regional planning agency to support its mitigation planning 

efforts and provide assistance. For large jurisdictions, reviewing administrative and technical capabilities may 

involve targeting specific staff in various departments who have the expertise and are available to support mitigation 

initiatives. The degree of intergovernmental coordination among departments also affects administrative capability.

 Plan and Policy Summaries

The Multi-Jurisdictional Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan for Klamath County, Oregon includes a section on 

“Existing Plans and Policies” and states that implementing the natural hazards mitigation plan’s action items 

through existing plans and policies increases their likelihood of being supported and getting updated, and maximizes the 

county’s resources. The following excerpt from the Plan summarizes two of the existing documents in place for one of its 

participating jurisdictions: 

City of Klamath Falls Comprehensive Plan

• Date of Last Revision: 1981

• Author/Owner: City of Klamath Falls

• Description: The Comprehensive Plan is the overall policy guide for future growth and development.

• Relationship to Natural Hazard Mitigation Planning: The Land, Water, Climate, Storm Drainage, and Safety and Health 

elements of the Klamath Falls Comprehensive Plan include specific goals and policies related to natural hazards. The 

comprehensive plan is implemented through city ordinances. Notably, the City of Klamath Falls comprehensive plan 

does not contain a section specifically addressing statewide planning Goal 7.

City of Klamath Falls Development Ordinance

• Date of Last Revision: 2000 (update process currently underway)

• Author/Owner: City of Klamath Falls

• Description: The Development Ordinance implements comprehensive plan policy through specific development 

standards and criteria.

• Relationship to Natural Hazard Mitigation Planning: The City of Klamath Falls development ordinance contains a Flood 

Hazard Zone and a Hazard Overlay Zone. The Flood Hazard Zone contains regulations that apply to properties within 

special flood hazard areas. In addition, the ordinance contains a Hazard Overlay Zone that addresses areas of steep 

slope, slumping and landslide.
4-3

Task 4

Review Community Capabilities

Financial

Financial capabilities are the resources that a jurisdiction has access to or is eligible to use to fund mitigation 

actions. The costs associated with implementing mitigation activities vary. Some mitigation actions such as building 

assessment or outreach efforts require little to no costs other than staff time and existing operating budgets. Other 

actions, such as the acquisition of flood-prone properties, could require a substantial monetary commitment from 

local, State, and Federal funding sources. 

Some local governments may have access to a recurring source of revenue beyond property, sales, and income taxes, 

such as stormwater utility or development impact fees. These communities may be able to use the funds to support 

local mitigation efforts independently or as the local match or cost-share often required for grant funding.

Education and Outreach 

This type of capability refers to education and outreach programs and methods already in place that could be used 

to implement mitigation activities and communicate hazard-related information. Examples include fire safety 

programs that fire departments deliver to students at local schools; participation in community programs, such 

as Firewise1 or StormReady;

2

 and activities conducted as part of hazard awareness campaigns, such as Tornado or 

Flood Awareness Month. Some communities have their own public information or communications office to handle 

outreach initiatives. 

1 The Firewise Communities program encourages local solutions for wildfire safety by involving homeowners, community leaders, planners, 

developers, firefighters, and others in the effort to protect people and property from wildfire risks. The program is co-sponsored by the USDA 

Forest Service, the U.S. Department of the Interior, and the National Association of State Foresters. Information is available here: http://

www.firewise.org/.

2 The National Weather Service’s StormReady is a nationwide community preparedness program that uses a grassroots approach to help 

communities develop plans to handle all types of severe weather. Information is available here: http://www.stormready.noaa.gov/.

Mitigation Core Capabilities

Capabilities can be grouped or described in many different ways. Mitigation requires capabilities necessary to reduce loss 

of life and property by lessening the impacts of disasters. Your organization has already demonstrated a set of capabilities 

by initiating the mitigation planning process. The National Preparedness Goal, First Edition* groups core capabilities for 

mitigation another way, and the Mitigation Planning process described at 44 CFR §201.6 incorporates and enables local 

communities to build each of these core capabilities as follows: 

• Planning through the Mitigation Planning process at 44 CFR §201.6

• Public information and warning through education and outreach and public participation (see Task 3, Create an 

Outreach Strategy) 

• Operational coordination through the mitigation strategy and integration into other planning efforts (see Task 6, 

Develop a Mitigation Strategy); maintenance plan (see Task 7, Keep the Plan Current); and plan implementation (see 

Task 9, Create a Safe and Resilient Community) 

• Community resilience through leadership, partnerships, and public involvement (see Tasks 1-3 and Task 9, Create a 

Safe and Resilient Community)

• Long-term vulnerability reduction through identified mitigation actions to reduce or eliminate risks to threats and 

hazards (see Task 6, Develop a Mitigation Strategy and Task 9, Create a Safe and Resilient Community)

• Risk and disaster resilience assessment through threat and hazard risk assessments (see Task 5, Conduct a Risk 

Assessment) 

• Threats and hazard identification through threat and hazard risk assessments (See Task 5, Conduct a Risk 

Assessment)

* National Preparedness Goal, First Edition, September, 2011, FEMA, http://www.fema.gov/pdf/prepared/npg.pdf.
4-4 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Task 4

Review Community Capabilities

National Flood Insurance Program

As a participant in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP),

3 a community develops capabilities for conducting 

flood mitigation activities. The local mitigation plan must describe each jurisdiction’s participation in the NFIP.

Participating communities must describe their continued 

compliance with NFIP requirements. The mitigation plan must 

do more than state that the community will continue to comply 

with the NFIP. Each jurisdiction must describe their floodplain 

management program and address how they will continue 

to comply with the NFIP requirements. The local floodplain 

administrator is often the primary source for this information.

Jurisdictions where FEMA has issued a floodplain map but are 

currently not participating in the NFIP may meet this requirement 

by describing the reasons why the community does not participate.

Plan updates must meet the same requirements and document any change in floodplain management 

programs. 

Planning and regulatory. The plan may describe the community’s adoption and enforcement of floodplain 

management regulations, including when the community joined the NFIP, when the Flood Insurance Rate Maps 

(FIRM) became effective, and whether the floodplain ordinance meets or exceeds minimum requirements. You can 

provide a summary of the community’s compliance history, including the results from the most recent Community 

Assistance Visit (CAV).

4

 If applicable, you may include activities that contributed to the communities’ class rankings 

in the Community Rating System (CRS).

5

Administrative and technical. The planning team may identify the staff dedicated to managing the NFIP in the 

community, such as a dedicated floodplain administrator or staff for which the NFIP is a secondary duty. Also, 

the plan may describe the tasks completed by staff in support of the NFIP, such as permit reviews and building 

inspections.

3 For more information on the NFIP, see http://www.fema.gov/national-flood-insurance-program.

4 For more information on CAVs, see http://www.fema.gov/national-flood-insurance-program-2/community-assistance-visit.

5 For more information on activities under the CRS, see http://www.fema.gov/national-flood-insurance-program/community-rating-system.

 

National Flood Insurance Program

Participation in the NFIP is based on an agreement between communities and FEMA. The NFIP has three basic 

components: 

1. Floodplain mapping. NFIP participation requires community adoption of flood hazard maps to provide the data needed 

to administer floodplain management programs and to actuarially rate new construction for flood insurance. 

2. Floodplain management. The NFIP requires communities to adopt and enforce minimum Federal floodplain 

management regulations that help mitigate the effects of flooding on new and improved structures. States and 

communities may have more restrictive elements in their floodplain ordinances to provide additional safety measures. 

3. Flood insurance. Community participation in the NFIP enables property owners to purchase insurance as a protection 

against flood losses in exchange for community floodplain management regulations that reduce future flood damages. 

Element C2

The hazard mitigation strategy 

shall address each jurisdiction’s 

participation in the NFIP and 

continued compliance with NFIP 

requirements, as appropriate.

44 CFR §201.6(c)(3)(ii)
4-5

Task 4

Review Community Capabilities

Financial. The plan may include a summary of your community’s flood insurance coverage, number of policies, 

and claims history, including repetitive loss properties. Repetitive loss properties are NFIP insured structures that 

have been repetitively damaged by flooding. A good approach is to include the types and numbers of repetitive loss 

properties in the community and maps showing concentrations of repetitive loss properties.6

 The planning team 

may contact the State NFIP Coordinator or the State Hazard Mitigation Officer (SHMO) for this information. 

Education and outreach. Participation in the NFIP could also be described through any education or outreach 

activities that relate to the NFIP, such as flood safe building initiatives or outreach on the availability of flood 

insurance. 

Appendix A includes a worksheet that lists important considerations when describing authorities and policies related 

to the NFIP and identifying actions to improve the existing program (see Worksheet 4.3). The plan does not need to 

include specific actions in the mitigation strategy for NFIP compliance, although areas of improvement, if identified, 

can become future mitigation actions. Communities are encouraged to complete additional activities that go above 

and beyond the minimum requirements of NFIP participation, as described in the CRS Coordinator’s Manual 

(FIA-15/2007).

Documentation of Community Capabilities

The plan must document what existing plans, studies, reports, and 

technical information were reviewed and how relevant information 

was incorporated into the mitigation plan. To document means to 

provide the factual evidence for how the jurisdictions developed 

the plan. Documentation can be met with a narrative description, 

but may also be shown in other formats. For example, a table or 

list format may provide the relevant sources and explain how 

information was incorporated, or citations or footnotes throughout 

the document may demonstrate incorporation of other plans. 

For multi-jurisdictional plans, the capabilities of each participating jurisdiction must be individually 

reviewed and documented. In a plan update, the planning team ensures capabilities are documented 

sufficiently and highlights any capability changes from the previous plan.

Conclusion

Task 4 describes how an assessment of existing plans, policies, studies, and programs can be completed to further 

inform the mitigation actions that will be identified through the planning process. Local capability for mitigation 

can vary significantly from community to community. In the development of multi-jurisdictional hazard mitigation 

plans, local governments with limited capacity or capability may use the planning process as a means to develop 

cooperative agreements, mutual aid agreements, or service agreements that enhance their capacity to undertake 

mitigation activities.

As part of the risk assessment in Task 5, the planning team evaluates how existing capabilities contribute to 

vulnerability by reducing or exacerbating disaster impacts. Understanding what capabilities need to be changed or 

enhanced to reduce disaster losses allows the planning team to address those shortfalls in the mitigation strategy.

6 Use of flood insurance claim information is subject to The Privacy Act of 1974, as amended, which prohibits public release of the names 

of policy holders and the amount of the claim payment. However, maps showing general areas where claims have been paid can be made 

public. If a plan includes the names of policy holders and the amount of the claim payment, the plan cannot be approved until this Privacy 

Act covered information is removed from the plan.

 The CRS is a voluntary incentive program that recognizes and encourages community floodplain management activities that exceed the minimum NFIP requirements. For more information visit http://www.fema.gov/business/nfip/crs.shtm. The Mitigation Best Practice Portfolio is a 

collection of ideas, activities, projects, and funding sources that can help reduce or prevent the impacts of disasters. Find more information 

here: http://www.fema.gov/plan/prevent/bestpractices/index.shtm.

Element A4

The planning process shall include 

the review and incorporation, if 

appropriate, of existing plans, studies, 

reports, and technical information. 

44 CFR §201.6(b)(3)
4-6 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Task 4

Review Community Capabilities

This page intentionally left blank.
Task 5

Conduct a Risk Assessment
About the Cover: FEMA Long-Term Community Recovery specialists, professional designers, urban planners, architects, ESF-14 

recovery specialists, and community members participate in an outreach and information meeting at First Baptist Church in 

Hackleburg, Alabama. FEMA supports and coordinates the involvement and participation of all stakeholders in the recovery and 

rebuilding of a community following a disaster, such as the tornado that struck Hackleburg on April 27, 2011. 
5-1

Task 5

Conduct a Risk Assessment

Task 5 – Conduct a Risk Assessment 

The planning team conducts a risk assessment to determine the potential impacts of hazards to the people, economy, 

and built and natural environments of the community. The risk assessment provides the foundation for the rest of 

the mitigation planning process, which is focused on identifying and prioritizing actions to reduce risk to hazards. 

In addition to informing the mitigation strategy, the risk assessment also can be used to establish emergency 

preparedness and response priorities, for land use and comprehensive planning, and for decision making by elected 

officials, city and county departments, businesses, and organizations in the community. 

Task 5 presents a framework for conducting a local risk assessment. Many approaches to developing a risk assessment 

are possible, depending on available data, technology, and resources. Local risk assessments do not require 

sophisticated technology but do need to be accurate, current, and relevant. Some communities may choose to 

address a broader range of threats and hazards, or to tie their hazard identification and risk assessment to other 

planning initiatives.

Defining Risk Assessment 

Risk, for the purpose of hazard mitigation planning, is the 

potential for damage, loss, or other impacts created by the 

interaction of natural hazards with community assets. Hazards 

are natural processes, such as tornados and earthquakes. The 

exposure of people, property, and other community assets to 

natural hazards can result in disasters depending on the impacts. 

Impacts are the consequences or effects of the hazard on the 

community and its assets. The type and severity of impacts are 

based on the extent of the hazard and the vulnerability of the 

asset, as well as the community’s capabilities to mitigate, prepare 

for, respond to, and recover from events. 

Figure 5.1 illustrates the concept of risk as the relationship, or 

overlap, between hazards and community assets. The smaller the 

overlap, the lower the risk. 

Figure 5.1: Community risk from natural hazards

Risk Assessment Terminology*

Natural hazard – source of harm or difficulty 

created by a meteorological, environmental, or 

geological event 

Community assets – the people, structures, 

facilities, and systems that have value to the 

community 

Vulnerability – characteristics of community 

assets that make them susceptible to damage 

from a given hazard 

Impact – the consequences or effects of a hazard 

on the community and its assets 

Risk – the potential for damage, loss, or other 

impacts created by the interaction of natural 

hazards with community assets

Risk assessment – product or process that 

collects information and assigns values to risks 

for the purpose of informing priorities, developing 

or comparing courses of action, and informing 

decision making.

Threat or human-caused incident – intentional 

actions of an adversary, such as a threatened 

or actual chemical or biological attack or cyber 

event.

* Definitions from FEMA Local Mitigation Plan Review 

Guide, October, 2011, Threat and Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment Guide: Comprehensive 

Preparedness Guide (CPG) 201, First Edition, April 

2012, and adapted from the Department of 

Homeland Security Risk Lexicon, 2008.
5-2 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Task 5

Conduct a Risk Assessment

Steps to Conduct a Risk Assessment

Figure 5.2 shows the four recommended steps for conducting a risk 

assessment. The desired outcomes of these steps are 1) an evaluation of 

each hazard’s potential impacts on the people, economy, and built and 

natural environments in the planning area and 2) an understanding of 

each community’s overall vulnerability and most significant risks. These 

potential impacts and the overall vulnerability can be used to create problem 

statements and identify mitigation actions to reduce risk.

For multi-jurisdictional planning efforts, the risk assessment must result 

in an evaluation of potential impacts and overall vulnerability that each 

participating jurisdiction will use to development specific mitigation actions. 

Assets, vulnerabilities, and overall risk are unique to each community and 

must be addressed in a multi-jurisdictional plan. Although hazards 

may be described for the entire planning area, the plan also must 

explain any hazards that are unique or varied within communities. 

A mitigation plan update focuses on how risk has 

changed since the previous plan was completed, 

particularly changes related to land use development 

and new hazard information. New development in 

hazard-prone areas, areas affected by recent disasters, and new 

data and reports are examples of information that should be 

incorporated into the plan to analyze the current risk and update 

problem statements.

Because the best available data is constantly changing, this Handbook does not include a comprehensive list of 

resources. The local community is the best source for specific information on community assets and past impacts. 

Your State Hazard Mitigation Officer and the State Hazard Mitigation Plan are also key resources for best available 

hazard data and risk assessment information. 

1. Describe Hazards

The plan must include a description of the natural hazards that 

affect the jurisdiction(s) in the planning area. The following 

provides suggestions for identifying hazards in the planning area:

• Review your State Hazard Mitigation Plan for information on 

hazards affecting the planning area.

• Document the disaster declaration history.1

• Download weather-related events from online resources, such 

as the National Climatic Data Center.

2

• Review existing studies, reports, and plans related to hazards in 

the planning area. State and Federal agencies are also good sources for hazard-related information.

1 For recent disaster declaration information, visit FEMA’s Federal Disaster Declarations webpage, http://www.fema.gov/news/disasters.fema. 

PERI Presidential Disaster Declarations are available at http://www.peripresdecusa.org/mainframe.htm. The Farm Services Agency Disaster 

Assistance provides assistance for natural disaster losses, resulting from drought, flood, fire, freeze, tornadoes, pest infestation, and other 

calamities. For more information, visit: http://www.fsa.usda.gov/FSA/webapp?area=home&subject=diap&topic=landing.

2 Websites of the National Climatic Data Center, http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/, and the Spatial Hazard Events and Losses Database for the 

United States (SHELDUS), http://webra.cas.sc.edu/hvri/products/sheldus.aspx, compile county-level hazard data sets.

Figure 5.2: Steps to conduct a risk 

assessment

Element B1

The risk assessment shall include a 

description of the type, location and 

extent of all natural hazards that can 

affect the jurisdiction. 

44 CFR §201.6(c)(2)(i)

Element B1

For multi-jurisdictional plans, the risk 

assessment section must assess each 

jurisdiction’s risks where they vary from 

the risks facing the entire planning 

area. 

44 CFR §201.6(c)(2)(iii) 
5-3

Task 5

Conduct a Risk Assessment

• Use flood insurance rate maps (FIRM) and non-regulatory flood risk assessment products developed for your 

community by FEMA as part of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) and the RiskMAP program.

3

• Contact colleges or universities that have hazard-related academic programs or extension services.

• Interview your planning team and stakeholders about which hazards affect the planning area and should be 

described in the mitigation plan. 

• Consult local resources such as the newspaper, chamber of commerce, local historical society, or other resources 

with records of past occurrences.

• For plan updates, reference hazards previously identified and determine if they are still relevant. 

If your plan omits a natural hazard that is commonly recognized to affect the planning area, it must include the 

planning team’s rationale for the omission. For example, a hazard may be possible, but the likelihood and magnitude 

are so minimal that the planning team decides not to provide a detailed description or risk assessment. 

Hazard Descriptions

For each hazard affecting the planning area, the risk assessment must include a description of location, 

extent, previous occurrences, and probability of future events. Plan updates will incorporate any additional 

hazards that have been identified and any new data that has become available, such as new flood studies. 

Plan updates must include hazard events that have occurred since the last plan was completed.

Location. Location is the geographic areas within the planning area that are affected by the hazard, such as a 

floodplain. Hazard areas may be further defined, such as high wildfire hazard areas versus low wildfire hazard areas. 

The entire planning area may be uniformly affected by some hazards, such as drought or winter storm. Although 

maps are usually the best way to illustrate location for many hazards, location may be described in other formats, 

such as a narrative. 

Extent. Extent is the strength or magnitude of the hazard. Extent can be described in a combination of ways 

depending on the hazard, such as:

• The value on an established scientific scale or measurement system, such as EF2 on the Enhanced Fujita Scale for 

tornadoes or 5.5 on the Richter Scale for earthquakes. 

• Other measures of magnitude, such as water depth or wind speed.

• The speed of onset. For example, hurricanes have longer warning times, giving people and governments more 

time to prepare and evacuate, while earthquakes occur without warning. 

• The duration of hazard events. For most hazards, the longer the duration of an event, the greater the extent. 

Flooding that peaks and retreats in a matter of hours is typically less damaging than flooding of the same depth 

that remains in place for days. 

Extent can be described using a map and/or narrative. Describing the extent of a hazard is not the same as 

describing its potential impacts on a community. Extent defines the characteristics of the hazard regardless of 

the people and property it affects, while impact refers to the effect of a hazard on the people and property in the 

community and will be addressed later in Task 5. 

3 More information on the Risk MAP program is available at http://www.fema.gov/rm-main.
5-4 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Task 5

Conduct a Risk Assessment

Previous occurrences. The plan must include the history of 

previous hazard events for each hazard. This information helps 

estimate the likelihood of future events and predict potential 

impacts. For some hazards, it may be helpful to compile past 

events in tables. When data is available, describe the extent of the 

event and impacts, such as fatalities and injuries, building and 

infrastructure damages, and loss of services. Understanding the 

extent and impacts of past hazard events will help you anticipate 

potential damage from future events.

Probability of future events. Probability is the likelihood of the hazard occurring in the future and can be 

described in a variety of ways. Probability may be defined using historical frequencies or statistical probabilities. 

Statistical probabilities often refer to events of a specific size or strength. For example, the likelihood of a flood event 

of a given size is defined by the percent chance in a single year, such as the one-percent annual chance of flood, 

also known as a 100-year flood. Hazard likelihood can also be compared using general descriptions or rankings. If 

Element B2

The risk assessment shall include 

information on previous occurrences of 

hazard events and on the probability of 

future hazard events.

44 CFR §201.6(c)(2)(i)

Previous Occurrences

Dale County, Alabama obtained historical data from the National Weather Service for previous damaging tornado 

occurrences in their planning area dating as far back as 1907.

Past Occurrences of Tornadoes

Year Month Day Time 

(CST) County Damage Scale

Path 

Length 

(Miles)

Fatalities Injuries Location

1972 1 13 100 CoffeeDale F2 6 4 88

3 E Enterprise - Fort Rucker - Lake Tholocco 

The tornado struck two trailer parks destroying at 

least 68 mobile homes and 15 vehicles. Several 

other trailers and cars were damaged. All the 

deaths were army dependents. At Fort Rucker, 2 

buildings were damaged and 15 helicopters were 

damaged. 

1968 1 23 1630 Barbour 

Dale F1 10 0 0

Near New Hope 

Approximately 12 homes damaged. 1 house and 

numerous barns and utility sheds damaged or 

destroyed. Timber damaged in several spots.

1955 10 16 1815 CoffeeDale F2 20 0 0

Elba - New Brocton - NE Enterprise - S Ozark

2 barns were destroyed and 2 homes were 

unroofed.

1954 4 16 800 CoffeeDale F2 17 0 1 2 E Enterprise - 3 E Ozark 

4 barns were destroyed.

1937 3 24 1045 Dale F2 0.1 2 0

Ozark 

One small home was leveled. Both fatalities occurred in the home.

1936 1 18 1800 Dale F2 2 1 7 Skipperville 

One person died as 5 homes were destroyed.

1935 5 20 1030 Dale F2 5 3 0

2 E Midland City 

One home and several barns were destroyed. 3 

members of one family were killed when their home 

was demolished.

1907 4 5 1600 CoffeeDale F2 15 1 20 Central City - N Clayhatchee 

Most of the village of Central City was destroyed.

Source: National Weather Service
5-5

Task 5

Conduct a Risk Assessment

general descriptors are used, then they must be defined in the plan. For example, “highly likely” could be defined 

as occurring every 1-10 years, “likely” as occurring every 10-50 years, and “unlikely” as occurring at intervals 

greater than 50 years. Some hazards are most likely during a specific time of year, but others can occur at any time. 

For example, flooding might be more frequent in the spring because of snow melt or during late summer or fall 

because of the hurricane season.

Displaying Hazard Information

The following figures illustrate how communities have used maps to describe the location, extent, previous 

occurrences, and/or probability of future events for various hazards. Note that one map can be used to describe 

several hazard characteristics.

A table or matrix can help summarize information from the hazard descriptions and identify which hazards are 

most significant to the planning area. Appendix A includes an example hazard description summary worksheet (see 

Worksheet 5.1).

Using Historical Frequency to Determine Probability

The figure below shows the average number of thunderstorm days each year throughout the U.S. (Source: NOAA).
5-6 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Task 5

Conduct a Risk Assessment

Storm Surge Hazard (location and extent)
5-7

Task 5

Conduct a Risk Assessment

Earthquake Hazard (location and previous occurrences)
5-8 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Task 5

Conduct a Risk Assessment

Climate Change

The planning team may decide to include a discussion of the 

impacts of climate change in the risk assessment. This is not 

required by Federal mitigation planning regulation, but can 

provide a better understanding of how risk may change in the 

future. Climate change in and of itself may not be a hazard, but 

it may change the characteristics of the hazards that currently 

affect the planning area. The planning team can include 

climate change as a separate section in the plan or within the 

descriptions of the existing hazards, such as severe storms, 

flooding, wildfire, and drought. Climate adaptation strategies, 

which are adjustments in natural or human systems to mitigate 

the impacts of a changing environment, may complement 

other hazard mitigation strategies. For an overview of potential 

changes in your region, consider reviewing the United States 

Global Change Research Program’s Regional Climate Change 

Impacts reports.4

4 The U.S. Global Change Research Program coordinates and integrates Federal research on changes in the global environment and their 

implications for society. See http://www.globalchange.gov/publications/reports/scientific-assessments/us-impacts/regional-climate-changeimpacts.

Wildfire Hazard (location, extent, and previous occurrences)

Climate Change and Climate 

Adaptation

Climate Change: A statistically significant 

variation in either the mean state of the climate 

or in its variability, persisting for an extended 

period (typically decades or longer). Climate 

change may be due to natural internal processes 

or external forcing, or to persistent anthropogenic 

changes in the composition of the atmosphere or 

in land use.

Climate Change Adaptation: The adjustment in 

natural or human systems in response to actual 

or expected climatic stimuli or their effects.

Source: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 

(IPCC), http://www.ipcc.ch/index.htm. 
5-9

Task 5

Conduct a Risk Assessment

Technological Hazards and Human-Caused Threats

The planning team may decide to include technological hazards and human-caused threats in the plan. Technological 

hazards result from accidents or the failure of systems and structures, such as hazardous materials spills or airplane 

accidents. Human-caused incidents, also known as threats, result from intentional actions of an adversary, such as 

a chemical or cyber attack. A Threat and Hazard Identification 

and Risk Assessment (THIRA) expands on the existing hazard 

identification and risk assessment of a local mitigation plan; 

provides a comprehensive approach for assessing risks and 

associated impacts with all types of threat or hazard; and 

identifies a methodology for assessing a broader range of 

capabilities for prevention, protection, response and recovery, 

and mitigation.5

A discussion of technological hazards and human-caused 

threats is not required by Federal mitigation planning 

regulation, but may be included in the plan. See Integrating 

Manmade Hazards into Mitigation Planning (FEMA 386-7)6

 for 

suggestions and information on including these types of 

hazards and threats in the mitigation plan.

2. Identify Community Assets 

In this next step, each participating jurisdiction identifies 

assets at risk to hazards. Assets are defined broadly to include 

anything that is important to the character and function of a 

community and can be described very generally in the following four categories: 

• People 

• Economy

• Built environment

• Natural environment

Although all assets may be affected by hazards, some assets are more vulnerable because of their physical 

characteristics or socioeconomic uses. The purpose of an asset inventory is to identify specific vulnerable 

assets in your community. When updating a mitigation plan, the planning team will update the asset 

inventory to reflect current conditions.

5 Threat and Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment Guide: Comprehensive Preparedness Guide (CPG) 201, First Edition, April 2012; 

http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=5823.

6 See Integrating Manmade Hazards into Mitigation Planning (FEMA 386-7); http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=1915.

Threat and Hazard 

Identification and Risk 

Assessment (THIRA)

A THIRA incorporates technological and humancaused threats in addition to natural hazards. 

Similar to the risk assessment process described 

here, a THIRA describes the types of risk and 

gives them context, such as probability and 

likelihood. The process for conducting a THIRA 

results in a set of capability targets for all stages 

of emergency management, including prevention, 

protection, mitigation, response and recovery. 

The THIRA may be completed separately or build 

on the mitigation plan risk assessment, or HIRA, 

which further defines a community’s vulnerability 

to hazards, particularly for the built environment. 
5-10 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Task 5

Conduct a Risk Assessment

People

People are your most important asset. The risk assessment 

can identify areas of greater population density, as well as 

populations that may have unique vulnerabilities or be less able 

to respond and recover during a disaster. These include visiting 

populations and access and functional needs populations. In 

addition, the risk assessment can identify locations that provide 

health or social services that are critical to post-disaster response 

or recovery capabilities.

Visiting populations include students, second home owners, 

migrant farm workers, and visitors for special events. Special 

events could include large sporting events and festivals where 

large numbers of people are concentrated and vulnerable to 

hazards and threats. Visiting populations may be less familiar 

with the local environment and hazards and less prepared to 

protect themselves during an event.

The term “access and functional needs populations” describes 

groups that may not comfortably or safely access the standard resources offered in emergencies. These populations 

may include children, the elderly, the physically or mentally disabled, non-English speakers, or the medically or 

chemically dependent. Facility locations and support service operations for these populations (e.g., hospitals, 

dependent care facilities, oxygen delivery, and accessible transportation) also need to be considered. 

A variety of data sources are available to help collect information on population, such as the U.S. Census,

7

 state 

population estimates, and the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

8

 Creating maps that show facilities that house 

dependent populations or venues that host large numbers of people will help illustrate the relationship between 

population and potential hazards. 

Economy

After a disaster, economic resiliency drives recovery. Every 

community has specific economic drivers that are important to 

understand when planning to reduce the impacts of hazards and 

disasters to the local economy. Economic assets can be described 

in terms of direct or indirect losses; for example, building or 

inventory damage is direct, but functional downtime and loss 

of employment wages are indirect losses that can be calculated. 

In addition to the primary economic sectors in the community, 

such as manufacturing, agricultural, or service sectors, major 

employers and commercial centers also support the local 

economy. 

7 The US Census Bureau’s Quick Facts give a summary of the population in the selected community. See http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/

index.html.

8 The Bureau of Labor Statistics is the principal Federal agency responsible for measuring labor market activity, working conditions, and price 

changes in the economy. For access to data related to specific communities, visit http://www.bls.gov/data/.

People

• Identify concentrations of residents and 

employees to help target preparedness, 

response, and mitigation actions.

• Identify the types of visiting populations and 

their likely locations to assess potential 

problems. 

• Identify locations and concentrations of 

access and functional needs populations 

to develop mitigation actions that will best 

assist them.

• Consider demographics of projected 

population growth to predict vulnerability.

• Identify locations that provide health or social 

services that are critical to disaster recovery.

Economy

• Identify major employers, primary economic 

sectors (e.g., agriculture), and commercial 

centers whose losses or inoperability would 

have severe impacts on the community and 

its ability to recover from a disaster. 

• Assess dependencies between economic 

sectors and businesses and the infrastructure 

needed to support them.
5-11

Task 5

Conduct a Risk Assessment

Infrastructure and Critical Facilities

Critical Facilities High Potential Loss Facilities Infrastructure Systems

Hospitals and medical facilities Nuclear power plants Water and wastewater

Police and fire stations Dams Power utilities

Emergency operations centers Military and civil defense installations Transportation (roads, railways, waterways)

Evacuation shelters Locations housing hazardous materials Communication systems/centers

Schools Energy pipelines and storage

Airports/heliports

Built Environment

The built environment includes existing structures, 

infrastructure systems, critical facilities, and cultural resources. 

Areas of future growth and development are also an important 

component when assessing the building environment.

Existing Structures. All structures are exposed to risk, but 

certain buildings or concentrations of buildings may be 

more vulnerable because of their location, age, construction 

type, condition, or use. Consult the local tax assessor and 

planning department for information on land use, zoning, 

parcel boundaries and ownership, and types and numbers of 

structures. 

Infrastructure. Infrastructure systems are critical for life safety 

and economic viability and include transportation, power, 

communication, and water and wastewater systems. Many 

critical facilities depend on infrastructure to function. For 

example, hospitals need electricity, water, and sewer to continue 

helping patients. As with critical facilities, the continued 

operations of infrastructure systems during and following a 

disaster are key factors in the severity of impacts and the speed of recovery. 

Critical facilities. Critical facilities are structures and institutions necessary for a community’s response to and 

recovery from emergencies. Critical facilities must continue to operate during and following a disaster to reduce the 

severity of impacts and accelerate recovery. When identifying vulnerabilities, consider both the structural integrity 

and content value of critical facilities and the effects of interrupting their services to the community. 

Built Environment

Existing Structures 

• Identify types of buildings, which include 

commercial, industrial, and single and multifamily residential. 

• Determine the age and construction type of 

buildings to understand building codes in 

effect and quality of construction.

Infrastructure and Critical Facilities

• Develop an inventory of the location, 

construction standards, age, and life 

expectancy of specific critical infrastructure 

and facilities in the planning area. 

• Assess dependencies between infrastructure 

systems, critical facilities, and the people they 

serve.
5-12 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Task 5

Conduct a Risk Assessment

Cultural resources. This inventory should also include cultural 

and historic assets that are unique or irreplaceable. Museums, 

unique geological sites, concert halls, parks, stadiums, or any 

asset that is important to the community can be considered a 

cultural resource. 

Future development. An effective way to reduce future losses 

in your community is to avoid development in known hazard 

areas and to enforce the development of safe structures in other 

areas. In other words, keep people, businesses, and buildings 

out of harm’s way from the beginning. The plan should provide 

a general description of community land uses and development 

trends so that mitigation options can be considered in 

future land use decisions to ensure safe development. Local 

comprehensive or master plans may have information on future 

land use and build-out scenarios. 

Natural Environment

Environmental assets and natural resources are important 

to community identity and quality of life and support the 

economy through agriculture, tourism and recreation, and a 

variety of other ecosystem services, such as clean air and water. 

The natural environment also provides protective functions 

that reduce hazard impacts and increase resiliency. For instance, 

wetlands and riparian areas help absorb flood waters, soils 

and landscaping contribute to stormwater management, 

and vegetation provides erosion control and reduces runoff. 

Conservation of environmental assets may present opportunities 

to meet mitigation and other community objectives, such as 

protecting sensitive habitat, developing parks and trails, or 

contributing to the economy. 

Built Environment

Cultural Resources

• Review state and national historic registries 

and identify cultural assets, such as 

museums, that have significance to the 

community.

Future Development

• Identify areas planned and zoned for future 

development and annexation.

• Identify location, numbers, and types of 

structures of planned new development and 

redevelopment. 

• Review plans for new facilities, infrastructure, 

and other capital improvements, such as 

stormwater management infrastructure, to 

support existing and future development.

Natural Environment

• Identify the most valuable areas that can 

provide protective functions that reduce the 

magnitude of hazard events. 

• Identify critical habitat areas and other 

environmental features that are important to 

protect.
5-13

Task 5

Conduct a Risk Assessment

3. Analyze Risk

Risk analysis involves evaluating vulnerable assets, describing 

potential impacts, and estimating losses for each hazard. The 

purpose of this analysis is to help the community understand 

the greatest risks facing the planning area. This step occurs after 

hazards and assets have been identified. 

Methods for analyzing risk include exposure analysis, historical 

analysis, and scenario analysis. These methods can be expressed 

qualitatively or quantitatively. Qualitative evaluations describe 

the types of impacts that might occur during a hazard event. The 

planning team, subject matter experts, stakeholders, and community members can conduct qualitative evaluations 

by brainstorming and discussing potential impacts. Quantitative evaluations assign values and measure the potential 

losses to the assets at risk. 

Identify Critical Facilities

In the completion of their hazard mitigation plan, Fannin County, Texas included a series of tables to describe their 

community assets. The table excerpt below lists some of the information collected for the county’s critical facilities.

Critical Facility Name Location Facility Type Structure Type Value

Arledge Ridge Water Supply 

(500 customers) Bailey Utilities 3 Water Wells $3M

Bailey City Hall Bailey Administration Wood Frame $100K

Bailey Fie Department Bailey Public Safety Metal Structure $300K

Bailey Water Department

(100 customers) Bailey Utilities 1 Water Well $100K

Boise D Arc Municipal 

Utilities (1,100 customers) NE corner of county Utilities Water System $5M

Bonham City Hall (Police) 301 E 5th, Bonham Administration Masonry Structure $225K

Bonham Fire (Jones Field) 2509 N Center, Bonham Public Safety Metal Structure $150K

Bonham Fire Station 

(Downtown) 220 E 5th, Bonham Public Safety Masonry/Metal $165K

Bonham Wastewater Facility 2501 Seven Oaks, 

Bonham Utilities Wastewater Treatment $14M

Bonham Water Department Bonham Utilities Water System $12M

Buster Cole State Jail 

(800 inmates) 3801 Silo Road, Bonham Public Safety Masonry Structure $75M

Choice Moore Transfer 

Facility (1,200 inmates) 1700 FM 87, Bonham Public Safety Masonry Structure $100M

District #1 Barn Savoy Administration Metal Structure $81K

District #2 Barn Leonard Administration Metal Structure $465K

District #3 Barn Honey Grove Administration Metal Structure $152K

Element B3

The risk assessment shall include an 

overall summary of each hazard and its 

impact on the community.

44 CFR §201.6(c)(2)(ii)
5-14 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Task 5

Conduct a Risk Assessment

Exposure Analysis

An exposure analysis identifies the existing and future assets located in identified hazard areas, often by using GIS for 

analysis and maps for visualization. You also can take into account the magnitude of the hazard, such as assets located 

in high, medium, or low wildfire hazard areas or assets located in different flood frequency areas (1% annual flood 

and 0.2% annual flood risk). 

Exposure analysis can quantify the number, type, and value of structures, critical facilities, and infrastructure located 

in identified hazard areas, as well as assets exposed to multiple hazards. It can also be used to quantify the number of 

future structures and infrastructure possible in hazard prone areas based on current zoning and building codes. 

Exposure of Existing Structures in Flood Hazard Areas

Sacramento County, California used its digital parcel and tax assessor records in combination with FEMA Digital Flood 

Insurance Rate Maps (DFIRM) to determine the count and value of improved parcels in floodplain areas for each jurisdiction 

in its planning area. 

1% Annual Chance 0.2% Annual Chance* X Zone (no flood)

Jurisdiction Parcel 

Count

Structure 

Value

Parcel 

Count

Structure 

Value

Parcel 

Count Structure

Citrus Heights 157 $30,238,980 276 $50,562,943 23,170 $3,718,817,361

Elk Grove 525 $206,224,864 3,967 $812,840,315 41,437 $9,429,151,072

Folsom 8 $2,519,665 124 $168,740,000 19,787 $6,912,827,854

Galt 1 $315,000 - - 6,712 $4,262,908,025

Isleton 324 $29,743,865 - - 9 $1,633,479

Rancho Cordova 21 $9,394,521 976 $153,705,651 16,207 $4,262,908,025

Sacramento 28,192 $6,781,945,735 8,420 $1,736,860,331 94,263 $18,389,505,445

Unincorporated County 4,483 $1,444,981,125 21,415 $3,583,079,793 131,159 $24,219,438,215

Total 33,711 $8,505,363,755 35,178 $6,505,789,033 332,744 $67,955,877,183

Source: Sacramento County 2010 secured roll assessor and parcel date; Sacramento County DFIRM, January 2011.

* This parcel count only includes those parcels in the 0.2% annual chance floodplain. The 0.2% annual chance flood also 

includes all parcels in the 1% annual chance floodplain.
5-15

Task 5

Conduct a Risk Assessment

Exposure of Future Development to Multiple Hazards

This map includes location information for various hazards (flood, wildfire, dam failure, railroad accident, and hazardous materials incident) along with the locations of anticipated future development (new subdivisions, public facilities, and areas of potential commercial redevelopment) and future annexation areas.
5-16 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Task 5

Conduct a Risk Assessment

Historical Analysis

Historical analysis uses information on impacts and losses from previous hazard events to predict potential impacts 

and losses during a similar future event. This can be especially useful for weather-related hazards, such as severe 

winter storms, hail, and drought. Because of the frequency of these events, communities are more likely to have 

experience with and data on impacts and losses. For recent events, consider not only what was damaged, but what 

might have been damaged if the event had been of greater magnitude. For hazard events that have not occurred 

recently, consider new development and infrastructure that would 

now be vulnerable in a similar event.

The plan must address NFIP-insured structures that have been 

repetitively damaged by floods. The definitions for repetitive 

loss are below. Information on repetitive loss properties in your 

community can be obtained from your State NFIP coordinator or 

local floodplain administrator. 

Scenario Analysis

Scenario analysis predicts the impacts of a particular event. Scenarios can be an especially helpful tool for low 

frequency, high consequence events, such as earthquakes, for which historical information is not available. Scenario 

analysis asks “what if” a particular event occurred and predicts potential impacts and losses in terms of monetary 

costs, casualties, infrastructure downtime, and other risk elements. This type of analysis can also be used to describe 

possible impacts for different growth and development scenarios. 

Element B4

All plans must address NFIP insured 

structures that have been repetitively 

damaged by floods.

44 CFR §201.6(c)(2)(ii)

Repetitive and Severe Repetitive Loss Properties 

A repetitive loss property: an NFIP insured structure that has had at least two paid flood losses of more than $1,000 each 

in any 10-year period since 1978. (Source: NFIP Flood Insurance Manual, FEMA. Revised October, 2012. 

http://nfipiservice.com/pdf/October%202012/splashscreen.pdf).

Severe repetitive loss properties single or multifamily residential properties that are covered under an NFIP flood insurance 

policy and: 

1. That have incurred flood-related damage for which 4 or more separate claims payments have been made, with the 

amount of each claim (including building and contents payments) exceeding $5,000, and with the cumulative amount of 

such claims payments exceeding $20,000; or 

2. For which at least 2 separate claims payments (building payments only) have been made under such coverage, with 

cumulative amount of such claims exceeding the market value of the building. 

3. In both instances, at least 2 of the claims must be within 10 years of each other, and claims made within 10 days of 

each other will be counted as 1 claim. 

Source: 44 CFR §79.2(g), Definitions
5-17

Task 5

Conduct a Risk Assessment

Hazus, a FEMA loss estimation software, is one tool that can 

estimate losses for flood, earthquake, and wind hazards. Loss 

estimations can quantify potential fatalities, injuries, direct 

property loss and damage, and indirect economic loss for a 

certain event scenario or over time (annualized loss).

Combine Available Data and Methods

The planning team will likely use a combination of methods 

for analyzing risk and express impacts both qualitatively and 

quantitatively, depending on the hazard and the available time, 

data, staff, and technical resources. For instance, analyzing flood 

risk could include the following:

• A description of the types of impacts that affected 

community assets as a result of previous flood events, 

including public assistance costs and insured and uninsured 

losses. 

• Identification of the number and value of community assets 

located in flood hazard areas and any specific vulnerability 

due to physical characteristics or socioeconomic uses.

• Estimates of the physical, economic, and social impacts of a 

one-percent annual flood event based on a Hazus model.

• A description of future development that may be at risk to 

flooding based on current zoning maps. 

The results of these analyses could be incorporated into a risk 

index or matrix. The purpose of a risk index is to compare 

hazards and rank which pose the greatest risk. Each hazard is 

given a rank based on probability, magnitude, impacts, and 

other characteristics of risk. A risk index can be a helpful way to 

compare multiple hazards, but it is not a complete risk assessment. The plan must include the process for analysis 

and the data underlying the values calculated in the index. 

Regardless of how the results are expressed or the methods of analysis used, this step must result in a description of 

the potential impacts of each hazard on the assets of each participating jurisdiction. 

Hazus is a nationally applicable methodology for 

estimating potential losses from earthquakes, 

hurricane winds and floods. Hazus uses GIS 

technology to estimate physical, economic, and 

social impacts of disasters.

Applications for Mitigation Planning

• Develop earthquake, hurricane, or flood 

models to describe location, extent, and 

probability of the hazard across the planning 

area and potential impacts to critical facilities 

• Conduct a cost benefit or losses avoided 

analysis to support a mitigation strategy

• Use Hazus GIS data inventories to model 

losses from other hazards such as landslide, 

wildfire, dam/levee failure, etc.

Techniques to Improve Model Accuracy

• Update hazard data with flood boundary, flood 

depth grid, earthquake shake maps, and 

hurricane wind data

• Update asset inventory data with population, 

building stock, or utility data

• Edit flood depth damage functions and stream 

discharges

http://www.fema.gov/protecting-our-communities/hazus
5-18 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Task 5

Conduct a Risk Assessment

Scenario Analysis

Although the probability of a significant earthquake occurring in New York City is low, the density and high value of the 

structures and infrastructure result in significant estimates of potential losses. The New York City Hazard Mitigation 

Planning Team estimated significant annualized potential losses for the City using Hazus-MH. Annualized losses are an 

estimated long-term value of earthquake losses to the general building stock in any single year. The table and figure, 

excerpts from the New York City Hazard Mitigation Plan (New York City Office of Emergency Management, 2008) below 

display these estimates.

Annualized Capital Stock Losses for Earthquakes ($1,000s)

Borough Structural Damage Non-Structural Damage Contents Damage Total

Brooklyn 2,883 9,002 2,932 14,817

Bronx 825 2,594 851 4,270

Manhattan 3,056 9,893 3,593 16,542

Queens 1,542 4,881 1,776 8,200

Staten Island 217 837 363 1,417

Total 8,524 27,207 9,516 45,247
5-19

Task 5

Conduct a Risk Assessment

Updating to Reflect Changes in Development 

Plan updates must describe changes in development that have occurred since the last plan was approved. The 

planning team will need to gather information from planning and building departments on recent and planned 

development to evaluate how vulnerability may have increased or decreased. Development in identified hazard areas 

and construction not built to updated building codes increase your community’s vulnerability to future hazards and 

disasters. 

The planning team may also consider other conditions that affect 

vulnerability, such as climate variability, declining or increasing 

populations, infrastructure expansion, or economic shifts. If no 

changes in development occurred or did not affect the 

jurisdiction’s overall vulnerability, plan updates can 

validate the information in the previously approved plan.

4. Summarize Vulnerability

The previous three steps in the risk assessment process generate 

large amounts of information regarding hazards, vulnerable 

assets, and potential impacts and losses. This information needs 

to be summarized so that the community can understand the 

most significant risks and vulnerabilities, not only to inform the 

mitigation strategy, but also to communicate findings to elected 

officials and other stakeholders to support their decision making. 

The plan must provide an overall summary of each jurisdiction’s 

vulnerability to the identified hazards.

One recommended approach is to develop problem statements. For instance, your analysis of impacts and losses 

helps you to identify which critical facilities are located in identified hazard areas, the neighborhood that has 

experienced the most flood damage in the past, or which hazard-prone areas are zoned for future development. This 

information on the issues of greatest concern can be summarized into problem statements, such as in the following 

examples. The planning team may evaluate the impacts and develop problem statements for each hazard, as well as 

identify the problems or issues that apply to all hazards.

Plan updates will need to revise the problems statements to reflect the current risk assessment. This may 

include developing new statements and removing or revising ones that are no longer valid because 

mitigation projects have addressed the risk or other conditions have changed. 

Problem Statements

• The North Creek Sewage Treatment Plant is located in the 100-year floodplain and has been damaged by past flood 

events. It serves 10,000 residential and commercial properties.

• Newberg City recently annexed the South Woods area located in the wildland-urban interface. The City’s land use and 

building codes do not address wildfire hazard areas. Future development in South Woods will increase vulnerability to 

wildfires. 

• The City of Greenville is located in a seismic hazard area subject to severe ground shaking and soil liquefaction. Hazus 

predicts a 6.0 magnitude event would result in $10.5 million in structural losses and $40 million in non-structural 

losses. Damage will be greatest to the 100 unreinforced masonry buildings (pre- building code) located in the 

downtown business district.

• The schools are a central focus of the community and offer opportunities to educate the public about hazards, risk, 

and mitigation. In addition, many school facilities are vulnerable to one or more hazards, including flooding, earthquake, 

tornado, and severe winter storms. 

Element D1

A local jurisdiction must review and 

revise its plan to reflect changes in 

development.

44 CFR §201.6(d)(3)

Element B3

The risk assessment shall include an 

overall summary of each hazard and its 

impact on the community.

44 CFR §201.6(c)(2)(ii)
5-20 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Task 5

Conduct a Risk Assessment

Documentation of the Risk Assessment

The quantity of information produced as part of a risk assessment varies dramatically depending on the size of 

communities, number of participating jurisdictions, number of hazards, available data, technical expertise, and 

other factors. While the process for conducting the risk assessment needs to be described as part of the planning 

process, some data inputs and outputs will likely not need to be included in the main body of the plan document. 

Some of this information may be included in appendices, and some may be integrated and updated as part of your 

community’s GIS program, record keeping, and other systems. Information in the plan document should focus on 

communicating the analysis and findings to a non-scientific audience of planners, policy makers, and community 

members. 

Conclusion

Task 5 describes how to complete a local risk assessment by describing the hazards, identifying community assets, 

analyzing the risks or impacts of the hazards to those assets, and summarizing the results and overall vulnerability 

of your community. This information forms the factual basis for developing a comprehensive strategy to reduce 

vulnerability and risk, which is described in Task 6 – Develop a Mitigation Strategy.
Task 6

Develop a Mitigation Strategy
About the Cover: The St. George, Utah trail system was started with Hazard Mitigation Grant Program funds and was the result 

of property acquisition (Source: http://www.fema.gov/mitigationbp/bestPracticeDetail.do?mitssId=8111).
6-1

Task 6

Develop a Mitigation Strategy

Task 6 – Develop a Mitigation Strategy

The heart of the mitigation plan is the mitigation strategy, which serves as the long-term blueprint for reducing 

the potential losses identified in the risk assessment. The mitigation strategy describes how the community will 

accomplish the overall purpose, or mission, of the planning process. Task 6 provides suggestions for developing a 

new or updating an existing mitigation strategy.

The Mitigation Strategy: Goals, Actions, Action Plan 

The mitigation strategy is made up of three main required 

components: mitigation goals, mitigation actions, and an 

action plan for implementation. These provide the framework 

to identify, prioritize, and implement actions to reduce risk to 

hazards. 

Mitigation goals are general guidelines that explain what the 

community wants to achieve with the plan (see Figure 6.1). 

They are usually broad policy-type statements that are longterm, and they represent visions for reducing or avoiding 

losses from the identified hazards.

• Example goal: Minimize new development in hazardprone areas. 

Mitigation actions are specific projects and activities that help 

achieve the goals. 

• Example action: Amend zoning ordinance to permit only 

open space land uses within floodplains.

The action plan describes how the mitigation actions will be 

implemented, including how those actions will be prioritized, 

administered, and incorporated into the community’s 

existing planning mechanisms. In a multi-jurisdictional plan, 

each jurisdiction must have an action plan specific to that 

jurisdiction and its vulnerabilities.

Although not required, some communities choose to develop 

objectives to help define or organize mitigation actions (see 

Figure 6.2). Objectives are broader than specific actions, but 

are measurable, unlike goals. Objectives connect goals with 

the actual mitigation actions, as shown in the example. Figure 6.1: Mitigation strategy

Figure 6.2: Objective linking goal and action
6-2 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Task 6

Develop a Mitigation Strategy

Mitigation Goals 

The plan must include hazard mitigation goals that represent 

what the community seeks to achieve through mitigation 

plan implementation. Clear goals that are agreed upon by the 

planning team, elected officials, and the public provide the basis 

for prioritizing mitigation actions. Mitigation goals, such as the 

examples from local plans shown below, are required to be in the 

plan and must be consistent with the hazards identified in the risk 

assessment. 

Whether you are updating goals or developing new ones, here are some considerations:

• Risk assessment findings. Review the findings of the risk assessment, especially the problem statements. Group 

the problem statements by themes, such as hazards, assets at risk, or location. Several problem statements or 

groups may lead to a single mitigation goal. 

• Outreach findings. Consider themes that stood out during planning team meetings and outreach activities. For 

instance, the need for improved education and awareness about hazards may be a common theme.

• Community goals. Review existing plans and other policy documents to ensure hazard mitigation goals are 

consistent with the goals of other community plans, such as the comprehensive plan, and other objectives 

established by the governing body. Mitigation goals that complement other plans and policies may garner more 

support for hazard mitigation.

• State hazard mitigation goals. Because the State Hazard Mitigation Plan documents the State’s goals for 

reducing risk and allocating resources, it may be strategic to align your plan’s goals to the State’s plan.

If you are updating a plan, the planning team should evaluate the previous goals and reaffirm or change 

them based on current conditions and priorities.

Element C3

The hazard mitigation strategy shall 

include a description of mitigation 

goals to reduce or avoid long-term 

vulnerabilities to the identified hazards.

44 CFR §201.6(c)(3)(i)

Pass Christian (MS) Hazard Mitigation Plan Goals

Goal 1 – Minimize loss of life, injury, and damage to property, the economy, and the environment from natural hazards

Goal 2 – Build and enhance local mitigation capabilities to ensure individual safety, reduce damage to public buildings and 

ensure continuity of emergency services

Goal 3 – Maintain Pass Christian’s natural and man-made systems that protect the community from natural hazards

Curry County (OR) Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Goals

• Minimize and prevent damage to public and private buildings and infrastructure

• Reduce economic losses

• Increase cooperation and coordination among private entities, local agencies, State agencies, and Federal agencies

• Increase education, outreach, and awareness

• Protect natural and cultural resources
6-3

Task 6

Develop a Mitigation Strategy

Mitigation Actions

A mitigation action is a specific action, project, activity, or 

process taken to reduce or eliminate long-term risk to people 

and property from hazards and their impacts. Implementing 

mitigation actions helps achieve the plan’s mission and goals. 

The actions to reduce vulnerability to threats and hazards form 

the core of the plan and are a key outcome of the planning 

process. 

Types of Mitigation Actions 

The primary types of mitigation actions to reduce long-term 

vulnerability include:

• local plans and regulations,

• structure and infrastructure projects, 

• natural systems protection, and 

• education and awareness programs.

Table 6.1 on the following page provides definitions and examples for these types of mitigation actions.

Preparedness and Response Actions

Mitigation actions reduce or eliminate long-term risk and are different from actions taken to prepare for or respond 

to hazard events. Mitigation activities lessen or eliminate the need for preparedness or response resources in the 

future. When analyzing risks and identifying mitigation actions, the planning team may also identify emergency 

response or operational preparedness actions. Examples include:

• Creating mutual aid agreements with neighboring communities to meet emergency response needs.

• Purchasing radio communications equipment for the Fire Department.

• Developing procedures for notifying citizens of available shelter locations during and following an event.

For some hazards, such as tornados, including preparedness actions in the mitigation plan may be necessary 

and practical. The mitigation plan may be the best place for your community to capture and justify the need for 

these actions. However, these will not take the place of or meet the Federal mitigation planning requirements for 

identifying mitigation actions. It is important that the planning team understands the difference and can distinguish 

between mitigation and other emergency management activities. 

Identifying Mitigation Actions

The mitigation planning regulation requires that each participating 

jurisdiction identify and analyze a comprehensive range of specific 

mitigation actions and projects to reduce the impacts of the hazards 

identified in the risk assessment. The emphasis is on the impacts or 

vulnerabilities identified in the risk assessment, not on the hazards 

themselves. As described in Task 5, these impacts and vulnerabilities 

may be summarized in problem statements. Some hazards may not 

have many impacts, or the impacts may already be mitigated. In this 

case, fewer mitigation actions may be identified than for a hazard 

causing more frequent or severe impacts.

Infrastructure Project and Natural Systems 

Protection: This reconstructed culvert in 

Moosalamoo National Recreation Area in 

Arlington, Vermont uses rocks and sand to 

simulate a natural fish passage.

Element C4

The hazard mitigation strategy shall 

include a section that identifies and 

analyzes a comprehensive range of 

specific mitigation actions and projects 

being considered to reduce the 

effects of each hazard, with particular 

emphasis on new and existing 

buildings and infrastructure.

44 CFR §201.6(c)(3)(ii)
6-4 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Task 6

Develop a Mitigation Strategy

Table 6.1: Types of Mitigation Actions

Mitigation 

Type Description Examples

Local Plans and 

Regulations

These actions include government authorities, 

policies, or codes that influence the way land and 

buildings are developed and built. 

• Comprehensive plans

• Land use ordinances

• Subdivision regulations

• Development review

• Building codes and enforcement

• NFIP Community Rating System

• Capital improvement programs

• Open space preservation

• Stormwater management regulations and 

master plans

Structure and 

Infrastructure 

Projects

These actions involve modifying existing 

structures and infrastructure to protect them 

from a hazard or remove them from a hazard 

area. This could apply to public or private 

structures as well as critical facilities and 

infrastructure. 

This type of action also involves projects to 

construct manmade structures to reduce the 

impact of hazards.

Many of these types of actions are projects 

eligible for funding through the FEMA Hazard 

Mitigation Assistance program. Task 9 – Create 

a Safe and Resilient Community provides more 

information on these programs. 

• Acquisitions and elevations of structures in 

flood prone areas

• Utility undergrounding

• Structural retrofits.

• Floodwalls and retaining walls

• Detention and retention structures

• Culverts

• Safe rooms

Natural 

Systems 

Protection

These are actions that minimize damage and 

losses and also preserve or restore the functions 

of natural systems.

• Sediment and erosion control

• Stream corridor restoration

• Forest management

• Conservation easements

• Wetland restoration and preservation

Education and 

Awareness 

Programs

These are actions to inform and educate citizens, 

elected officials, and property owners about 

hazards and potential ways to mitigate them. 

These actions may also include participation 

in national programs, such as StormReady1

or Firewise2 Communities. Although this 

type of mitigation reduces risk less directly 

than structural projects or regulation, it is an 

important foundation. A greater understanding 

and awareness of hazards and risk among local 

officials, stakeholders, and the public is more 

likely to lead to direct actions.

• Radio or television spots

• Websites with maps and information

• Real estate disclosure

• Presentations to school groups or 

neighborhood organizations

• Mailings to residents in hazard-prone areas.

• StormReady 

• Firewise Communities

1 For more information on the National Weather Service’s StormReady, see http://www.stormready.noaa.gov/.

2 For more information on the Firewise Communities program, see http://www.firewise.org/.
6-5

Task 6

Develop a Mitigation Strategy

A comprehensive range means that communities analyze, or evaluate, different types of mitigation actions. For 

example, building retrofits, infrastructure protection, and changes in local ordinances represent a mix of structural 

and non-structural approaches. In addition, each jurisdiction must consider actions that reduce risk to existing 

buildings and infrastructure, as well as limit risk to new development and redevelopment. 

The planning team may identify low-cost mitigation actions that can be readily implemented, such as developing 

an outreach program to encourage homeowners to secure furnishings and utilities to prevent injuries and damage 

during an earthquake. Other actions may depend on available funding, such as retrofitting critical infrastructure. 

Though funding and support may not be immediately available for every action, including the actions in the plan 

may lead to future opportunities for implementation. For example, some actions can be implemented following a 

disaster when additional funding and political and public support are available, such as acquiring homes in a flood 

hazard area. Additionally, if actions are not included in the plan, securing funding may be more difficult once it 

becomes available.

To identify potential mitigation actions, the planning team needs to review the risk assessment and assess 

capabilities. 

1. Review Risk Assessment

The planning team should start with the problem statements developed from the risk assessment. For each problem 

statement, consider different types of mitigation actions for addressing the problem. See the example on the page 

6-6. 

You may have multiple ideas that are categorized under one type (e.g., education and awareness or local plans and 

regulations) and no ideas under another type. However, the intent is to think comprehensively when identifying 

potential actions and to consider future development. 

Mitigation Ideas

To find effective solutions, innovative ideas, and best practices for mitigating risks, consult the following resources: 

Ask subject matter experts. Experts on the planning team and among stakeholders can help evaluate actions that 

provide long-term solutions. For example, if the problem is repetitive flood damage in a specific location, but you are 

unsure if the flooding is caused by undersized culverts, inadequate storm drainage, or debris, you could ask an engineer to 

evaluate the flooding and recommend potential solutions.

Collect ideas from stakeholders and public. The outreach strategy developed as part of Task 3 provides opportunities 

for gathering ideas and input from the public. Surveys and questionnaires are effective tools for gathering information on 

alternative mitigation actions that would be preferred by community members.

Research existing guides and resources. Many publications and web-based resources are available for identifying 

mitigation actions. Some states have prepared technical guides to assist local communities. The State Hazard Mitigation 

Plan describes state funding sources and priorities for mitigation. FEMA’s website includes a Mitigation Best Practices 

Portfolio* that provides mitigation success stories and case studies from communities across the country and Mitigation 

Ideas: A Resource for Reducing Risk to Natural Hazards** that lists potential mitigation actions by hazard type.

Review FEMA Hazard Mitigation Assistance (HMA)*** eligible activities. HMA grant programs provide funding for 

eligible mitigation activities that reduce disaster losses and protect life and property from future disaster damages. The 

most recent Hazard Mitigation Assistance Unified Guidance provides information on eligible project activities.

* http://www.fema.gov/mitigation-best-practices-portfolio

** http://www.fema.gov/hazard-mitigation-planning-resources

*** http://www.fema.gov/hazard-mitigation-assistance
6-6 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Task 6

Develop a Mitigation Strategy

For certain problems, you may not have enough information about a particular situation to recommend a specific 

mitigation action. In these cases, the mitigation action can be to recommend further study. For example, if your 

community has 20 critical facilities that are threatened, further technical study may be needed to determine which 

facilities should be addressed first. Your recommendation could be “Conduct an assessment of the 20 critical 

facilities over the next 3 years to determine the most appropriate mitigation actions.”

2. Assess Capabilities

The mitigation strategy is based on existing local authorities, policies, programs, and resources, as well as the ability 

to expand on and improve these existing tools. As part of Task 4, the planning team reviewed existing capabilities for 

reducing long-term vulnerability to hazards. Those capabilities can be assessed to identify gaps to be addressed and 

strengths to enhance through new mitigation actions. For instance, can gaps in design or enforcement of existing 

regulations be addressed through additional personnel or a change in procedure or policy? Could an existing 

education program be improved to cover the most significant hazards and better target non-English speakers? Are 

additional studies, reports, or plans needed to understand risk? 

Jurisdictions participating in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) can consider actions to enhance their 

floodplain management program, such as addressing repetitive loss properties and improving standards beyond the 

minimum requirements for NFIP participation. 

Communities also must consider actions that reduce risk to future development. The planning team can evaluate 

the effects of current growth plans and regulations (i.e., comprehensive plans, zoning and subdivisions ordinances, 

building codes, and capital improvement programs) on community safety and consider how these could be updated 

to reduce the community’s vulnerability. For instance, development review procedures may be revised to include a 

hazard assessment for new development. The types of questions that the community can ask include:

• Will population growth and future land use plans put more people in hazardous areas?

• Will current redevelopment policies increase the population and property vulnerable to hazards?

• Will planned infrastructure extensions encourage unsafe development by facilitating access to hazardous areas?

Identify Actions to Address Problem Statements

Problem Statement

In wildland-urban interface areas, two critical facilities (school and county maintenance shop) and $500 million in property 

value are at risk, and there is increasing development pressure.

Potential Actions

Local Planning and Regulations: Adopt a wildfire mitigation ordinance to specify conditions for the use and development of 

wildfire hazard areas to mitigate risk to life and property. 

Structure and Infrastructure Projects: Retrofit the school and the county maintenance shop with fire-resistant construction 

materials and create a defensible space around the perimeters of the buildings.

Natural Systems Protection: Identify large tracts of vacant land in high hazard areas for acquisition by the Department of 

Parks to develop trails and preserve open space.

Education and Awareness Programs: Implement a program using Firewise Communities materials to educate property 

owners in the wildland-urban interface on actions they can take to reduce risk.
6-7

Task 6

Develop a Mitigation Strategy

Evaluating and Prioritizing Mitigation Actions

Not all of the identified actions may be included in the final action plan because of technical feasibility, political 

acceptance, lack of funding, and other constraints. The planning team will evaluate and prioritize the most suitable 

mitigation actions for the community to implement. The plan must include a mitigation strategy that 1) analyzes 

actions and/or projects considered to reduce the impacts of hazards identified in the risk assessment and 2) 

identifies the actions and/or projects that each jurisdiction intends to implement. 

Benefit-Cost Review

The one criterion that must be part of the evaluation and 

prioritization process is benefit-cost review. That is, the planning 

team must consider the benefits that would result from a 

mitigation action versus the cost. This does not mean a full benefitcost analysis, such as the FEMA BCA Module,

1

 but a planning level 

assessment of whether the costs are reasonable compared to the 

probable benefits. Cost estimates do not have to be exact but can be 

based on experience and judgment. 

Benefits include losses avoided, such as the number and value 

of structures and infrastructure protected by the action and the 

population protected from injury and loss of life. Qualitative 

benefits, such as quality of life and natural and beneficial functions 

of ecosystems, can also be included in the review.

Evaluation Criteria

The planning team needs to agree upon the other criteria that will 

be used to analyze the mitigation actions. Suggested criteria and 

sample planning team questions to evaluate each mitigation action 

alternative include:

• Life safety. How effectively will the action protect lives and 

prevent injuries?

• Property protection. How significant will the action 

be at eliminating or reducing damage to structures and 

infrastructure?

• Technical. Is the mitigation action technically feasible? 

Is it a long-term solution? Eliminate actions that, from a 

technical standpoint, will not meet the goals. 

• Political. Does the public support the mitigation action? Is 

there the political will to support it?

1 The FEMA BCA program consists of guidelines, methodologies, and software modules for a range of major natural hazards. More information 

can be found here: http://www.fema.gov/government/grant/bca.shtm.

Element C5

The hazard mitigation strategy shall 

include an action plan, describing how 

the actions identified will be prioritized, 

implemented, and administered by 

each local jurisdiction. Prioritization 

shall include a special emphasis 

on the extent to which benefits are 

maximized according to a cost benefit 

review of the proposed projects and 

their associated costs. 

44 CFR §201.6(c)(3)(iii)

For multi-jurisdictional plans, there 

must be identifiable action items 

specific to the jurisdiction requesting 

FEMA approval or credit of the plan.

44 CFR §201.6(c)(3)(iv)

Balancing Mitigation with 

Private Property Rights 

While evaluating and prioritizing mitigation 

actions, and particularly regulatory activities, it 

is important to consider any potential impact to 

the rights or interests of private property owners. 

Generally, states delegate the authority to 

enact regulations designed to protect the public 

health, safety, and welfare to local governments 

through local police power. While regulations 

have been enacted in many places to mitigate 

natural disasters, these powers are not without 

limitation and may need to strike a balance 

with private property rights. If your evaluation of 

a mitigation action raises any such concerns, 

it is recommended that you consult with your 

appropriate legal counsel. 
6-8 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Task 6

Develop a Mitigation Strategy

• Legal. Does the community have the authority to implement the action?

• Environmental. What are the potential environmental impacts of the action? Will it comply with environmental 

regulations? 

• Social. Will the proposed action adversely affect one segment of the population? Will the action disrupt 

established neighborhoods, break up voting districts, or cause the relocation of lower income people?

• Administrative. Does the community have the personnel and administrative capabilities to implement the 

action and maintain it, or will outside help be necessary? 

• Local champion. Is there a strong advocate for the action or project among local departments and agencies who 

will support the action’s implementation?

• Other community objectives. Does the action advance other community objectives, such as capital 

improvements, economic development, environmental quality, or open space preservation? Does it support the 

policies of the comprehensive plan?

Action Prioritization 

After careful evaluation, the planning team will have a list of actions that are acceptable and practical for addressing 

the problems identified in the risk assessment. The planning team can prioritize actions for implementation by 

assessing the importance of each item relative to the plan’s goals and the risks and capabilities. Actions could 

be prioritized by numerical ranking; high, medium, or low designation; chronological ranking by date of 

implementation; or other methods. Prioritization may change over time in response to changes in community 

characteristics and risks and to take advantage of available resources.

The evaluation and prioritization process helps the planning team weigh the pros and cons of different action 

alternatives. However, the decision-making process is not necessarily straightforward; it is highly specific to each 

jurisdiction. The example that follows describes one approach for identifying and prioritizing mitigation actions. 

Your process should be appropriate for the size, number, and capabilities of the communities involved. Each 

participating jurisdiction may have different priorities for implementing actions. Appendix A includes an example of 

a worksheet that could be used to facilitate the evaluation and prioritization process (see Worksheet 6.1).

Action Plan for Implementation

A common failure of some mitigation plans is that they are never implemented. The action plan lays the groundwork 

for implementation by describing how the mitigation plan will be incorporated into existing planning mechanisms 

and how the mitigation actions will be prioritized, implemented, and administered by each jurisdiction. 

Action Identification and Prioritization

1. Form workgroups of planning team members and/or stakeholders to identify actions to address a set of problems 

statements from the risk assessment, which could be grouped by hazard or action type.

2. Ask the planning team to agree upon the criteria and process for evaluating and prioritizing the actions.

3. Present mitigation action alternatives and criteria to the public, elected officials, and other stakeholders for feedback 

and acceptance.

4. Develop a worksheet and/or conduct a facilitated process to evaluate the list of alternatives based on the identified 

criteria and plan goals.

5. Ask the planning team to vote on or rank their highest priority actions for implementation.
6-9

Task 6

Develop a Mitigation Strategy

Incorporation into Existing Plans and Procedures

For a community to succeed in reducing risks in the long term, the 

information and recommendations of the mitigation plan should 

be integrated throughout government operations. Through the 

planning process, partnerships are formed, and sustained action 

can increase the community’s resilience to disasters. Many other 

local plans, such as comprehensive, stormwater management, 

sustainability, economic development, and area plans present 

opportunities to address hazard mitigation in a way that can 

support multiple community objectives. Mitigation plans must 

describe the community’s process to integrate the data, analysis, 

and mitigation goals and actions into other planning mechanisms. 

First, the plan must identify the existing planning mechanisms 

where hazard mitigation information and actions may be incorporated. In this context, planning mechanisms mean 

governance structures used to manage local land use development and community decision making. The review of 

community capabilities described in Task 4 identifies this information. Multi-jurisdictional plans must describe each 

participating jurisdiction’s individual process for integrating the plan into their local planning mechanisms.

In some cases, a community may choose to develop their hazard mitigation plan wholly within their comprehensive 

planning process. Hazard Mitigation: Integrating Best Practices into Planning2 provides technical advice and examples of 

communities that have successfully integrated mitigation into local comprehensive plans and other types of 

local planning processes. Some existing processes may not allow for integration due to timing, budgets, or other 

constraints. For example, a community may determine that the goals and actions of the hazard mitigation plan will 

be considered in the next 5-year capital improvements planning process, which may be updated annually. 

To identify how the plan can be incorporated into other plans, programs, and procedures, consider the following: 

Integrate Plan Goals with other Community Objectives

The overall mission and goals for risk reduction and community 

safety may be incorporated into the objectives and policies of 

other plans. Goals for disaster resiliency can also complement 

the sustainability programs being developed by many 

communities. The following are examples of policies that can 

be included in the comprehensive plan and are implemented 

through zoning and building codes, capital improvements 

programs, and permitting processes: 

• Protect life and property in high hazard areas by limiting 

densities of new development 

• Limit the extension of public infrastructure in high hazard 

areas

• Reduce the vulnerability of future development in high 

hazard areas by reviewing development regulations 

2 Schwab, James, ed. 2010. Hazard Mitigation: Integrating Best Practices into Planning. Planning Advisory Service Report No. 560. Chicago: 

American Planning Association. This report is available through the FEMA Library at http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=4267.

Element C6

The plan shall include a process by 

which local governments incorporate 

the requirements of the mitigation 

plan into other planning mechanisms 

such as comprehensive or capital 

improvements, when appropriate.

44 CFR §201.6(c)(4)(ii)

Education and Awareness Program: First grade 

students learn about natural disasters during a 

FEMA For Kids workshop.
6-10 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Task 6

Develop a Mitigation Strategy

Use the Risk Assessment to Inform Plans and Policies

The risk assessment provides data, analysis, and maps that can be integrated into other plans to inform policies and 

decision-making. For instance, the risk assessment can form the basis for other emergency management program 

activities, including the emergency operations and evacuation planning. Incorporation of hazard information and 

mapping into land use plans, zoning and subdivision codes, and the development review process can guide growth 

and redevelopment away from high-risk locations. This information can also be used to design and site future public 

facilities to minimize exposure to hazards. 

Implement Mitigation Actions through Existing Mechanisms

Where possible, the community should implement the identified mitigation actions through existing plans and 

policies, which already have support from the community and policy makers. For instance, a Community Wildfire 

Protection Plan3

 identifies a community’s priorities for wildfire fuel reduction projects. A capital improvements 

program outlines a jurisdiction’s spending plan for capital projects that support existing and future developments, 

such as roads, water, and sewer systems, usually over a 5-year period. Mitigation projects that could be included in 

the capital improvements plan include strengthening at-risk critical facilities or acquiring open space in identified 

hazard areas. Other implementation tools for mitigation actions could include staff work plans, permitting 

procedures, job descriptions, and training.

Think Mitigation Pre- and Post-Disaster

Some communities have recovery or post-disaster redevelopment plans that identify the operations and strategies 

the community will take post-disaster to recover more effectively and to become more resilient in future disasters. 

Mitigation actions to reduce long-term vulnerability, such as effective building code adoption and enforcement, are 

applied in both the pre-disaster mitigation planning and post-disaster recovery activities of a community. Effective 

recovery planning builds on existing community goals and plans and incorporates the mitigation strategy into longterm recovery and reinvestment decisions.

Implementation of Mitigation Actions

The action plan also identifies how specific mitigation actions will 

be implemented, including who is responsible for which actions, 

what funding mechanisms and other resources are available or 

will be pursued, when the actions will be completed, and how 

they are prioritized. The capability assessment developed in Task 4 

can be helpful in determining the agencies responsible for certain 

functions in the community and the available financial resources.

Assign Responsible Agency

The planning team needs to determine which department or 

agency is most appropriate to lead each action. In order to clearly 

describe how actions will be implemented and administered, 

at a minimum, a specific agency, department, or position must 

be assigned to the action, not the jurisdiction as a whole. If 

coordinating with other agencies will be necessary, this is a good 

time for them to provide input on the steps and timeframes 

necessary to carry out the actions.

3 The Healthy Forest Restoration Act incentivizes and defines the development of Community Wildfire Protection Plans by at-risk communities. 

See http://www.forestsandrangelands.gov/communities/cwpp.shtml.

Element C5

The hazard mitigation strategy shall 

include an action plan, describing how 

the actions identified will be prioritized, 

implemented, and administered by 

each local jurisdiction. Prioritization 

shall include a special emphasis 

on the extent to which benefits are 

maximized according to a cost benefit 

review of the proposed projects and 

their associated costs. 

44 CFR §201.6(c)(3)(iii)

For multi-jurisdictional plans, there 

must be identifiable action items 

specific to the jurisdiction requesting 

FEMA approval or credit of the plan.

44 CFR §201.6(c)(3)(iv)
6-11

Task 6

Develop a Mitigation Strategy

Identify Potential Resources

Resources include funding, technical assistance, and materials. Estimating the cost of an action will help the 

planning team target the most appropriate resources. Sources of local funding may include the general operating 

budget, capital improvement budgets, staff time, impact fees, special assessment districts, and more. Your State 

Hazard Mitigation Officer and the FEMA mitigation planning webpage can help you identify potential State and 

Federal resources. The planning team should also consider opportunities for private sector funding and partnerships, 

as well as resources that may be provided by academic institutions.

Estimate the Timeframe

The planning team and responsible agencies must develop a timeframe for implementing each mitigation action. 

Funding cycles can affect when you can begin implementing an action. The timeframe can detail when the action 

will be started, interim steps, and when it should be fully implemented. Timeframes can also be general, such as “3 

to 5 years,” or defined for short, medium, and long term. 

Other implementation items that you may consider describing in the action plan are goals addressed, partner 

agencies, steps for implementation, and estimated budget. An action implementation worksheet can be a good 

approach for formatting the information collected for each action and its implementation. An example worksheet 

is provided in Appendix A (see Worksheet 6.2). The planning team may decide to assign the responsible agency for 

each action first. Each agency can then be responsible for developing the action implementation worksheet with 

additional information on how the action will be administered and implemented. If appropriate, the community 

can also begin developing project scopes of work, schedules, and budgets, particularly where Federal funding 

applications are anticipated. FEMA’s approval of the plan does not mean approved funding for projects identified in 

the plan or an approved application for Federal assistance.

Updating the Mitigation Strategy

One of the most important steps in updating your plan is to refine the community’s mitigation strategy, particularly 

in light of experiences gained from the implementation of the previous plan. To continue to be an effective 

representation of the jurisdiction’s overall strategy for reducing risk to natural hazards, the updated 

local mitigation plan must reflect current conditions and progress in mitigation efforts. The 5-year plan 

update is an opportunity for each jurisdiction to assess its previous goals and actions, evaluate progress in 

implementing the action plan, and adjust its actions to address current realities. The mitigation strategy should also 

be revised following disasters to determine if the recommended actions are still appropriate given the impacts of the 

event. 

Evaluate Progress in Implementation

Plan updates must reflect progress in local mitigation efforts. 

Whereas goals may not change significantly over a 5-year 

timeframe, the integration of the plan into existing planning 

mechanisms and the implementation of mitigation actions 

demonstrate progress in risk reduction.

Integration of Hazard Mitigation 

The updated plan must explain how the jurisdiction(s) 

incorporated the previous mitigation plan, when appropriate, 

into other planning mechanisms over the last 5 years as a demonstration of progress in local mitigation efforts. 

The updated plan must continue to describe how the current mitigation strategy, including the goals and hazard 

mitigation actions, will be incorporated into other planning mechanisms over the next 5 years.

Element D2

A local jurisdiction must review and 

revise its plan to reflect progress in 

local mitigation efforts.

44 CFR §201.6(d)(3)
6-12 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Task 6

Develop a Mitigation Strategy

Completion of Mitigation Actions

The plan also must describe the status of the mitigation actions identified in the previous plan by describing those 

that have been completed or not completed. For actions that have not been completed, the plan must either describe 

whether the action is no longer relevant or indicate whether it is included as part of the updated action plan. 

The planning team may ask the local agencies and departments assigned responsibility for the implementation of 

mitigation actions in the previous plan to provide a status update on each of their actions. For instance, agencies 

could provide an evaluation of the following: 

• If the action was completed, did it have the intended results? Did it achieve the goals outlined in the plan? What 

factors contributed to success?

• If the action was not completed, what were the barriers to implementation? For instance, was there a lack of 

political support, funding, staff availability, or other obstacle? Should the action be included in the updated 

mitigation strategy?

Task 7 describes how to develop a process for monitoring and evaluating the plan that can be used to evaluate 

progress. 

Describe Changes in Priorities

The plan must describe if and how any priorities changed since 

the plan was previously approved. Your community’s mitigation 

priorities may change over time for a variety of reasons. Addressing 

changes in priorities allows you to redirect actions to reflect 

current conditions, including financial and political realities, 

or changes in conditions or priorities due to disaster events. In 

addition, now that the community has implemented some actions, 

you may apply lessons learned about what works and does not. 

New actions can be identified based on the updated risk assessment and capability assessment. New actions are 

prioritized in combination with the actions carried forward from the previous plan. Factors that may influence 

changes in priorities include the following:

• Altered conditions due to disaster events and recovery priorities

• Changing local resources, community needs, and capabilities

• New State or Federal policies and funding resources

• New hazard impacts identified in the updated risk assessment

• Changes in development patterns that could influence the effects of hazards

• New partners that have come to the table

If no changes in priorities are necessary, plan updates may validate the information in the previously approved plan.

Communicating the Mitigation Action Plan

You may consider how to present the final action plan in a format that can be easily used and referenced by 

community members and officials. The mitigation strategy or action plan is the primary tool to obtain funding, 

assign priorities, guide the decision making process, and track progress in future plan updates. A matrix, such as the 

example provided on page 6-14, can be a good format for summarizing information on the recommended actions. 

You also may consider including this information along with the mission and goals in the front of the plan in the 

form of an executive summary. This allows users to quickly understand how the community plans to reduce risk to 

hazards and strengthen disaster resiliency.

Element D3

A local jurisdiction must review and 

revise its plan to reflect changes in 

priorities.

44 CFR §201.6(d)(3)
6-13

Task 6

Develop a Mitigation Strategy

Conclusion

Task 6 describes how to develop a comprehensive mitigation strategy that is integrated with existing plans and 

programs in your community. These mitigation goals and actions establish a path forward for creating a safer, more 

disaster resilient community. Task 7 – Keep the Plan Current describes how to develop procedures for continuously 

monitoring, evaluating, and updating the mitigation plan so that it continues to meet community needs over time. 
6-14 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Task 6

Develop a Mitigation Strategy

Summary of Mitigation Actions

The City of Portland, Oregon Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan summarizes 102 specific mitigation actions in one matrix. The 

example below includes excerpts from this matrix, which identifies short-term (ST) and long-term (LT) actions and multihazard (MH) and hazard-specific issues, as well information on how each action will be implemented. 

Action Id 

and 

Goals

Description

Prioritization 

(High, 

Medium, Low)

and Timeframe

Responsible and 

Coordinating 

Bureaus and 

Agencies

Potential 

Funding 

Agencies

(B/C) Benefit-Costs 

(TF) Technical Feasibility

ST MH 

#10

2,3,5,6

Develop educational materials 

(television and print media) for 

residents that identify and define 

their risk to multi hazards: define 

and offer mitigation measures that 

residents can take home or share, 

determine method of distribution of the 

educational materials and coordinate 

with the media to reduce conveyance of 

misinformation. (education, outreach)

High

ST – Ongoing

POEM City of 

Portland 

FEMA HMA, 

FEMA AFG, 

FP&S, SAFER, 

EFSP, DHS, 

NRCS

B/C: Sustained mitigation outreach program has minimal 

cost and will help build and support area-wide capacity. 

This type activity enables the public to prepare for, respond 

to and recover from disasters.

TF: This low cost activity can be combined with recurring 

outreach opportunities at meetings where hazard specific 

information can be presented in small increments. This 

activity is ongoing demonstrating its feasibility.

LT MH 

#1

2,5,6,7

Revise Portland’s Comprehensive Plan 

to address and implement Citywide 

policies, land use improvements 

and mapping changes to natural 

hazards including, but not limited to, 

earthquakes, erosion, floods, invasive 

plants, landslides, volcano, severe 

weather and wildfires. (mapping, 

planning) (NFIP Compliance)

LT – Ongoing

BPS City of 

Portland

B/C: Land use planning that considers hazards as an 

integral component, policies can be established that will 

ensure reduction of loss and damage to structures. 

TF: This activity is feasible and currently being 

implemented through the background reports of the 

Portland Plan which will inform the 25 year long range 

Comprehensive Plan.

ST EQ 

#8

5

Study the feasibility of mandatory 

or voluntary installation of seismic 

shutoff valves on natural gas meters at 

commercial and residential buildings.

Medium

ST

BF&R, BDS, POEM City of 

Portland, 

FEMA HMA, 

FEMA AFG, 

FP&S, SAFER, 

EFSP, DHS, 

NRCS

B/C: Coordinated legislation ensures consistency, 

enforcement and protection to the City’s population and 

resource expenditure reduction. 

TF: This activity is technically feasible and involves 

effective communication and staff resources; this activity 

is feasible for the City to complete.

LT FL #5

2,3,5,6

As Waterfront Park remodeling is 

designed, ensure that Portland’s 

downtown property and critical facilities 

remain protected from floodwaters. 

(asset management)

High

LT – Ongoing

BP&R, BF&R BPS, 

BDS

City of 

Portland

B/C: This project is essential for sustainability and 

operations continuity ensuring City infrastructure and the 

population’s remain protected from potential flood impacts 

during reconstruction ensuring their health and safety. 

TF: This activity is technically feasible within the community 

through partnership agreements or memoranda to 

maximize existing utility infrastructure availability.

ER#

2,5

Construct and install bio-engineered 

slope protective measures to reduce or 

eliminate erosion.

High

LT

BP&R City of 

Portland, 

FEMA HMA, 

FEMA AFG, 

FP&S, SAFER, 

NRCS

B/C: This project would reduce erosion risk to 

infrastructure and residential properties using effective 

native vegetation bank stabilization measures to reduce 

erosion damage to threatened structures. 

TF: This activity is technically feasible and involves 

effective communication and staff resources; this activity 

is feasible for the City to complete.

WF

2,4,5,6

Develop and implement protocol 

for defining and mapping Wildland 

Urban Interface Zones and develop 

recommended policies, regulations and 

landscape options for incorporation into 

City plans and programs. (planning)

High

ST

BF&R, BP&R, 

BES, POEM, PBOT, 

Metro, BDS, BPS

City of 

Portland, 

FEMA AFG, 

FP&S, SAFER

B/C: Coordinated planning ensures effective damage 

avoidance or reduction and ensures proper attention is 

assigned to reduce losses and damage to structures and 

City residents. 

TF: This activity involves effective communication and staff 

resources; this activity is feasible for the City to complete. 

This activity is ongoing demonstrating its feasibility.
Task 7

Keep the Plan Current
About the Cover: A FEMA Voluntary Agency Specialist addresses representatives from the Regional Catastrophic Planning Team, 

New York City Office of Emergency Management, American Red Cross, and other voluntary organizations active in disaster. 

FEMA works with local community and faith-based organizations to coordinate future recovery efforts.
7-1

Task 7

Keep the Plan Current

Task 7 – Keep the Plan Current 

The mitigation plan is a living document that guides action over time. As conditions change, new information 

becomes available, or actions progress over the life of the plan, plan adjustments may be necessary to maintain its 

relevance. Task 7 describes how to develop procedures to monitor, evaluate, and update the mitigation plan over 

time.

Plan Maintenance Procedures

Plan maintenance is the process the planning team establishes 

to track the plan’s implementation progress and to inform the 

plan update. The plan must include a description of the method 

and schedule for monitoring, evaluating, and updating it within 

a 5-year cycle. These procedures help to:

• Ensure that the mitigation strategy is implemented 

according to the plan.

• Provide the foundation for an ongoing mitigation program 

in your community. 

• Standardize long-term monitoring of hazard-related 

activities.

• Integrate mitigation principles into community officials’ 

daily job responsibilities and department roles.

• Maintain momentum through continued engagement and 

accountability in the plan’s progress.

Plan updates provide the opportunity to consider 

how well the procedures established in the previously 

approved plan worked and revise them as needed. 

Monitoring Implementation

Plan monitoring means tracking the implementation of the plan over time. The plan must identify how, when, and 

by whom the plan will be monitored. For example, the plan may describe a monitoring system for tracking the 

status of the identified mitigation actions and reporting this information on a quarterly basis. The responsible agency 

assigned to each mitigation action may be responsible for tracking and reporting on each of their actions. Appendix 

A includes an example worksheet for reporting progress on a mitigation action (see Worksheet 7.1). 

The planning team must identify the lead position or agency, usually the same individual or agency leading the 

plan’s development, for coordinating the monitoring process. A method and schedule for regular monitoring can 

include reports or other deliverables and expectations for meeting attendance. Monitoring, therefore, becomes part 

of the regular administrative function of the offices or positions to which it is assigned. 

Evaluating Effectiveness

Evaluating means assessing the effectiveness of the plan at achieving its stated purpose and goals. The planning team 

must identify how, when, and by whom the plan will be evaluated. The planning team may develop a list of metrics 

to evaluate progress toward goals on an annual basis. For instance, if a goal is to improve public awareness of 

hazards and risk, then repeat a survey conducted during the planning process on an annual or 5-year basis to gauge 

Element A6

The plan maintenance process shall 

include a section describing the method 

and schedule of monitoring, evaluating, 

evaluating, and updating the mitigation 

plan within a five-year cycle.

44 CFR §201.6(c)(4)(i)

Develop Procedures For:

Monitoring. Tracking the implementation of the 

plan over time.

Evaluating. Assessing the effectiveness of the 

plan at achieving its stated purpose and goals.

Updating. Reviewing and revising the plan at 

least once every 5 years.
7-2 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Task 7

Keep the Plan Current

how perception of risk is changing. If a goal is to reduce the number of structures in hazard prone areas, evaluate 

how these numbers change over time. The planning team could also evaluate the percentage of actions implemented. 

Plan evaluation may not occur as frequently as plan monitoring, but it is an important step to ensure that the plan 

continues to serve a purpose. Many communities commit to, at a minimum, annually reconvening the planning 

team to evaluate the plan’s effectiveness and to prepare a report for their governing bodies that demonstrates 

progress to date. This information also serves as the basis of the next plan update. 

The planning team or, if applicable, a subset of the planning team assigned to evaluate the plan, may develop a 

schedule for both regular meetings and specific deliverables. To maximize funding opportunities, schedule the 

meetings to coincide with an existing process or procedure, such as the community budget cycle or FEMA’s annual 

grant cycle. If reports or other deliverables are necessary, determine their frequency and reporting requirements.

Updating the Plan

Updating means reviewing and revising the plan at least once every 5 years to reflect changes in development, 

progress in local mitigation efforts, and changes in priorities. The planning team must identify how, when, and by 

whom the plan will be updated. Documenting the procedures for updating the plan requires an explanation of who 

will be responsible for updating the plan and when and how this process will be initiated. The plan must include 

the title of the individual or name of the department or agency responsible for leading the updating effort. It may 

be appropriate to include a schedule of activities that allows sufficient time to obtain funding for and complete the 

planning process before the plan expires. 

The planning team can also establish procedures for updating the plan following a disaster event or concurrent with 

the development of a recovery or post-disaster redevelopment plan. Your community’s vulnerabilities and mitigation 

priorities often change following a disaster, and additional funding sources may become available, such as FEMA’s 

Hazard Mitigation Grant Program or Public Assistance. Generally, public awareness increases, and the demand and 

support for mitigation frequently increases following a disaster. You may choose to take advantage of opportunities 

to incorporate mitigation into recovery strategies and to rebuild wisely and safely to avoid similar losses in the 

future. This is also an important time to collect data on the hazard and its impacts for future plan updates. If you are 

considering developing a recovery plan prior to a disaster, coordinating the recovery and mitigation planning efforts 

promotes messages about building resilience. 

Continue Public Involvement

Keeping the plan current also means continuing to provide 

opportunities for public involvement in the plan and its 

implementation. Task 3 describes this requirement and offers 

suggestions for continuing outreach to the public and other 

stakeholders during plan maintenance and implementation. You 

may choose to document how the community will continue 

public participation during the plan maintenance process, along 

with the procedures for monitoring, evaluating, and updating 

the plan.

The planning team also may identify specific procedures for 

keeping elected officials involved, either through the monitoring and evaluation procedures and/or through the 

process for continuing public participation. The local governing body usually adopts the plan, so reporting back 

to them annually or at other regular intervals can help maintain support and provide accountability for those 

responsible for the plan’s maintenance and implementation. 

Element A5

The plan maintenance process 

shall include a discussion on how 

the community will continue public 

participation in the plan maintenance 

process. 

44 CFR §201.6(c)(4)(iii)
7-3

Task 7

Keep the Plan Current

Conclusion

Task 7 describes the requirements and recommendations for documenting how, when, and by whom the mitigation 

plan will be maintained over time. Identifying and adhering to monitoring and evaluation procedures will make the 

5-year update process easier and more effective. Task 8 describes the final review and adoption of the plan document 

and the process for submitting the plan for FEMA approval. 
7-4 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Task 7

Keep the Plan Current

This page intentionally left blank.
Task 8

Review and Adopt the Plan
About the Cover: Citizens attend a City Council meeting in the City of Biloxi’s newly renovated City Hall. The historic building was 

damaged by Hurricane Katrina.
8-1

Task 8

Review and Adopt the Plan

Task 8 – Review and Adopt the Plan

The previous tasks described how to engage community participation, assess risks, and develop a mitigation strategy. 

Now, you are ready to take the plan through the local adoption and the review and approval process. First, you 

must incorporate feedback from the planning team, stakeholders, and the public on the final plan document. Task 

8 describes the final review and adoption of the plan document by the community and the process for FEMA plan 

approval. 

Local Plan Review

When you have completed a final draft of the plan, the planning team can publicize the mitigation plan and ask 

stakeholders and the public to review and submit comments for the planning team’s final consideration. Task 3 – 

Create an Outreach Strategy describes how the public must be given the opportunity to review and comment on the 

mitigation plan prior to its adoption. Suggestions for how to meet this requirement are also described in more 

detail in Task 3. A good approach provides the public sufficient time to comment and explains how comments will 

be used. 

You may also directly inform certain stakeholders of the plan’s availability for comment, such as through an email 

or letter. This is a particularly good approach for providing neighboring jurisdictions an opportunity to review the 

mitigation plan. The plan itself can include information on the types of comments received and how comments 

were incorporated.

Prior to submitting the plan to the State Hazard Mitigation Officer (SHMO), the planning team may validate that 

the local mitigation plan meets all requirements of Title 44 Code of Regulations (CFR) 201.6. FEMA uses the Local 

Mitigation Plan Review Tool to ensure that approved local mitigation plans meet these requirements. The planning team 

may view the Regulation Checklist portion of the Plan Review Tool and fill in the page numbers where your plan 

meets each of the required elements. This can serve as a final internal review to confirm the plan meets Federal 

requirements prior to submitting it for approval. Appendix B provides a copy of the Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool.

State and FEMA Plan Review 

Submitting the Plan

Once the planning team is confident the plan meets the 

required elements and includes all supporting documentation, 

forward the plan to your SHMO or State Mitigation Planner. 

It is critical that all supporting documentation related to 

the planning process and other components of the plan are 

included in the initial submittal. Incomplete plan submittals 

can delay plan approval. The State will review the plan and work 

with you on any required revisions for approval. Don’t forget 

to provide your local contact information where you can be 

reached for any questions.

Once the State is satisfied that the plan meets the requirements, 

the SHMO will forward the plan to the FEMA Regional Office 

for review and approval. FEMA will conduct its review within 

45 days, if possible, and provide a completed Local Mitigation 

Plan Review Tool to the State. The FEMA Regional Office and 

the State may contact you to discuss additional revisions to the Figure 8.1: Plan approval process
8-2 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Task 8

Review and Adopt the Plan

plan to ensure that it meets the Federal regulation. Once FEMA determines the plan meets the regulation, FEMA will 

notify the SHMO that the plan is approvable pending adoption (APA), or approved if the community has already 

adopted the mitigation plan.

Approvable Pending Adoption

To avoid repeated attempts to adopt the plan prior to FEMA approval, many communities obtain a notice from FEMA 

that the plan is APA before adopting the plan. As a time-saving measure, communities are encouraged to submit 

the final draft of the mitigation plan to the State and FEMA for review prior to formal adoption by the elected 

officials or other authorized governing body. If FEMA determines the plan is not approvable and requires revisions, 

the community will be able to make revisions before initiating the plan adoption process, therefore avoiding 

unnecessary delays in plan approval.

Plan Approval

Upon receiving the record of adoption from the State, FEMA will issue an official approval letter stating which 

jurisdictions have adopted and are approved and eligible for FEMA Hazard Mitigation Assistance programs. The 

approval letter will include the expiration date 5 years from the date of the letter. Attached to the approval letter will 

be a final Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool that provides feedback on the strengths of the plan, recommendations 

for plan improvements during future plan updates, and suggestions for implementing the mitigation strategy. 

Local Adoption of the Plan

Adoption by the local governing body demonstrates the 

community’s commitment to implementing the mitigation 

strategy and authorizes responsible agencies to execute their 

actions. The final plan is not approved until the community 

adopts the plan and FEMA receives documentation of formal 

adoption by the governing body of the jurisdiction(s) 

requesting approval. The governing bodies are typically the 

Town Board, City Council, County Commissioners, and/

or Board of Selectmen. While plan adoption usually occurs 

through a formal resolution, council minutes, consent agendas, 

or other forms of adoption are acceptable if allowed by local 

law. Appendix A includes an example of a local adoption 

resolution (see Worksheet 8.1). 

Each jurisdiction submits documentation of adoption to the State, who is responsible for forwarding this on to the 

FEMA Regional Office. If you choose to use the APA process, adoption must take place within 1 year of receipt of 

FEMA’s APA notification. 

Multi-Jurisdictional Adoption

Each jurisdiction seeking plan approval must adopt the plan. If 

you choose to use the APA process, it is important to coordinate 

the adoptions of all the jurisdictions as soon as the plan receives 

APA status. The governing bodies may have different meeting 

schedules, which prevent all the jurisdictions from adopting at 

the same time. If possible, coordinate the adoptions and submit 

documentation to the State at the same time. 

Element E1

The plan shall include documentation 

that the plan has been formally adopted 

by the governing body of the jurisdiction 

requesting approval of the plan (e.g., 

City Council, County commissioner, Tribal 

Council). 

44 CFR §201.6(c)(5)

Element E2

For multi-jurisdictional plans, each 

jurisdiction requesting approval of the plan 

must document that it has been formally 

adopted.

44 CFR §201.6(c)(5)
8-3

Task 8

Review and Adopt the Plan

At least one of the participating jurisdictions must adopt the plan within 1 year of FEMA’s APA notice. FEMA 

will issue an official approval letter stating which jurisdictions have adopted the plan and are eligible for FEMA 

hazard mitigation assistance programs. The plan will expire 5 years from the date of FEMA’s approval letter for the 

mitigation plan. The approval letter and date are generated with the first jurisdiction adopting the plan. The plan 

approval date remains the same regardless of when other participating jurisdictions adopt the plan. It is important 

to coordinate the adoption process to ensure that all participants are covered by the plan for the full 5 years. Plan 

updates follow the same adoption process.

Additional Considerations

Additional considerations related to the plan review and approval process include:

• Communicate with your SHMO early and often. Discuss with your SHMO whether it would be appropriate to 

share drafts of the plan or portions of the plan prior to a formal review to ensure the plan is complete. Also, you 

will want to ensure your plan meets any additional State requirements, which are noted in Element F of the Local 

Mitigation Plan Review Tool.

• Keep stakeholders informed. The relationships you have already established with stakeholders, elected officials, 

and government agencies will be important assets during the adoption process. To facilitate adoption of the plan, 

periodically brief community decision makers throughout the planning process on the progress of the planning 

team’s efforts. When presenting the final draft for adoption, invite the planning team to the meeting and ask 

supporting agencies to provide testimony regarding their support of the plan. 

• Allow for sufficient time. Build time into your planning process to meet State and FEMA procedures for review. 

Task 2 describes the development of a scope and schedule for the planning process, which may involve a lengthy 

timeframe for review, approval, and adoption. Your local governing body may meet only once a month and may 

require agenda items to be submitted well ahead of time. 

Celebrate Success

Now that the plan is adopted and approved, the work is just beginning. But first, it’s time to celebrate! Publicize the 

adoption and approval of the plan. Consider getting the word out using multiple methods, such as the following:

• Post a notice on the community’s website

• Issue a press release on plan adoption and approval to local media outlets

• Distribute notices of approval to stakeholders

• Announce the first project(s) to be initiated

• Propose a congratulatory resolution or achievement award for the planning team (or specific individuals) for 

their successful work and commitment to making the community safer

These and similar steps are easy to complete, are inexpensive, and will keep the plan at the forefront of people’s 

minds, helping to build momentum as you move into implementation. Task 9 provides recommendations for 

implementing your mitigation strategy to reduce risk and strengthen your community’s resilience to future disasters. 
8-4 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Task 8

Review and Adopt the Plan

Publicize Plan Adoption and Approval 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: 

Bonnie Prigge, MRPC, 573-265-2993

Gasconade County Hazard Mitigation Plan approved

The Gasconade County Hazard Mitigation Plan has been approved by both the State Emergency Management Agency and 

the Federal Emergency Management Agency. The plan approval is pending adoption resolutions from the participating 

jurisdictions including Gasconade County, its cities and its school districts. 

Meramec Regional Planning Commission (MRPC) worked in partnership with Gasconade County to update the plan. 

Planning meetings were held with city and county officials, school leaders, emergency management agencies and 

interested individuals. 

The county must have an approved hazard mitigation plan in order for Gasconade County schools, cities, agencies and 

others to access state hazard mitigation grant funds. The plan includes an assessment of natural hazards, showcases 

past accomplishments and sets goals and action items to reduce the impact of natural hazards in the future. 

Persons wishing to review the plan may access it on the MRPC website at www.meramecregion.org. 

For more information on the plan, contact Assistant Director and Environmental Programs Manager Tammy Snodgrass at 

MRPC, 573-265-2993.
Task 9

Create a Safe and Resilient Community
About the Cover: The Longaberger company receives an honorary “Proclamation” at the Longaberger Tree Dedication in 

Cunningham Park, Joplin, Missouri. The tree dedication was part of Joplin’s Day of Remembrance one year after a deadly 

tornado struck Joplin on May 22, 2011. The tornado killed 161 residents of Joplin, destroyed 25% of the town, and caused 

$2.2 billion in property damage. The ceremony recognized the planting of 40 trees donated by the Longaberger Foundation of 

Newark, Ohio. FEMA supports the recovery efforts of towns and communities like Joplin as they work to rebuild after a disaster.
9-1

Task 9

Create a Safe and Resilient Community

Task 9 – Create a Safe and Resilient Community

The Handbook’s Introduction summarizes the benefits of hazard mitigation—sustained action taken to reduce or 

eliminate the long-term risk to human life and property from hazards. These benefits contribute to a community’s 

disaster resilience and include protecting public safety, preventing damage to infrastructure and homes, encouraging 

safer and more sustainable development, and reducing the costs of disaster response and recovery.

Through the mitigation planning process, your community 

has identified and prioritized mitigation policies and actions to 

reduce risk and future losses. The implementation of proactive 

mitigation policies and actions, as well as an inclusive, informed 

planning process, helps create a safer, more resilient community. 

However, turning your mitigation plan into action can be 

difficult. Task 9 identifies some common challenges communities 

face in implementing their mitigation strategy. It also provides 

suggestions for how to overcome mitigation barriers and 

describes some funding and resources available to help.

Challenges to Achieving Mitigation Goals

Community officials make difficult decisions every day to 

balance competing priorities for local resources, funding, 

and staff time. Multiple, competing priorities can be a major 

challenge to implementing the plan and accomplishing your 

community’s mitigation goals. Other common challenges 

include the following:

• Loss of interest or meeting fatigue after the mitigation 

planning and adoption process ends on the part of the 

planning team, stakeholders, and the public

• Lack of funding and other resources and capabilities, 

including staff time and technical expertise, to accomplish 

the mitigation actions

• Insufficient political will to address the more complicated 

problems and controversial solutions

• Apathy created by “disaster amnesia” or the perception that 

“nothing ever happens here” when time passes without a 

significant hazard event

• Disconnect between the mitigation strategy and the day-to-day operations, staff work plans and procedures, and 

the policies and objectives of other local plans and programs 

Recommendations for Success

Communities all over the country of various sizes and capabilities are successfully implementing mitigation 

activities and overcoming challenges due to funding, competing priorities, political hardships, and more. The 

following approaches may be helpful for your community.

Disaster Resilience

Resilience is the ability to adapt to changing 

conditions and prepare for, withstand, and rapidly 

recover from disruption.

U.S. Department of Homeland Security Risk 

Lexicon, 2008.

The School Superintendent cuts the ribbon to 

re-open North Bay Elementary school on 

November 7, 2005, along with students and 

teachers. Waveland/Bay St. Louis, Missouri, 

schools had been closed since the landfall of 

Hurricane Katrina on August 29, 2005.
9-2 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Task 9

Create a Safe and Resilient Community

Use the Post-Disaster Window of Opportunity

The post-disaster recovery period offers unique opportunities 

to accomplish mitigation goals. Public support and political 

will to change policies and invest in long-term risk reduction 

may be at its highest. In addition, funding sources may become 

available for mitigation, such as FEMA’s Hazard Mitigation 

Grant Program (HMGP) and Public Assistance (PA) Section 406 

funding described in the Funding and Resources section that follows. 

A strong mitigation plan can help your community be prepared 

to take advantage of the funding and resources. Incorporation 

of mitigation strategies into either a pre-disaster or post-disaster 

recovery plan reinforces the linkage of long-term risk reduction 

and community resilience. 

In a post-disaster environment, significant reinvestments 

in infrastructure and development are often made during a 

relatively short timeframe. The mitigation plan can help guide 

those efforts to create a community that is more resilient to 

future disasters. Here are some questions to consider and take 

full advantage of the post-disaster window of opportunity for mitigation: 

• How can disaster funds be used to implement actions in the mitigation strategy? 

• How can the planning team take advantage of the public’s risk awareness due to the disaster events? 

• How can the disaster effects influence future land use decisions to work toward mitigation goals? 

• What local mitigation capabilities need to be strengthened based on lessons learned? 

Post-disaster implementation also presents challenges. Local priorities may be limited to building back quickly, 

rather than safely, or communities may face strained capacity or capability as local officials address other postdisaster priorities. Increased mitigation funding and technical assistance from State and Federal sources after a 

disaster can help offset these challenges. The recovery process should ensure that mitigation priorities, as outlined in 

the plan, are actively applied to reinvestment decisions. 

Focus on Quality over Quantity 

As you move forward with transitioning from plan development to plan implementation, it is important to achieve 

a few “early wins,” or successfully complete some initial mitigation actions. These could be low-cost actions that can 

be implemented quickly or a single high-priority project. Demonstrating progress can go a long way in gaining the 

support needed to implement more complex actions in the future.

Develop Strong Messaging

Some actions may require greater effort to gain political backing or public support to implement, particularly those 

that require local financial and/or administrative commitments or those that generate opposition from competing 

interests. You will need to make a convincing and long-lasting case for mitigation. For each proposed action, you 

should be prepared to clearly and succinctly explain how well the action can meet additional standards or “selling 

points,” such as:

• The action is economically viable and contributes towards your community’s long-term resilience and 

sustainability. 

• The action can be completed efficiently using staff time and coordination among departments, or in the case of 

required financial commitments, is a wise and cost-effective expenditure.

An administrator visits a mitigation project in the 

Cedar Heights neighborhood of Colorado Springs, 

Colorado. The project protected homes from the 

2012 Waldo Canyon Fire.
9-3

Task 9

Create a Safe and Resilient Community

• The action will reduce the overall community risk.

• The action achieves multiple objectives that go beyond increasing overall safety (such as social, economic, or 

environmental benefits). 

• The action is supported by a broad array of stakeholders, including intergovernmental or public-private 

partnerships.

• The action has a local champion to ensure its completion and success. 

Encourage Local Champions

Successful projects often involve a strong local champion. 

Champions are leaders who understand the mitigation vision, 

can clearly communicate it, and can engage others to get buyin. Spreading out the responsibility for mitigation activities to 

a variety of champions increases the likelihood of a successful 

mitigation program. Enlist the support of external partners 

that can provide additional leverage for promoting projects, 

including local businesses and other stakeholders.

Identify a Mentor

Community officials can learn from other communities that 

have successfully implemented mitigation actions. Other 

communities may be willing to share experience and lessons 

learned. Consult the FEMA Best Practices Portfolio1

 or your 

State Hazard Mitigation Officer (SHMO) for contacts in other 

communities who can provide ideas and advice.

Funding and Assistance

Many mitigation actions require financial assistance—in particular, structural and critical infrastructure projects. 

Funding can take the form of grants and loans, but assistance can also be provided as technical assistance or in-kind 

contributions. Some projects may require a combination of your community’s financial resources, State and Federal 

grant programs, and non-governmental funding assistance.

Local Funding and Private Property Owners

You should first seek to identify any initiatives and activities that 

can be accomplished using existing operations and budgets. 

For example, small infrastructure projects such as storm water 

drainage improvements can likely be incorporated into your 

community’s recurring capital improvements program. Other 

projects may require a specific line-item request as part of 

the routine planning and budgeting cycle, or possibly require 

more creative public financing methods such as special purpose 

assessments, impact fees, or tax increment financing. Some 

actions may leverage a combination of funding sources with 

other local departments, particularly those that can result in 

multiple benefits for the community (for example, acquiring 

flood prone properties to be maintained as a public park or 

recreational area). 

1 To search the FEMA Best Practices Portfolio, see http://www.fema.gov/mitigationbp/.

A seismic retrofit of this police station in 

Seattle, Washington was paid for using capital 

improvements funds. Structural bracing was 

added to the building at all levels. The project is 

highlighted in FEMA’s Best Practices Portfolio.

This sign describing building methods that can 

withstand 120-mph winds is placed in front of 

a home in Pratt City. The house that originally 

stood on this spot was destroyed on April 27, 

2011, when a string of deadly tornadoes struck 

Alabama. 
9-4 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Task 9

Create a Safe and Resilient Community

Private property owners share the responsibility to protect themselves and their property. Many Federal mitigation 

grants for activities like acquisition or elevation require a minimum of 25 percent of the total project cost to be nonFederal, and local communities often pass that cost on to the individual property owner.

State Funding and Assistance

State government funding for mitigation varies from state to state. Hazard Mitigation Assistance funds may be 

available following a Federal disaster declaration, as described below, and some states use their own general funds 

for grant matching. Contact your SHMO to learn about available funds in your state. In addition, other State agencies, 

such as your State forestry department, geological survey, and water resources agency, may offer programs that fund 

projects related to specific hazards.

Get to know your SHMO, who is responsible for organizing, developing, and implementing the State’s hazard 

mitigation program as well as reviewing plans and projects submitted for approval by local communities. Your 

SHMO coordinates with other State agencies, FEMA and other Federal agencies, local governments, and other public 

and private organizations regularly; monitors the completion of approved projects; and provides technical assistance 

and grant funding for approved activities and expenses. Your SHMO coordinates most FEMA funding to support 

mitigation plans and project implementation.2

FEMA Mitigation Grant Programs

Hazard Mitigation Assistance Grant Programs

Hazard Mitigation Assistance grant programs provide funding opportunities for pre- and post-disaster mitigation.3

While the statutory origins of the programs differ, all share the common goal of reducing the risk of loss of life and 

property due to natural hazards. Brief descriptions of the Hazard Mitigation Assistance grant programs are provided 

below. 

• Hazard Mitigation Grant Program. FEMA’s Hazard Mitigation Grant Program assists in implementing longterm hazard mitigation measures following Presidential disaster declarations. Funding may be authorized after a 

declaration to implement projects in accordance with State, Tribal, and local priorities. 

• Pre-Disaster Mitigation. FEMA’s Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant Program provides funds on an annual basis for 

hazard mitigation planning and mitigation project implementation prior to a disaster. The goal of the program is 

to reduce overall risk to the population and structures, while at the same time also reducing reliance on Federal 

funding from actual disaster declarations. 

• Flood Mitigation Assistance. FEMA’s Flood Mitigation Assistance Program provides funds on an annual basis so 

that communities can take measures to reduce or eliminate risk of flood damage to buildings insured under the 

National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).

Hazard Mitigation Funding Under Public Assistance, Section 406

Section 406 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (Stafford Act), 42 U.S.C. 5172, 

provides FEMA with the authority to fund cost-effective mitigation measures under the PA program in conjunction 

with the repair of disaster-damaged public facilities. These opportunities usually become apparent during the 

immediate repair phase following disaster events. It is critical that your community is aware and involved in the 

development of PA projects in close coordination with State and FEMA counterparts to help identify possible 

mitigation opportunities under the PA program.4

2 A list of SHMOs can be found at: http://www.fema.gov/state-hazard-mitigation-officers.

3 For more information on FEMA’s Hazard Mitigation Assistance programs, see http://www.fema.gov/hazard-mitigation-assistance.

4 For more information on hazard mitigation funding under Section 406, see http://www.fema.gov/public-assistance-local-state-tribal-and-nonprofit/hazard-mitigation-funding-under-section-406-0.
9-5

Task 9

Create a Safe and Resilient Community

Earthquake Grants

The National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program Earthquake State Assistance Program was created to increase 

and enhance the effective implementation of earthquake risk reduction at the local level. Examples of mitigation 

activities funded through this program include: developing seismic mitigation plans; conducting seismic safety 

inspections of critical structures and lifelines; updating building codes, zoning codes, and ordinances to enhance 

seismic safety; or increasing earthquake awareness and education. More information on the availability of funding to 

assist with local activities supporting earthquake risk reduction can be obtained by contacting your SHMO or State 

Earthquake Program contact.5

Emergency Management Performance Grants Program

The purpose of the Emergency Management Performance Grants Program is to provide grants to states to assist 

State, local, Tribal, and territorial governments in preparing for threats and hazards. The grant focuses on planning, 

operations, equipment acquisitions, training, exercises, and construction and renovation in enhancing and 

sustaining all-hazards emergency management capabilities. Your State emergency management agency is the only 

entity eligible to apply to FEMA for Emergency Management Performance Grant funds on behalf of State and local 

emergency management agencies, so your first point of coordination should be through your local emergency 

management office.6

FEMA Technical Assistance

Many types of technical assistance are available from FEMA. Technical assistance may take the form of information 

resources; publications; training; templates, models, and samples; networking; or onsite workshops. 

Risk MAP

FEMA’s Risk Mapping, Assessment, and Planning (Risk MAP) program helps communities identify, assess, and reduce 

flood risk. Through Risk MAP, FEMA provides communities with flood risk data and information to enhance local 

mitigation plans, improve community outreach, and increase local resilience to floods. The products and guidance 

provided by Risk MAP can be used to help implement your local mitigation plan.7

Building Science

FEMA’s Building Science Branch provides technical services and produces mitigation guidance to create disasterresilient communities. The Building Science Branch provides NFIP technical support for public and private sector 

stakeholders, the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program, the National Windstorm Impact Reduction 

Program, and outreach strategies for communicating Building Science issues.8

National Earthquake Technical Assistance Program 

The National Earthquake Technical Assistance Program is designed to help State, Tribal, and local governments obtain 

the knowledge, tools, and support needed to plan and implement effective earthquake mitigation strategies.9

 FEMA 

provides the following types of assistance through the program: 

5 For more information on the Earthquake State Assistance Program, see http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-grants.

6 For more information on Emergency Management Performance Grants, see http://www.fema.gov/fy-2009-emergency-management-performance-grants.

7 For more information on Risk MAP, see http://www.fema.gov/rm-main.

8 For more information on FEMA’s Building Science Branch, see http://www.fema.gov/building-science.

9 For more information on the National Earthquake Technical Assistance Program, see http://www.fema.gov/national-earthquake-hazardsreduction-program/national-earthquake-technical-assistance-program.
9-6 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Task 9

Create a Safe and Resilient Community

• Training. Courses and associated materials, available for classroom presentation or independent study, related to 

a variety of seismic risk reduction activities and stakeholders.

• Technical assistance. Technical advice and shared expertise that help recipients design, develop, and implement 

earthquake mitigation projects.

• Tools development. Assistance in developing job aids and other tools that facilitate efficient and effective 

implementation of earthquake mitigation efforts.

• Special project support. Depending on the availability of program funding, support for demonstration projects 

or other original or replicable mitigation initiatives.

FEMA Best Practices 

The FEMA Best Practices Portfolio consists of illustrated stories, ideas, activities, and projects that show how 

others have worked to reduce or prevent damage from disasters. These best practices are submitted by individuals 

and communities to describe measures they have taken to reduce the loss of life and property from disasters. The 

portfolio is meant to provide ideas and concepts about reducing losses and to encourage others to evaluate their own 

risk and consider mitigation as a long-term solution to reducing that risk. In addition to the portfolio, FEMA also 

provides more detailed case studies that offer in-depth, analytical information about innovative projects throughout 

the United States that address all types of hazards.10

Other Federal Agencies

In addition to FEMA, other Federal agencies also provide funding or technical assistance programs for activities that 

complement or support mitigation objectives. For example, many communities have used Community Development 

Block Grant funds from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development to implement mitigation activities. 

Many funding programs may be found by searching the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance, or by browsing 

other Federal agency websites.

Conclusion

This Local Mitigation Planning Handbook provides guidance on how to develop or update a local hazard mitigation 

plan to serve as an effective blueprint for reducing future losses from natural hazards and disasters and to meet 

requirements for FEMA approval. The local mitigation plan is the representation of your whole community’s 

commitment to reducing long-term vulnerability and acts as a guide for decision makers as they commit resources 

for implementation. Task 9 describes how to turn your mitigation plan into action. The planning process does not 

stop at adoption, and funding and resources are available to help implement your plan. Proactively implementing 

the policies and actions identified in your mitigation plan increases community resilience and is an investment in 

your community’s future safety and sustainability.

10 To search the FEMA Best Practices Portfolio, see http://www.fema.gov/mitigationbp/.
Appendix A

Planning Process Worksheets
List of Planning Process Worksheets

Task 1: Determine the Planning Area and Resources

Worksheet 1.1 – Comparison of Multi-Hazard Mitigation and CRS Planning Requirements

Worksheet 1.2 – Sample Memorandum of Agreement for a Multi-Jurisdictional Planning Team

Task 2: Build the Planning Team

Worksheet 2.1 – Mitigation Planning Team Worksheet

Worksheet 2.2 – Sample Schedule of Tasks

Task 3: Create an Outreach Strategy

Worksheet 3.1 – Sample Public Opinion Survey

Task 4: Review Community Capabilities

Worksheet 4.1 – Capability Assessment Worksheet

Worksheet 4.2 – Safe Growth Audit 

Worksheet 4.3 – National Flood Insurance Program Worksheet

Task 5: Conduct a Risk Assessment

Worksheet 5.1 – Hazards Summary Worksheet

Task 6: Develop a Mitigation Strategy

Worksheet 6.1 – Mitigation Action Evaluation Worksheet

Worksheet 6.2 – Mitigation Action Implementation Worksheet

Task 7: Keep the Plan Current

Worksheet 7.1 – Mitigation Action Progress Report Form

Worksheet 7.2 – Plan Update Evaluation Worksheet 

Task 8: Review and Adopt the Plan

Worksheet 8.1 – Example Adoption Resolution
A-1

Task 3

Create an Outreach Strategy

Comparison of Multi-Hazard Mitigation and CRS 

Planning Requirements

One of the activities that communities can take to improve their Community Rating System (CRS) rating (and 

subsequently lower National Flood Insurance Program [NFIP] premiums) is to develop a CRS plan. The CRS 

10-step planning process is consistent with the multi-hazard planning regulations under 44 CFR Part 201. Use 

this worksheet to compare how the local mitigation planning requirements at 44 CFR Part 201 relate to the CRS 

planning steps. 

More detailed information on CRS plans can be found in Activity 510 of the CRS Coordinator’s Manual at http://

www.fema.gov/national-flood-insurance-program/community-rating-system. 

Check 3 if You 

Meet Both CRS 

& Part 201

Community Rating System (CRS) 

Planning Steps 

(Activity 510)

Local Mitigation Planning 

Handbook Tasks 

(44 CFR Part 201)

Step 1. Organize

Task 1: Determine the Planning Area and Resources

Task 2: Build the Planning Team 

44 CFR 201.6(c)(1)

Step 2. Involve the public

Task 3: Create an Outreach Strategy

44 CFR 201.6(b)(1)

Step 3. Coordinate

Task 4: Review Community Capabilities

44 CFR 201.6(b)(2) & (3)

Step 4. Assess the hazard Task 5: Conduct a Risk Assessment

44 CFR 201.6(c)(2)(i)

44 CFR 201.6(c)(2)(ii) & (iii)

Step 5. Assess the problem

Step 6. Set goals Task 6: Develop a Mitigation Strategy

44 CFR 201.6(c)(3)(i)

44 CFR 201.6(c)(3)(ii)

44 CFR 201.6(c)(3)(iii)

Step 7. Review possible activities

Step 8. Draft an action plan

Step 9. Adopt the plan

Task 8: Review and Adopt the Plan

44 CFR 201.6(c)(5)

Step 10. Implement, evaluate, revise

Task 7: Keep the Plan Current

Task 9: Create a Safe and Resilient Community

44 CFR 201.6(c)(4)

Worksheet 1.1

Comparison of Multi-Hazard and CRS Planning Requirements
A-2 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Task 3

Create an Outreach Strategy

Worksheet 1.1

Comparison of Multi-Hazard and CRS Planning Requirements

This page intentionally left blank.
A-3

Task 3

Create an Outreach Strategy

Sample Memorandum of Agreement for a 

Multi-Jurisdictional Planning Team1

I. Purpose

A Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) is hereby executed between the participating jurisdictions in the [Insert Title 

of Plan]. “Participating jurisdictions” in this MOA are as follows:

• [insert Lead Community name]

• [insert Community A name] 

• [insert Community B name]

The purpose of this MOA is to establish commitment from and a cooperative working relationship between all 

Participating Jurisdictions in the development and implementation of the [Insert Title of Plan]. In addition, the 

intent of this MOA is to ensure that the multi-jurisdictional hazard mitigation plan is developed in accordance 

with Title 44 of the Federal Code of Regulations (CFR) Part 201.6; that the planning process is conducted in an 

open manner involving community stakeholders; that it is consistent with each participating jurisdiction’s policies, 

programs and authorities; and it is an accurate reflection of the community’s values. 

This MOA sets out the responsibilities of all parties. The MOA identifies the work to be performed by each 

participating jurisdiction. Planning tasks, schedules, and finished products are identified in the Work Program and 

Schedule. The plan created as a result of this MOA will be presented to the governing body (Planning Commission, 

City Council and or Board of Commissioners) of each participating jurisdiction for adoption.

II. Background

Mitigation plans form the foundation for a community’s long-term strategy to reduce disaster losses and break 

the cycle of disaster damage, reconstruction, and repeated damage. The Participating Jurisdictions in a mitigation 

planning process would benefit by: 

• identifying cost effective actions for risk reduction; 

• directing resources on the greatest risks and vulnerabilities; 

• building partnerships by involving people, organizations, and businesses; 

• increasing education and awareness of hazards and risk; 

• aligning risk reduction with other community objectives; and 

• providing eligibility to receive federal hazard mitigation grant funding.

The [insert Lead Community name] has received a grant from the Federal Emergency Management Agency to 

prepare a multi-jurisdictional hazard mitigation plan in accordance with 44 FEMA requirements at 44.C.F.R. 201.6. 

III. Planning Team Responsibilities

[Insert Lead Community name] will act as the Lead Community, and will assign a Chairperson of the Planning Team 

for the [Insert Title of Plan]. The Participating Jurisdictions authorize the Lead Community to manage and facilitate 

the planning process in accordance with the Work Program and Schedule. 

1 The language provided in this Sample Memorandum of Agreement does not impose legally enforceable rights and obligations, but provides 

information that may be suitable for your community in entering a partnership agreement with other jurisdictions. It is recommended that you 

consult an attorney prior to executing any legal instruments. 

Worksheet 1.2

Sample Memorandum of Agreement for a Multi-Jurisdictional Planning Team
A-4 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Task 3

Create an Outreach Strategy

The Participating Jurisdictions understand that representatives must engage in the following planning process, as 

more fully described in the Local Mitigation Planning Handbook (FEMA, 2012), including, but not limited to:

• Develop the Work Program and Schedule with the Planning Team

• Organize and attend regular meetings of the Planning Team.

• Assist the Planning Team with developing and conducting an outreach strategy to involve other planning team 

members, stakeholders, and the public, as appropriate to represent their Jurisdiction.

• Identify community resources available to support the planning effort, including meeting spaces, facilitators, 

and media outlets.

• Provide data and feedback to develop the risk assessment and mitigation strategy, including a specific mitigation 

action plan for their Jurisdiction.

• Submit the draft plan to their Jurisdiction for review.

• Work with the Planning Team to incorporate all their Jurisdiction’s comments into the draft plan.

• Submit the draft plan to their respective governing body for consideration and adoption.

• After adoption, coordinate a process to monitor, evaluate, and work toward plan implementation.

IV. Planning Team

The following points of contacts and alternatives are authorized on behalf of the governing bodies to participate as 

members of the Planning Team for the [Insert Title of Plan]:

[Insert Points of Contact for the Lead Jurisdiction and for each Participating Jurisdiction, and any alternative POCs, 

including, at a minimum:]

Name

Title

Office/Agency

Name of Participating Jurisdiction

Address

Phone number

Email address

V. MOA Implementation

This MOA will be in effect from the date of signature by all parties, will remain in effect through the duration of the 

planning process, and will terminate after adoption of the final FEMA-approved mitigation plan by all participating 

jurisdictions, or 5 years after FEMA approval, whichever is earlier. It may be terminated prior to that time for any 

Participating Jurisdiction by giving 60 days written notice. This MOA is to be implemented through the attached 

Work Program and Schedule, and any addendums that describe specific activities, programs, and projects, and if 

necessary, funding by separate instrument.

[Insert signature block for each Participating Jurisdiction, or attach resolutions]

Signature: _______________________________

Name of Authorized Government Official 

Title (City Manager, Mayor, County Emergency Management Director, etc.)

Task 3

Create an Outreach Strategy

Worksheet 1.2

Sample Memorandum of Agreement for a Multi-Jurisdictional Planning Team
A-5

Task 3

Create an Outreach Strategy

Name of Lead Jurisdiction

Office/Agency

Date: ___________________________________

Signature: _______________________________

Name of Authorized Government Official

Title (City Manager, Mayor, County Emergency Management Director, etc.)

Name of Jurisdiction A

Office/Agency

Date: ___________________________________

VI. Attachments

Plan Work Program and Schedule

Task 3

Create an Outreach Strategy

Worksheet 1.2

Sample Memorandum of Agreement for a Multi-Jurisdictional Planning Team
A-6 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Task 3

Create an Outreach Strategy

Worksheet 1.2

Sample Memorandum of Agreement for a Multi-Jurisdictional Planning Team

This page intentionally left blank.
A-7

Task 3

Create an Outreach Strategy

Mitigation Planning Team Worksheet

Use this worksheet to identify partner organizations to invite to participate on the planning team. Some 

organizations do not need to be involved in every decision of the planning process but are stakeholders that require 

outreach and involvement during the planning process. Revise the list of general partners below to reflect the 

organizations in your community. Mark which organizations will be invited to participate on the planning team and 

which will be involved through stakeholder outreach activities. 

Planning Team – The core group responsible for making decisions, guiding the planning process, and agreeing 

upon the final contents of the plan

Stakeholders – Individuals or groups that affect or can be affected by a mitigation action or policy

Partner Organization Planning Team Stakeholder Notes

Local Agencies

Building Code Enforcement

City Management/County Administration

Emergency Management

Fire Department/District

Floodplain Administration

Geographic Information Systems

Parks and Recreation 

Planning/Community Development

Public Works

Stormwater Management

Transportation (Roads and Bridges)

City Council/Board of Commissioners

Planning Commission

Planning/Community Development 

Regional/Metropolitan Planning Organization(s)

City/County Attorney’s Office 

Economic Development Agency

Local Emergency Planning Committee

Police/Sheriff’s Department 

Sanitation Department

Tax Assessor’s Office

Special Districts and Authorities

Airport, Seaport Authorities 

Fire Control District 

Flood Control District 

School District(s)

Transit Authority

Utility Districts 

Worksheet 2.1

Mitigation Planning Team Worksheet
A-8 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Task 3

Create an Outreach Strategy

Partner Organization Planning Team Stakeholder Notes

Non-Governmental Organizations

American Red Cross 

Chamber of Commerce 

Community/Faith-Based Organizations 

Environmental Organizations 

Homeowners Associations 

Neighborhood/Community Organizations 

Utility Companies

State Agencies

State Emergency Management Agency

State Dam Safety

State Department of Transportation

State Fire and Forestry Agency

State Geological Survey

State Water Resources Agency

State National Flood Insurance Program 

Coordinator

State Planning Office

Federal Agencies

Federal Emergency Management Agency

Land Management Agencies (USFS/NPS/BLM)

National Weather Service

US Army Corps of Engineers

US Department of Housing and Urban 

Development

US Department of Transportation

US Environmental Protection Agency

US Geological Survey

Other

Tribal Officials

Colleges/Universities

Land Developers and Real Estate Agencies

Major Employers and Businesses

Professional Associations

Neighboring Jurisdictions

Note: Multi-jurisdictional planning teams require at least one representative for each participating jurisdiction. This 

worksheet can be used by each jurisdiction to identify their local sub-team.

Worksheet 2.1

Mitigation Planning Team Worksheet
A-9

Task 3

Create an Outreach Strategy

Sample Schedule of Tasks

Worksheet 2.2

Sample Schedule of Tasks

September October November December January February March April May June July

Project TasksOrganize Resources andConvene Planning TeamCreate OutreachStrategyReview CommunityCapabilitiesConduct RiskAssessmentIdentify Mitigation Goalsand ActionsDevelop Action Plan forImplementationIdentify PlanMaintenance ProceduresReview Final DraftSubmit Plan to Stateand FEMAAdopt PlanMeetings

Planning TeamJurisdictional Sub-teamStakeholder/Public Outreach
A-10 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Task 3

Create an Outreach Strategy

Worksheet 2.2

Sample Schedule of Tasks

This page intentionally left blank.
A-11

Task 3

Create an Outreach Strategy

Sample Mitigation Public Opinion Survey

Worksheet 3.1

Sample Mitigation Public Opinion Survey
A-12 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Task 3

Create an Outreach Strategy

Worksheet 3.1

Sample Mitigation Public Opinion Survey
A-13

Task 3

Create an Outreach Strategy

Worksheet 3.1

Sample Mitigation Public Opinion Survey
A-14 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Task 3

Create an Outreach Strategy

Worksheet 3.1

Sample Mitigation Public Opinion Survey
A-15

Task 3

Create an Outreach Strategy

Worksheet 3.1

Sample Mitigation Public Opinion Survey
A-16 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Task 3

Create an Outreach Strategy

Worksheet 3.1

Sample Mitigation Public Opinion Survey
A-17

Task 3

Create an Outreach Strategy

Capability Assessment Worksheet

Jurisdiction: _________________________________________________________________________

Local mitigation capabilities are existing authorities, policies, programs, and resources that reduce hazard impacts 

or that could be used to implement hazard mitigation activities. Please complete the tables and questions in the 

worksheet as completely as possible. Complete one worksheet for each jurisdiction. 

Planning and Regulatory

Planning and regulatory capabilities are the plans, policies, codes, and ordinances that prevent and reduce the 

impacts of hazards. Please indicate which of the following your jurisdiction has in place. 

Plans Yes/No 

Year

Does the plan address hazards?

Does the plan identify projects to include in the mitigation 

strategy?

Can the plan be used to implement mitigation actions?

Comprehensive/Master Plan

Capital Improvements Plan

Economic Development Plan

Local Emergency Operations Plan

Continuity of Operations Plan

Transportation Plan

Stormwater Management Plan

Community Wildfire Protection Plan

Other special plans (e.g., brownfields 

redevelopment, disaster recovery, coastal zone 

management, climate change adaptation)

Worksheet 4.1

Capability Assessment Worksheet
A-18 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Task 3

Create an Outreach Strategy

Building Code, Permitting, and Inspections Yes/No Are codes adequately enforced?

Building Code Version/Year:

Building Code Effectiveness Grading Schedule 

(BCEGS) Score

Score:

Fire department ISO rating Rating:

Site plan review requirements

Land Use Planning and Ordinances Yes/No

Is the ordinance an effective measure for reducing hazard 

impacts?

Is the ordinance adequately administered and enforced?

Zoning ordinance

Subdivision ordinance

Floodplain ordinance

Natural hazard specific ordinance (stormwater, 

steep slope, wildfire)

Flood insurance rate maps

Acquisition of land for open space and public 

recreation uses

Other

How can these capabilities be expanded and improved to reduce risk?

Worksheet 4.1

Capability Assessment Worksheet
A-19

Task 3

Create an Outreach Strategy

Administrative and Technical

Identify whether your community has the following administrative and technical capabilities. These include staff 

and their skills and tools that can be used for mitigation planning and to implement specific mitigation actions. For 

smaller jurisdictions without local staff resources, if there are public resources at the next higher level government 

that can provide technical assistance, indicate so in your comments.

Administration Yes/No

Describe capability

Is coordination effective?

Planning Commission

Mitigation Planning Committee

Maintenance programs to reduce risk (e.g., 

tree trimming, clearing drainage systems)

Mutual aid agreements

Staff Yes/No 

FT/PT1

Is staffing adequate to enforce regulations?

Is staff trained on hazards and mitigation?

Is coordination between agencies and staff effective?

Chief Building Official

Floodplain Administrator

Emergency Manager

Community Planner 

Civil Engineer 

GIS Coordinator

Other

1 Full-time (FT) or part-time (PT) position

Worksheet 4.1

 Capability Assessment Worksheet
A-20 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Task 3

Create an Outreach Strategy

Technical Yes/No

Describe capability

Has capability been used to assess/mitigate risk in the 

past?

Warning systems/services

(Reverse 911, outdoor warning signals)

Hazard data and information

Grant writing

Hazus analysis

Other

How can these capabilities be expanded and improved to reduce risk?

Worksheet 4.1

Capability Assessment Worksheet
A-21

Task 3

Create an Outreach Strategy

Worksheet 4.1

Capability Assessment Worksheet

Financial

Identify whether your jurisdiction has access to or is eligible to use the following funding resources for hazard 

mitigation. 

Funding Resource

Access/ 

Eligibility 

(Yes/No)

Has the funding resource been used in past and for what 

type of activities?

Could the resource be used to fund future mitigation 

actions?

Capital improvements project funding

Authority to levy taxes for specific purposes

Fees for water, sewer, gas, or electric services

Impact fees for new development

Storm water utility fee

Incur debt through general obligation bonds 

and/or special tax bonds

Incur debt through private activities

Community Development Block Grant

Other federal funding programs

State funding programs

Other

How can these capabilities be expanded and improved to reduce risk?
A-22 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Task 3

Create an Outreach Strategy

Worksheet 4.1

Capability Assessment Worksheet

Education and Outreach

Identify education and outreach programs and methods already in place that could be used to implement mitigation 

activities and communicate hazard-related information. 

Program/Organization Yes/No

Describe program/organization and how relates to 

disaster resilience and mitigation.

Could the program/organization help implement future 

mitigation activities?

Local citizen groups or non-profit organizations 

focused on environmental protection, 

emergency preparedness, access and 

functional needs populations, etc.

Ongoing public education or information 

program (e.g., responsible water use, fire 

safety, household preparedness, environmental 

education)

Natural disaster or safety related school 

programs

StormReady certification

Firewise Communities certification

Public-private partnership initiatives addressing 

disaster-related issues

Other

How can these capabilities be expanded and improved to reduce risk?
A-23

Task 3

Create an Outreach Strategy

Worksheet 4.2

Safe Growth Audit

Safe Growth Audit 

Use this worksheet to identify gaps in your community’s growth guidance instruments and improvements that 

could be made to reduce vulnerability to future development.

Comprehensive Plan Yes No

Land Use

1. Does the future land-use map clearly identify natural hazard areas?

2. Do the land-use policies discourage development or redevelopment within natural hazard areas?

3. Does the plan provide adequate space for expected future growth in areas located outside natural 

hazard areas?

Transportation

1. Does the transportation plan limit access to hazard areas?

2. Is transportation policy used to guide growth to safe locations?

3. Are movement systems designed to function under disaster conditions (e.g., evacuation)?
A-24 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Task 3

Create an Outreach Strategy

Comprehensive Plan (continued) Yes No

Environmental Management

1. Are environmental systems that protect development from hazards identified and mapped?

2. Do environmental policies maintain and restore protective ecosystems?

3. Do environmental policies provide incentives to development that is located outside protective 

ecosystems?

Public Safety

1. Are the goals and policies of the comprehensive plan related to those of the FEMA Local Hazard 

Mitigation Plan?

2. Is safety explicitly included in the plan’s growth and development policies?

3. Does the monitoring and implementation section of the plan cover safe growth objectives?

Worksheet 4.2

Safe Growth Audit
A-25

Task 3

Create an Outreach Strategy

Zoning Ordinance Yes No

1. Does the zoning ordinance conform to the comprehensive plan in terms of discouraging 

development or redevelopment within natural hazard areas?

2. Does the ordinance contain natural hazard overlay zones that set conditions for land use within 

such zones?

3. Do rezoning procedures recognize natural hazard areas as limits on zoning changes that allow 

greater intensity or density of use?

4. Does the ordinance prohibit development within, or filling of, wetlands, floodways, and floodplains?

Subdivision Regulations Yes No

1. Do the subdivision regulations restrict the subdivision of land within or adjacent to natural hazard 

areas?

2. Do the regulations provide for conservation subdivisions or cluster subdivisions in order to conserve 

environmental resources?

3. Do the regulations allow density transfers where hazard areas exist?

Worksheet 4.2

Safe Growth Audit
A-26 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Task 3

Create an Outreach Strategy

Capital Improvement Program and Infrastructure Policies Yes No

1. Does the capital improvement program limit expenditures on projects that would encourage 

development in areas vulnerable to natural hazards?

2. Do infrastructure policies limit extension of existing facilities and services that would encourage 

development in areas vulnerable to natural hazards?

3. Does the capital improvement program provide funding for hazard mitigation projects identified in 

the FEMA Mitigation Plan?

Other Yes No

1. Do small area or corridor plans recognize the need to avoid or mitigation natural hazards?

2. Does the building code contain provisions to strengthen or elevate construction to withstand hazard 

forces?

3. Do economic development or redevelopment strategies include provisions for mitigation natural 

hazards?

4. Is there an adopted evacuation and shelter plan to deal with emergencies from natural hazards?

Questions adapted from Godschalk, David R. Practice Safe Growth Audits, Zoning Practice, Issue Number 10, October 

2009, American Planning Association. http://www.planning.org/zoningpractice/open/pdf/oct09.pdf.

Worksheet 4.2

Safe Growth Audit
A-27

Task 3

Create an Outreach Strategy

National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) Worksheet

Use this worksheet to collect information on your community’s participation in and continued compliance with 

the NFIP, as well as identify areas for improvement that could be potential mitigation actions. Indicate the source of 

information, if different from the one included.

NFIP Topic Source of Information Comments

Insurance Summary

How many NFIP policies are in the 

community? What is the total premium 

and coverage?

State NFIP Coordinator or 

FEMA NFIP Specialist

How many claims have been paid in the 

community? What is the total amount 

of paid claims? How many of the claims 

were for substantial damage?

FEMA NFIP or Insurance 

Specialist

How many structures are exposed to 

flood risk within the community?

Community Floodplain 

Administrator (FPA)

Describe any areas of flood risk with 

limited NFIP policy coverage

Community FPA and FEMA 

Insurance Specialist

Staff Resources

Is the Community FPA or NFIP 

Coordinator certified?

Community FPA

Is floodplain management an auxiliary 

function? 

Community FPA

Provide an explanation of NFIP 

administration services (e.g., permit 

review, GIS, education or outreach, 

inspections, engineering capability)

Community FPA

What are the barriers to running an 

effective NFIP program in the community, 

if any?

Community FPA

Compliance History

Is the community in good standing with 

the NFIP?

State NFIP Coordinator, 

FEMA NFIP Specialist, 

community records

Are there any outstanding compliance 

issues (i.e., current violations)?

When was the most recent Community 

Assistance Visit (CAV) or Community 

Assistance Contact (CAC)?

Is a CAV or CAC scheduled or needed?

Worksheet 4.3

National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP)
A-28 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Task 3

Create an Outreach Strategy

NFIP Topic Source of Information Comments

Regulation

When did the community enter the NFIP? Community Status Book 

http://www.fema.gov/

national-flood-insuranceprogram/national-floodinsurance-programcommunity-status-book

Are the FIRMs digital or paper? Community FPA

Do floodplain development regulations 

meet or exceed FEMA or State minimum 

requirements? If so, in what ways?

Community FPA

Provide an explanation of the permitting 

process.

Community FPA, State, 

FEMA NFIP

Flood Insurance Manual 

http://www.fema.gov/

flood-insurance-manual

Community FPA, FEMA 

CRS Coordinator, ISO 

representative

CRS manual http://

www.fema.gov/library/

viewRecord.do?id=2434

Community Rating System (CRS)

Does the community participate in CRS? Community FPA, State, 

FEMA NFIP

What is the community’s CRS Class 

Ranking?

Flood Insurance Manual 

http://www.fema.gov/

flood-insurance-manual

What categories and activities provide 

CRS points and how can the class be 

improved?

Does the plan include CRS planning 

requirements

Community FPA, FEMA 

CRS Coordinator, ISO 

representative

CRS manual http://

www.fema.gov/library/

viewRecord.do?id=2434

Worksheet 4.3

National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP)
A-29

Task 3

Create an Outreach Strategy

Hazards Summary Worksheet

Use this worksheet to summarize hazard description information and identify which hazards are most significant to 

the planning area. The definitions provided on the following page can be modified to meet local needs and methods. 

Hazard

Location 

(Geographic Area 

Affected)

Maximum Probable 

Extent 

(Magnitude/Strength)

Probability of 

Future Events

Overall Significance 

Ranking

Avalanche

Dam Failure

Drought

Earthquake

Erosion

Expansive Soils

Extreme Cold

Extreme Heat

Flood

Hail

Hurricane

Landslide

Lightning

Sea Level Rise

Severe Wind

Severe Winter Weather

Storm Surge

Subsidence

Tornado

Tsunami

Wildfire

Worksheet 5.1

Hazard Summary Worksheet
A-30 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Task 3

Create an Outreach Strategy

Definitions for Classifications

Location (Geographic Area Affected)

• Negligible: Less than 10 percent of planning area or isolated single-point occurrences

• Limited: 10 to 25 percent of the planning area or limited single-point occurrences

• Significant: 25 to 75 percent of planning area or frequent single-point occurrences

• Extensive: 75 to 100 percent of planning area or consistent single-point occurrences

Maximum Probable Extent (Magnitude/Strength based on historic events or future probability)

• Weak: Limited classification on scientific scale, slow speed of onset or short duration of event, resulting in little 

to no damage

• Moderate: Moderate classification on scientific scale, moderate speed of onset or moderate duration of event, 

resulting in some damage and loss of services for days

• Severe: Severe classification on scientific scale, fast speed of onset or long duration of event, resulting in 

devastating damage and loss of services for weeks or months

• Extreme: Extreme classification on scientific scale, immediate onset or extended duration of event, resulting in 

catastrophic damage and uninhabitable conditions

Hazard Scale / Index Weak Moderate Severe Extreme

Drought Palmer Drought Severity Index3 -1.99 to 

+1.99

-2.00 to 

-2.99

-3.00 to 

-3.99

-4.00 and 

below

Earthquake

Modified Mercalli Scale4 I to IV V to VII VII IX to XII

Richter Magnitude5 2, 3 4, 5 6 7, 8

Hurricane Wind Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Wind Scale6 1 2 3 4, 5

Tornado Fujita Tornado Damage Scale7 F0 F1, F2 F3 F4, F5

Probability of Future Events

• Unlikely: Less than 1 percent probability of occurrence in the next year or a recurrence interval of greater than 

every 100 years.

• Occasional: 1 to 10 percent probability of occurrence in the next year or a recurrence interval of 11 to 100 

years. 

• Likely: 10 to 90 percent probability of occurrence in the next year or a recurrence interval of 1 to 10 years

• Highly Likely: 90 to 100 percent probability of occurrence in the next year or a recurrence interval of less than 

1 year.

Overall Significance 

• Low: Two or more criteria fall in lower classifications or the event has a minimal impact on the planning area. 

This rating is sometimes used for hazards with a minimal or unknown record of occurrences or for hazards 

with minimal mitigation potential. 

• Medium: The criteria fall mostly in the middle ranges of classifications and the event’s impacts on the planning 

area are noticeable but not devastating. This rating is sometimes used for hazards with a high extent rating but 

very low probability rating.

• High: The criteria consistently fall in the high classifications and the event is likely/highly likely to occur with 

severe strength over a significant to extensive portion of the planning area.

3 Cumulative meteorological drought and wet conditions: http://ncdc.noaa.gov/

4 Earthquake intensity and effect on population and structures: http://earthquake.usgs.gov

5 Earthquake magnitude as a logarithmic scale, measured by a seismograph: http://earthquake.usgs.gov

6 Hurricane rating based on sustained wind speed: http://nhc.noaa.gov

7 Tornado rating based on wind speed and associated damage: http://spc.noaa.gov

Worksheet 5.1

Hazard Summary Worksheet
A-31

Task 3

Create an Outreach Strategy

Mitigation Action Evaluation Worksheet

Use this worksheet to help evaluate and prioritize each mitigation action being considered by the planning team. 

For each action, evaluate the potential benefits and/or likelihood of successful implementation for the criteria 

defined below. 

Rank each of the criteria with a -1, 0 or 1 using the following scale: 

• 1 = Highly effective or feasible

• 0 = Neutral

• -1 = Ineffective or not feasible

Example Evaluation Criteria

Life Safety – How effective will the action be at protecting lives and preventing injuries?

Property Protection – How significant will the action be at eliminating or reducing damage to structures and 

infrastructure?

Technical – Is the mitigation action technically feasible? Is it a long-term solution? Eliminate actions that, from a 

technical standpoint, will not meet the goals. 

Political – Is there overall public support for the mitigation action? Is there the political will to support it?

Legal – Does the community have the authority to implement the action?

Environmental – What are the potential environmental impacts of the action? Will it comply with environmental 

regulations? 

Social – Will the proposed action adversely affect one segment of the population? Will the action disrupt established 

neighborhoods, break up voting districts, or cause the relocation of lower income people?

Administrative – Does the community have the personnel and administrative capabilities to implement the action 

and maintain it or will outside help be necessary? 

Local Champion – Is there a strong advocate for the action or project among local departments and agencies that 

will support the action’s implementation?

Other Community Objectives – Does the action advance other community objectives, such as capital 

improvements, economic development, environmental quality, or open space preservation? Does it support the 

policies of the comprehensive plan?

Worksheet 6.1

Mitigation Action Evaluation Worksheet
A-32 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Task 3

Create an Outreach Strategy Mitigation Action Life Safety Property Protection Technical Political Legal Environmental Social Administrative Local Champion Other Community Objectives Total Score Local Plans and Regulations

Structure and Infrastructure ProjectsNatural Systems ProtectionEducation and Awareness Programs

Worksheet 6.1

Mitigation Action Evaluation Worksheet
A-33

Task 3

Create an Outreach Strategy

Mitigation Action Implementation Worksheet

Complete a mitigation action implementation worksheet for each identified mitigation action.

Jurisdiction:

Mitigation Action/Project

Title:

Background/Issue:

Ideas for Integration: 

Responsible Agency:

Partners:

Potential Funding:

Cost Estimate:

Benefits:

(Losses Avoided)

Timeline:

Priority:

Worksheet Completed by: (Name/Department)

Worksheet 6.2

Mitigation Action Implementation Worksheet
A-34 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Task 3

Create an Outreach Strategy

Worksheet 6.2

Mitigation Action Implementation Worksheet

This page intentionally left blank.
A-35

Task 3

Create an Outreach Strategy

Mitigation Action Progress Report Form

Progress Report Period From Date: To Date:

Action/Project Title

Responsible Agency

Contact Name

Contact Phone/Email

Project Status o Project completed

o Project canceled

o Project on schedule

o Anticipated completion date:_______________________________________________________

o Project delayed

 Explain _________________________________________________________________________

Summary of Project Progress for this Report Period

1. What was accomplished for this project during this reporting period? 

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________

2. What obstacles, problems, or delays did the project encounter? 

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________

3. If uncompleted, is the project still relevant? Should the project be changed or revised? 

_______________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________________

4. Other comments

_______________________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________________________

Worksheet 7.1

Mitigation Action Progress Report Form
A-36 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Task 3

Create an Outreach Strategy

Worksheet 7.1

Mitigation Action Progress Report Form

This page intentionally left blank.
A-37

Task 3

Create an Outreach Strategy

Plan Update Evaluation Worksheet

Plan Section Considerations Explanation

Planning 

Process

Should new jurisdictions and/or 

districts be invited to participate in 

future plan updates?

Have any internal or external agencies 

been invaluable to the mitigation 

strategy?

Can any procedures (e.g., meeting 

announcements, plan updates) be 

done differently or more efficiently?

Has the Planning Team undertaken any 

public outreach activities?

How can public participation be 

improved?

Have there been any changes in 

public support and/or decision- maker 

priorities related to hazard mitigation?

Capability 

Assessment

Have jurisdictions adopted new 

policies, plans, regulations, or reports 

that could be incorporated into this 

plan?

Are there different or additional 

administrative, human, technical, 

and financial resources available for 

mitigation planning?

Are there different or new education 

and outreach programs and resources 

available for mitigation activities?

Has NFIP participation changed in the 

participating jurisdictions?

Risk 

Assessment

Has a natural and/or technical or 

human-caused disaster occurred?

Should the list of hazards addressed 

in the plan be modified?

Are there new data sources and/or 

additional maps and studies available? 

If so, what are they and what have they 

revealed? Should the information be 

incorporated into future plan updates?

Do any new critical facilities or 

infrastructure need to be added to the 

asset lists?

Have any changes in development 

trends occurred that could create 

additional risks?

Are there repetitive losses and/or 

severe repetitive losses to document? 

Worksheet 7.2

Plan Update Evaluation Worksheet
A-38 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Task 3

Create an Outreach Strategy

Plan Section Considerations Explanation

Mitigation 

Strategy

Is the mitigation strategy being 

implemented as anticipated? Were the 

cost and timeline estimates accurate?

Should new mitigation actions be 

added to the Action Plan? Should 

existing mitigation actions be revised 

or eliminated from the plan?

Are there new obstacles that were not 

anticipated in the plan that will need to 

be considered in the next plan update?

Are there new funding sources to 

consider?

Have elements of the plan been 

incorporated into other planning 

mechanisms?

Plan 

Maintenance 

Procedures

Was the plan monitored and evaluated 

as anticipated?

What are needed improvements to the 

procedures?

Worksheet 7.2

Plan Update Evaluation Worksheet
A-39

Task 3

Create an Outreach Strategy

Example Adoption Resolution

(LOCAL COMMUNITY)

(STATE)

RESOLUTION NO. ___________

A RESOLUTION OF THE (LOCAL COMMUNITY) ADOPTING THE 

(TITLE AND DATE OF MITIGATION PLAN)

WHEREAS the (local governing body) recognizes the threat that natural hazards pose to people and property within 

(local community); and

WHEREAS the (local community) has prepared a multi-hazard mitigation plan, hereby known as (title and date of 

mitigation plan) in accordance with the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000; and

WHEREAS (title and date of mitigation plan) identifies mitigation goals and actions to reduce or eliminate longterm risk to people and property in (local community) from the impacts of future hazards and disasters; and

WHEREAS adoption by the (local governing body) demonstrates their commitment to the hazard mitigation and 

achieving the goals outlined in the (title and date of mitigation plan).

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE (LOCAL COMMUNITY), (STATE), THAT: 

Section 1. In accordance with (local rule for adopting resolutions), the (local governing body) adopts the (title and 

date of mitigation plan). 

ADOPTED by a vote of ____ in favor and ____ against, and ____ abstaining, this _____ day of 

___________, ______. 

By: _________________________________

(print name)

ATTEST: 

By: _________________________________

(print name)

APPROVED AS TO FORM: 

By: _________________________________ 

(print name)

Worksheet 8.1

Example Adoption Resolution
A-40 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Task 3

Create an Outreach Strategy

Worksheet 8.1

Example Adoption Resolution

This page intentionally left blank.
Appendix B

Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool

Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool B-1

Appendix B

Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool

LOCAL MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW TOOL 

The Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool demonstrates how the Local Mitigation Plan meets 

the regulation in 44 CFR §201.6 and offers States and FEMA Mitigation Planners an 

opportunity to provide feedback to the community. 

• The Regulation Checklist provides a summary of FEMA's evaluation of whether the

Plan has addressed all requirements.

• The Plan Assessment identifies the plan's strengths as well as documents areas for

future improvement.

• The Multi-jurisdiction Summary Sheet is an optional worksheet that can be used to 

document how each jurisdiction met the requirements of the each Element of the

Plan (Planning Process; Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment; Mitigation

Strategy; Plan Review, Evaluation, and Implementation; and Plan Adoption).

The FEMA Mitigation Planner must reference this Local Mitigation Plan Review Guide when 

completing the Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool. 

Jurisdiction: Title of Plan: Date of Plan: 

Local Point of Contact: Address: 

Title: 

Agency: 

Phone Number: E-Mail:

State Reviewe,, Title I I 

FEMA Reviewer; Title: Date: 

I

Date Received in FEMA Region (insert II} 

Plan Not Approved 

Plan Approvable Pending Adoption 

Plan Approved 

Date
B-2 Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool

Appendix B

Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool

-

SECTION l: 

REGULATION CHECKLIST 

INSTRUCTIONS: The Regulation Checklist must be completed by FEMA. The purpose of the 

Checklist is to identify the location of relevant or applicable content in the Plan by 

Element/sub-element and to determine if each requirement has been 'Met' or 'Not Met.' 

The 'Required Revisions' summary at the bottom of each Element must be completed by 

FEMA to provide a clear explanation of the revisions that are required for plan approval. 

Required revisions must be explained for each plan sub-element that is 'Not Met.' Subelements should be referenced in each summary by using the appropriate numbers (Al, 83, 

etc.}, where applicable. Requirements for each Element and sub-element are described in 

detail in this Plan Review Guide in Section 4, Regulation Checklist. 

1. REGULATION CHECKLIST Location in Plan 

Not (section and/or 

Regulation (44 CFR 201.6 Local Mitigation Plans) page number) Met Met 

ELEMENT A. PLANNING PROCESS 

Al. Does the Plan document the planning process, including how it 

was prepared and who was involved in the process for each 

jurisdiction? (Requirement §201.6(c)(1)) 

A2. Does the Plan document an opportunity for neighboring 

communities, local and regional agencies involved in hazard 

mitigation activities, agencies that have the authority to regulate 

development as well as other interests to be involved in the planning 

process? (Requirement §201.6(b)(2)) 

A3. Does the Plan document how the public was involved in the 

planning process during the drafting stage? (Requirement 

§201.G(b)(l)) 

A4. Does the Plan describe the review and incorporation of existing 

plans, studies, reports, and technical information? (Requirement 

§201.6(b)(3)) 

AS, Is there discussion of how the community(ies) will continue public 

part(dpation in the plan maintenance process? (Requirement 

§201.6(c)(4)(iii)) 

A6. Is there a description of the method and schedule for keeping the 

plan current (monitoring, evaluating and updating the mitigation plan 

within a 5 -year cycle)? (Requirement §201.6(c)(4)(1)) 

ELEMENT A: REgUIRED REVISIONS 
Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool B-3

Appendix B

Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool

1. REGULATION CHECKLIST Location in Plan 

Not (section and/or 

Regulation (44 CFR 201.6 Local Mitigation Plans) page number) Met Met 

ELEMENT B. HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT 

Bl. Does the Plan include a description of the type, location, and 

extent of all natural hazards that can affect each jurisdiction(s)? 

(Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(i)) 

B2. Does the Plan include information on previous occurrences of 

hazard events and on the probability of future hazard events for each 

jurisdiction? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(i)) 

B3. Is there a description of each identified hazard's impact on the 

community as well as an overall summary of the community's 

vulnerability for each jurisdiction? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(ii)) 

B4. Does the Plan address NFIP insured structures within the 

jurisdiction that have been repetitively damaged by floods? 

(Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(ii)) 

ELEMENT B: REgUIRED REVISIONS 

ELEMENT C. MITIGATION STRATEGY 

Cl. Does the plan document each jurisdiction's existing authorities, 

policies, programs and resources and its ability to expand on and 

improve these existing policies and programs? (Requirement 

§201.6(c)(3)) 

C2. Does the Plan address each jurisdiction's participation in the NFIP 

and continued compliance with NFIP requirements, as appropriate? 

(Requirement §201.6(c)(3)(ii)) 

C3. Does the Plan include goals to reduce/avoid long-term 

vulnerabilities to the identified hazards? (Requirement 

§201.6( c)(3)(i)) 

C4. Does the Plan identify and analyze a comprehensive range of 

specific mitigation actions and projects for each jurisdiction being 

considered to reduce the effects of hazards, with emphasis on new 

and existing buildings and infrastructure? (Requirement 

§201.6(c)(3)(ii)) 

CS. Does the Plan contain an action plan that describes how the 

actions identified will be prioritized (including cost benefit review), 

implemented, and administered by each jurisdiction? (Requirement 

§201.6(c)(3)(iv)); (Requirement §201.6(c)(3)(iii)) 

C6. Does the Plan describe a process by which local governments will 

integrate the requirements of the mitigation plan into other planning 

mechanisms, such as comprehensive or capital improvement plans, 

when appropriate? (Requirement §201.6(c)(4)(ii)) 

ELEMENT C: REgUIRED REVISIONS 
B-4 Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool

Appendix B

Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool

1. REGULATION CHECKLIST Location in Plan 

Not (section and/or 

Regulation (44 CFR 201.6 Local Mitigation Plans) page number) Met Met

ELEMENT D. PLAN REVIEW, EVALUATION, AND IMPLEMENTATION (applicable to plan updates 

only) 

D1. Was the plan revised to reflect changes in development? 

(Requirement §201.6(d)(3)) 

D2. Was the plan revised to reflect progress in local mitigation 

efforts? (Requirement §201.6(d)(3)) 

D3. Was the plan revised to reflect changes in priorities? 

(Requirement §201.6(d)(3)) 

ELEMENT D: REgUIRED REVISIONS 

ELEMENT E. PLAN ADOPTION 

El. Does the Plan include documentation that the plan has been 

formally adopted by the governing body of the jurisdiction requesting 

approval? (Requirement §201.6(c)(5)) 

E2. For multi-jurisdictional plans, has each jurisdiction requesting 

approval of the plan documented formal plan adoption? 

(Requirement §201.6(c)(5)) 

ELEMENT E: REgUIRED REVISIONS 

ELEMENT F. ADDITIONAL STATE REQUIREMENTS (OPTIONAL FOR STATE REVIEWERS ONLY;

NOT TO BE COMPLETED BY FEMA) 

Fl. 

F2. 

ELEMENT F: REgUIRED REVISIONS 
Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool B-5

Appendix B

Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool

SECTION 2: 

PLAN ASSESSMENT

INSTRUCTIONS: The purpose of the Plan Assessment is to offer the local community more 

comprehensive feedback to the community on the quality and utility of the plan in a 

narrative format. The audience for the Plan Assessment is not only the plan developer/loc

community planner, but also elected officialsJ local departments and agencies, and others 

involved in implementing the Local Mitigation Plan. The Plan Assessment must be 

completed by FEMA. The Assessment is an opportunity for FEMA to provide feedback and 

information to the community on: 1) suggested improvements to the Plan; 2) specific 

sections in the Plan where the community has gone above and beyond minimum 

requirements; 3) recommendations for plan implementation; and 4) ongoing partnership(s)

and information on other FEMA programs, specifically RiskMAP and Hazard Mitigation 

Assistance programs. The Plan Assessment is divided into two sections: 

1. Plan Strengths and Opportunities for Improvement 

2. Resources for Implementing Your Approved Plan 

Plan Strengths and Opportunities for Improvement is organized according to the plan 

Elements listed in the Regulation Checklist. Each Element includes a series of italicized 

bulleted items that are suggested topics for consideration while evaluating plans, but it is 

not intended to be a comprehensive list. FEMA Mitigation Planners are not required to 

answer each bullet item, and should use them as a guide to paraphrase their own written 

assessment (2-3 sentences) of each Element. 

The Plan Assessment must not reiterate the required revisions from the Regulation 

Checklist or be regulatory in nature, and should be open-ended and to provide the 

community with suggestions for improvements or recommended revisions. The 

recommended revisions are suggestions for improvement and are not required to be made

for the Plan to meet Federal regulatory requirements. The italicized text should be deleted

once FEMA has added comments regarding strengths of the plan and potential 

improvements for future plan revisions. It is recommended that the Plan Assessment be a 

short synopsis of the overall strengths and weaknesses of the Plan (no longer than two 

pages), rather than a complete recap section by section. 

Resources for Implementing Your Approved Plan provides a place for FEMA to offer 

information, data sources and general suggestions on the overall plan implementation and 

maintenance process. Information on other possible sources of assistance including, but 

not limited to, existing publications, grant funding or training opportunities, can be 

.._ provided. __________________________________ States may add state and local resources, if available . 

al 

II 

II 

11 

11 

11 

11 11 

___., 
B-6 Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool

Appendix B

Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool

A. Plan Strengths and Opportunities for Improvement 

This section provides a discussion of the strengths of the plan document and identifies areas 

where these could be improved beyond minimum requirements. 

Element A: Planning Process 

How does the Plan go above and beyond minimum requirements to document the planning 

process with respect to: 

• Involvement of stakeholders (elected officials/decision makers, plan implementers, 

business owners, academic institutions, utility companies, water/sanitation districts, 

etc.); 

• Involvement of Planning, Emergency Management, Public Works Departments or other 

planning agencies (i.e., regional planning councils); 

• Diverse methods of participation (meetings, surveys, online, etc.); and 

• Reflective of an open and inclusive public involvement process. 

Element B: Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment 

In addition to the requirements listed in the Regulation Checklist, 44 CFR 201.6 Local 

Mitigation Plans identifies additional elements that should be included as part of a plan's 

risk assessment. The plan should describe vulnerability in terms of: 

1) A general description of land uses and future development trends within the community 

so that mitigation options can be considered in future land use decisions; 

2} The types and numbers of existing and future buildings, infrastructure, and critical 

facilities located in the identified hazard areas; and 

3) A description of potential dollar losses to vulnerable structures, and a description of the 

methodology used to prepare the estimate. 

How does the Plan go above and beyond minimum requirements to document the Hazard 

Identification and Risk Assessment with respect to: 

• Use of best available data (flood maps, HAZUS, flood studies) to describe significant 

hazards; 

• Communication of risk on people, property, and infrastructure to the public (through 

tables, charts, maps, photos, etc.); 

• Incorporation of techniques and methodologies to estimate dollar losses to vulnerable 

structures; 

• Incorporation of Risk MAP products (i.e., depth grids, Flood Risk Report, Changes Since 

Last FIRM, Areas of Mitigation Interest, etc.); and 

• Identification of any data gaps that can be filled as new data became available. 
Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool B-7

Appendix B

Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool

Element C: Mitigation Strategy 

How does the Plan go above and beyond minimum requirements to document the 

Mitigation Strategy with respect to: 

• Key problems identified in, and linkages to, the vulnerability assessment; 

• Serving as a blueprint for reducing potential losses identified in the Hazard Identification 

and Risk Assessment; 

• Plan content flow from the risk assessment (problem identification) to goal setting to 

mitigation action development; 

• An understanding of mitigation principles (diversity of actions that include structural 

projects, preventative measures, outreach activities, property protection measures, postdisaster actions, etc); 

• Specific mitigation actions for each participating jurisdictions that reflects their unique 

risks and capabilities; 

• Integration of mitigation actions with existing local authorities, policies., programs, and 

resources; and 

• Discussion of existing programs (including the NFJP)1 plans, and policies that could be 

used to implement mitigation., as well as document past projects. 

Element O: Plan Update, Evaluation, and Implementation (Plan Updates Only) 

How does the Plan go above and beyond minimum requirements to document the 5-year 

Evaluation and Implementation measures with respect to: 

• Status of previously recommended mitigation actions; 

• Identification of barriers or obstacles to successful implementation or completion of 

mitigatfon actions, along with possible solutfons for overcoming risk; 

• Documentation of annual reviews and committee involvement; 

• Identification of a lead person to take ownership of., and champion the Plan; 

• Reducing risks from natural hazards and serving as a guide for decisions makers as they 

commit resources to reducing the effects of natural hazards; 

• An approach to evaluating future conditions (i.e. socio-economic, environmental, 

demographic, change in built environment etc.); 

• Discussion of how changing conditions and opportunities could impact community 

resilience in the long term; and 

• Discussion of how the mitigation goals and actions support the long-term community 

vision for increased resilience. 
B-8 Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool

Appendix B

Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool

8. Resources for Implementing Your Approved Plan 

Ideas may be offered on moving the mitigation plan forward and continuing the relationship 

with key mitigation stakeholders such as the following: 

• What FEMA assistance (funding) programs are available (for example, Hazard 

Mitigation Assistance (HMA)) to the jurisdiction(s) to assist with implementing the 

mitigation actions? 

• What other Federal programs (National Flood Insurance Program {NFIP}, Community 

Rating System (CRS}) Risk MAP, etc,) may provide assistance for mitigation activities? 

• What publications, technical guidance or other resources are available to the 

jurisdiction(s) relevant to the identified mitigation actions? 

• Are there upcoming trainings/workshops (Benefit-Cost Analysis {BCA), HMA, etc.) to 

assist the jurisdictions(s)? 

• What mitigation actions can be funded by other Federal agencies (for example, U.S. 

Forest Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration {NOAA), 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Smart Growth, Housing and Urban Development 

{HUD) Sustainable Communities, etc.) and/or state and local agencies? 
Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool B-9

Appendix B

Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool
B-10 Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool

Appendix B

Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool

This page intentionally left blank.
Appendix C

Additional Resources

C-1

Appendix C

Additional Resources

Appendix C – Additional Resources

American Planning Association (APA). 2010. Hazard Mitigation: Integrating Best Practices into Planning. Planning Advisory 

Service (PAS) Report 560, http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=4267. 

APA. 1998. Planning for Post-Disaster Recovery and Reconstruction. Planning Advisory Service (PAS) Report 483/484, http://www.

fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=1558 (Chapters 3, 4, and 5). Complete copies may also be ordered through 

the APA Planners Book Service (http://www.planning.org/apastore/).

“Benefit-Cost Analysis,” Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), December 2011, http://www.fema.gov/

government/grant/bca.shtm. 

“Choosing a Consultant,” a revised and edited excerpt from Selecting and Retaining a Planning Consultant: RFPs, RFQs, Contracts, 

and Project Management by Eric Damian Kelly, FAICP. APA, 1993, http://www.planning.org/consultants/choosing/.

“Community Rating System,” FEMA, April 2012, http://www.fema.gov/business/nfip/crs.shtm. 

FEMA. 2003. Bringing the Plan to Life: Implementing the Hazard Mitigation Plan: State and Local Mitigation Planning How-To 

Guide. FEMA 386-4. August 2003, http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=1887. 

FEMA. 2003. Building a Disaster-Resistant University. FEMA 443. August 2003, http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.

do?id=1565. 

FEMA. 2005. Building Partnerships to Reduce Hazard Risks: Tips for Community Officials, Colleges and Universities. FEMA L-265. March 

2005, http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=1682. 

FEMA. 2011. Comprehensive Preparedness Guide (CPG) 201: Threat and Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment Guide. First Edition, 

April 2012. http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=5823. 

FEMA. 2003. Developing the Mitigation Plan: Identifying Mitigation Actions and Implementation Strategies: State and Local Mitigation 

Planning How-To Guide. FEMA 386-3. April 2003, http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=1886. 

FEMA. 2002. Getting Started: Building Support for Mitigation Planning: State and Local Mitigation Planning How-To Guide. 

FEMA 386-1. September 2002, http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=1867. 

FEMA. 2005. Integrating Historic Property and Cultural Resource Considerations into Hazard Mitigation Planning: State and Local 

Mitigation Planning How-To Guide. FEMA 386-6. May 2005, http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.

do?id=1892.

FEMA. 2003. Integrating Manmade Hazards into Mitigation Planning: State and Local Mitigation Planning How-To Guide. 

FEMA 386-7. September 2003, http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=1915. 

FEMA. 2011. Local Mitigation Plan Review Guide. October 2011. http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=4988. 

FEMA. 2010. Mitigation Planning Fact Sheet. March 2010, http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=2066. 

FEMA. 2006. Multi-Jurisdictional Mitigation Planning: State and Local Mitigation Planning How-To Guide. FEMA 386-8. 

August 2006, http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=1905. 

FEMA. 2007. National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) Community Rating System (CRS) Coordinator’s Manual. FIA-15/2007, http://

www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=2434 (also see draft copy of the new CRS Coordinator’s Manual at http://

www.crs2012.org).
C-2 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook

Appendix C

Additional Resources

FEMA. 2000. Planning for a Sustainable Future: The Link Between Hazard Mitigation and Livability. FEMA 364. September 2000, 

http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=1541. 

FEMA. 2000. Rebuilding for a More Sustainable Future: An Operational Framework. FEMA 365. November 2000, http://www.

fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=1429. 

FEMA. 2001. Understanding Your Risks: Identifying Hazards and Estimating Losses: State and Local Mitigation Planning How-To 

Guide. FEMA 386-2. August 2001, http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=1880. 

FEMA. 2008. Using the Hazard Mitigation Plan to Prepare Successful Mitigation Projects: State and Local Mitigation Planning HowTo Guide. FEMA 386-9. August 2008, http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=3388. 

FEMA. 2013. Mitigation Ideas. January 2013, http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=6938.

“Firewise Communities,” National Fire Protection Association, 2012, http://www.firewise.org/. 

Godschalk, David R. 2009. “Safe Growth Audits,” Zoning Practice, Issue Number 10, October 2009. APA, http://

www.planning.org/zoningpractice/open/pdf/oct09.pdf. 

“Hazus: FEMA’s Methodology for Estimating Potential Losses from Disasters,” FEMA, March 2012, http://www.

fema.gov/hazus/. 

“Mitigation Best Practices Portfolio,” FEMA, August 2010, http://www.fema.gov/mitigation-best-practicesportfolio. 

“Mitigation Planning Laws, Regulations, and Guidance,” FEMA, October 2011, http://www.fema.gov/preparedness. 

“Mitigation Planning for Local and Tribal Communities,” FEMA IS-318 (Interactive Web-based Course), December 

2011, http://training.fema.gov/EMIWeb/IS/is318.asp. 

“StormReady,” National Weather Service, 2012, http://www.stormready.noaa.gov/. 

FEMA P-736

Catalog No. 08319-1

FEMA