National Mitigation

Framework 

Second Edition 

June 2016 

National Mitigation Framework

 i 

Executive Summary

Threats and hazards present long-term risks to people and their property. Mitigation is risk 

management action taken to avoid, reduce, or transfer those risks. By reducing the impact of 

disasters, mitigation supports protection and prevention activities, eases response, and speeds 

recovery to create better prepared and more resilient communities. The National Mitigation 

Framework establishes a common platform and forum for coordinating and addressing how the 

Nation manages risk through mitigation capabilities. This Framework describes mitigation roles 

across the whole community. The Framework addresses how the Nation will lessen the impact of 

disaster by developing, employing, and coordinating core mitigation capabilities to reduce loss of life 

and property. Building on a wealth of evidence-based knowledge and community experience, the 

Framework seeks to increase risk awareness and promote resilience building by leveraging

mitigation enhancing products, services, and assets across the whole community. 

Mitigation exists at every level—from the family that creates a sheltering plan in case of a tornado, to 

corporate continuity of operations plans, to emergency plans for manufacturing facilitates to local 

codes and zoning that systemically address risks in a community’s buildings. Developing and 

maintaining a culture of preparedness to build widespread resilience throughout communities is a 

priority for the Nation. Cultivating this culture across the whole community will reduce the human 

impact of disasters, enhance emergency response professionals’ ability to perform critical tasks more 

effectively, and allow communities to recover more efficiently. Individuals, families, businesses, 

non-profit organizations, and local, state, tribal, territorial, and Federal governments share 

responsibility for preparedness. Drawing upon the support and guidance of the whole community,

these entities can manage risk and vulnerability, and community residents can feel confident 

knowing they live in safer, more secure, and resilient communities. 

A culture of preparedness is built over time on a shared acknowledgment of the certainty of future 

catastrophes; the importance of initiative and accountability at all levels; the role of individuals and 

stakeholders in preparedness; and finally, the roles of the whole community in creating a prepared 

Nation. Additionally, the culture of preparedness is demonstrated by the four guiding principles, 

which include; Resilience and Sustainability, Leadership and Locally Focused Implementation, 

Engaged Partnerships and Inclusiveness, and Risk-conscious Culture. These principles lay the 

foundation for the Mitigation mission and the execution of its core capabilities. 

Effective mitigation begins with a comprehensive understanding of risk based on vulnerabilities to 

threats and hazards. Aiming toward the ultimate goal of sustainability and resilience, mitigation 

requires a process of continuous learning, adapting to change, managing risk, and evaluating 

progress. Sound assessment requires risk information—based on credible science, technology, and 

intelligence—validated by experience. Understanding the risks makes it possible to develop 

strategies and plans to manage them. Managing risks from threats and hazards requires decision 

making to accept, avoid, reduce, or transfer those risks. Avoiding, reducing, and transferring risks are 

ways to reduce the long-term vulnerability of a community and build individual and community 

resilience. This Framework is driven by risk, rather than the occurrence of incidents. By fostering 

comprehensive risk considerations, the Framework encourages whole community behaviors and 

activities that will reduce the likelihood of exposure and vulnerability of communities. 

The Nation increases its resilience when it manages risks broadly, from local incidents to 

widespread, severe, and catastrophic disasters. Building and sustaining a culture of preparedness and 

a mitigation-mindset will make the Nation more socially, ecologically, and economically resilient 

before, during, and after an incident. Resilience in communities and the Nation depends on the whole 

community working together. 
National Mitigation Framework 

ii 

The National Mitigation Framework explores seven core capabilities required for entities involved in 

mitigation: threats and hazards identification, risk and disaster resilience assessment, planning, 

community resilience, public information and warning, long-term vulnerability reduction, and 

operational coordination. 

Coordinating structures are composed of representatives from multiple departments or agencies, 

public and/or private sector organizations, or a combination of these. Coordinating structures are able 

to facilitate the preparedness and delivery of capabilities, and they provide guidance, support, and 

integration to aid in the preparedness of the whole community and building resilience locally, 

regionally, and nationally. They ensure ongoing communication and coordination among all parties 

involved in preparing and delivering capabilities. 

The coordinating structures for mitigation focus on enabling efforts that embed risk management, 

adaptation, and mitigation in all planning, decision making, and development. Regardless of the level 

of the coordinating structure, consideration of risk management, adaptation, and mitigation will 

reduce the Nation’s risk and associated consequences. Given the risk-based premise (rather than an 

incident-based focus), the majority of coordinating structures originate and are sustained at a regional 

and local scale.

At the National scale, the Mitigation Framework Leadership Group (MitFLG) coordinates mitigation 

efforts across the Federal Government and assesses the effectiveness of mitigation capabilities 

developed and deployed across the Nation. The MitFLG includes relevant local, state, tribal, and 

Federal Government representatives. The MitFLG non-Federal members help to ensure appropriate 

integration of Federal efforts across the whole community. 

In implementing the National Mitigation Framework, partners are encouraged to develop a shared 

understanding of broad-level strategic implications as they make critical decisions in building future 

capacity and capability. Effective implementation of this Framework hinges on the inclusion and 

understanding of the whole community in carrying out the Mitigation unifying principles and 

doctrine. 
National Mitigation Framework

iii

Table of Contents

Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1

Framework Purpose and Organization .................................................................................1

Intended Audience ...................................................................................................................3

Scope ............................................................................................................................. 3

Guiding Principles ...................................................................................................................4

Risk Basis ..................................................................................................................................6

Roles and Responsibilities........................................................................................... 7

Individuals, Families, and Households ..................................................................................8

Communities .............................................................................................................................9

Nongovernmental Organizations ............................................................................................9

Private Sector Entities .............................................................................................................9

Local Governments ................................................................................................................10

State, Tribal, Territorial, and Insular Area Governments ................................................10

Federal Government ..............................................................................................................10

Collaboration Across Roles ...................................................................................................11

Core Capabilities......................................................................................................... 15

Threats and Hazards Identification .....................................................................................17

Risk and Disaster Resilience Assessment .............................................................................18

Planning ..................................................................................................................................20

Community Resilience ...........................................................................................................22

Public Information and Warning .........................................................................................25

Long-term Vulnerability Reduction .....................................................................................27

Operational Coordination .....................................................................................................28

Coordinating Structures and Integration .................................................................. 30

Local Coordinating Structures .............................................................................................31

Multi-jurisdictional, State, Tribal, Territorial, and Sector Coordinating Structures.....32

Federal Coordinating Structures..........................................................................................33

National Coordinating Structures ........................................................................................33
National Mitigation Framework 

iv 

Integration ..............................................................................................................................34

Relationship to Other Mission Areas......................................................................... 35

Prevention Mission Area .......................................................................................................36

Protection Mission Area ........................................................................................................37

Response Mission Area ..........................................................................................................37

Recovery Mission Area ..........................................................................................................37

Operational Planning .................................................................................................. 37

Mitigation Operational Planning .........................................................................................38

Planning Assumptions ...........................................................................................................39

Framework Application ........................................................................................................39

Supporting Resources................................................................................................ 40

Conclusion................................................................................................................... 40
National Mitigation Framework

 1 

Introduction

The National Preparedness System outlines an organized process for the whole community to move 

forward with its preparedness activities and achieve the National Preparedness Goal. The National 

Preparedness System integrates efforts across the five preparedness mission areas—Prevention, 

Protection, Mitigation, Response, and Recovery—in order to achieve the goal of a secure and 

resilient Nation. The National Mitigation Framework, part of the National Preparedness System, sets 

the strategy and doctrine for how the whole community builds, sustains, and delivers the Mitigation

core capabilities identified in the National Preparedness Goal in an integrated manner with the other 

mission areas. This second edition of the National Mitigation Framework reflects the insights and 

lessons learned from real-world incidents and the implementation of the National Preparedness 

System. 

Prevention: The capabilities necessary to avoid, prevent, or stop a threatened or actual 

act of terrorism. Within the context of national preparedness, the term “prevention” refers 

to preventing imminent threats.

Protection: The capabilities necessary to secure the homeland against acts of terrorism 

and manmade or natural disasters.

Mitigation: The capabilities necessary to reduce loss of life and property by lessening 

the impact of disasters.

Response: The capabilities necessary to save lives, protect property and the 

environment, and meet basic human needs after an incident has occurred.

Recovery: The capabilities necessary to assist communities affected by an incident to 

recover effectively.

Framework Purpose and Organization

This Framework establishes a common platform and forum for coordinating and addressing how the 

Nation manages risk using mitigation capabilities and describes mitigation roles across the whole 

community.1

 While businesses make money by taking risks, they lose money by failing to manage 

those risks effectively. Similarly, in the public sector, choices are made every day that affect the 

consequences, duration, and costs of responding to and recovering from adverse incidents. Mitigation 

requires systematically anticipating and adjusting to trends that could endanger the future of the 

community. Appropriate choices made before an event can help to manage or reduce long-term risk

and potentially reduce response requirements. Further, mitigation during the recovery phase helps 

strengthen and build a more resilient community to withstand future disasters. 

Building on long-held American values of civic engagement, the Nation must engage in an ongoing 

dialogue about how to prepare for the future. Demonstrating clear and measurable returns on 

investment through mitigation is essential to that dialogue and necessary to build a resilient, riskconscious culture. A mature, risk-conscious culture is measured in two ways. First, it is measured by 

its reduction of risk to life and property. Second, it is measured by whether it has sufficient capacity 

 

1 The whole community includes individuals and communities, the private and nonprofit sectors, faith-based 

organizations, and all levels of government (local, regional/metropolitan, state, tribal, territorial, insular area, and 

Federal). Whole community is defined in the National Preparedness Goal as “a focus on enabling the participation in 

national preparedness activities of a wider range of players from the private and nonprofit sectors, including 

nongovernmental organizations and the general public, in conjunction with the participation of all levels of 

government in order to foster better coordination and working relationships.” The National Preparedness Goal is 

located online at http://www.fema.gov. 
National Mitigation Framework 

2 

to continue to promote the social, ecological, and economic vitality of the community when adapting 

to changing conditions or continuing essential services and recovering from an adverse incident. 

Starting with existing structures and capabilities, this Framework outlines how the Nation can expand 

its commitment to mitigation and strengthen resilience. The National Mitigation Framework 

discusses seven core capabilities required for all entities involved in mitigation:

 Threats and Hazards Identification

 Risk and Disaster Resilience Assessment

 Planning 

 Community Resilience

 Public Information and Warning 

 Long-term Vulnerability Reduction 

 Operational Coordination. 

Those who play a role in mitigation range from an individual making decisions about how to manage 

the risks in his or her life, to local and tribal jurisdictions and large metropolitan regions working to 

manage their community members’ risks from threats and hazards, to state, territorial, and Federal 

agencies administering funding large, complex programs and projects. Our challenge is to build a 

society that is robust, adaptable, and has the capacity for rapid recovery. Providing individuals and 

communities with information, resources, knowledge, and skills will facilitate actions that help to 

strengthen community resilience and mitigate the impact of disasters. As a whole, the Nation 

increases its resilience when it manages risks across this spectrum, from narrow-impact incidents to 

widespread, severe, and catastrophic disasters. Building and sustaining a mitigation-minded culture 

of preparedness will make the Nation more socially, ecologically, and economically resilient before, 

during, and after an incident. Resilience in communities and the Nation depends on the whole 

community working together. 

Resilient communities proactively protect themselves against hazards, build selfsufficiency, and become more sustainable. Resilience...involves technical, 

organizational, social, and economic dimensions. It is fostered not only by government, 

but also by individual, organization, and business actions.2

Effective mitigation3 begins with identifying the threats and hazards a community faces and 

determining the associated vulnerabilities and consequences. Sound assessment requires risk 

information—based on credible science, technology, and intelligence—validated by experience. 

Understanding risks makes it possible to develop strategies and plans to manage them. Managing

risks from threats and hazards requires decision making to accept, avoid, reduce, or transfer those 

risks. Avoiding and reducing risks are ways to reduce the long-term vulnerability of a community 

and build individual and community resilience. 

 

2 Godschalk, David R., et.al. 2009. “Estimating the Value of Foresight: Aggregate Analysis of Natural Hazard 

Mitigation Benefits and Costs.” Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 52(6):739–56. 3 National Preparedness Goal includes a definition of “mitigation” that extends beyond the Robert T. Stafford

Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (Stafford Act). The term “mitigation” under National Preparedness 

Goal “refers to those capabilities necessary to reduce loss of life and property by lessening the impact of disasters. 

Mitigation capabilities include, but are not limited to, community-wide risk reduction projects; efforts to improve 

the resilience of critical infrastructure and key resource lifelines; risk reduction for specific vulnerabilities from 

natural hazards or acts of terrorism; and initiatives to reduce future risks after a disaster has occurred.”
National Mitigation Framework

 3 

When preparing mitigation plans and activities, it is critical to consider the implications in context of

the economy, housing, health and social services, infrastructure, and natural and cultural resources. 

Taking such a broad view enables leaders to assess existing interdependencies, associated 

vulnerabilities, and cascading effects, so that communities understand the risks thoroughly enough to 

plan not only for those identified and quantified but also for residual risks.

America’s security and resilience work is never finished. While the Nation is safer, stronger, and 

better prepared than it was a decade ago, the commitment to safeguard the Nation against its greatest 

risks, now and for decades to come, remains resolute. 

Intended Audience

The National Mitigation Framework is inclusive of the whole community with meaningful roles for

individuals, nonprofit entities and nongovernmental organizations, the private sector, communities, 

critical infrastructure owners, and governments Nation-wide. By providing equal access to and use of 

the necessary knowledge and skills, this Framework seeks to enable the whole community to

contribute to and benefit from national preparedness. This includes children4

; older adults; people 

with disabilities and others with access and functional needs5

; those from religious, racial, and 

ethnically diverse backgrounds; people with limited English proficiency; and owners of animals 

including household pets and service animals. 

Scope

The National Preparedness Goal defines the core capabilities necessary to prepare for the specific 

types of incidents that pose the greatest risk to the security of the Nation. The National Planning 

Frameworks describe coordination efforts to deliver the capabilities defined in the Goal. Developing 

and updating the National Preparedness Goal involved a coordinated effort with other Executive 

Branch departments and agencies and consultation with local, state, tribal, and territorial 

governments, the private, nonprofit, and nongovernmental sectors, and the public. 

The National Mitigation Framework is one of five frameworks developed to enable achievement of 

the goal of a secure and resilient Nation with the capabilities required to prevent, protect against, 

mitigate, respond to, and recover from the threats and hazards that pose the greatest risk across the 

whole community. The Framework addresses how the Nation lessens the impact of disasters by 

developing, employing, and coordinating core mitigation capabilities to reduce loss of life and 

property. Building on a wealth of objective and evidence-based knowledge and community 

experience, the Framework seeks to increase risk awareness and leverage mitigation products, 

services, and assets across the whole community. 

Mitigation is the thread that permeates the fabric of national preparedness.

This Framework describes the seven core capabilities necessary for successful mitigation that will 

lead to a more resilient Nation. This Framework is driven by risk rather than the occurrence of 

 

4 Children require a unique set of considerations across the core capabilities contained with this document. Their 

needs must be taken into consideration as part of any integrated planning effort.

5 Access and functional needs refers to persons who may have additional needs before, during and after an incident 

in functional areas, including but not limited to: maintaining health, independence, communication, transportation, 

support, services, self-determination, and medical care. Individuals in need of additional response assistance may 

include those who have disabilities; live in institutionalized settings; are older adults; are children; are from diverse 

cultures; have limited English proficiency or are non-English speaking; or are transportation disadvantaged.
National Mitigation Framework 

4 

incidents. By fostering comprehensive risk considerations, the Framework encourages behaviors and 

activities that will reduce the exposure to risk and vulnerability of communities. 

Guiding Principles

The four guiding principles for mitigation include Resilience and Sustainability, Leadership and 

Locally Focused Implementation, Engaged Partnerships and Inclusiveness, and a Shared Riskconscious Culture. These principles lay the foundation for the Mitigation mission area and the 

execution of its core capabilities. 

Resilience and Sustainability

Preparing people, property, critical infrastructure resources, and the economy to withstand or absorb 

the impact of an incident and rebound in a manner that sustains our way of life in the aftermath 

makes communities and the Nation more resilient. Individuals, communities, nongovernmental 

organizations, all levels of government, and the private sector should consider the long-term 

economic, health, social, and environmental dimensions of their choices and ensure resilience is 

continuously improved. 

The National Mitigation Framework addresses two dimensions of resilience6: 

Community resilience is an inclusive, informed process that addresses social, health, 

economic, natural and cultural, technical, and organizational dimensions within a 

community—preparing a community to consciously mitigate rather than ignore risks.

Resilience is an outcome—the state of being able to adapt to changing conditions and 

then withstand and rebound from the impacts of disasters and incidents.

Sustainability employs a longer-term approach through plans, policies, and actions that reflect a 

comprehensive understanding of the economic, social, and environmental systems within a 

community. Ensuring that actions to reduce long-term vulnerability can be maintained and supported 

overtime is critical to the overall performance of those actions and the overall resilience they 

contribute to for a community. 

Leadership and Locally Focused Implementation 

Mitigation empowers formal and informal local leaders to embrace their ownership of building 

resilient and sustainable communities. Effective, ongoing mitigation efforts are led at the local level, 

working to identify, plan for, and reduce vulnerabilities and promote long-term personal and 

community resilience and sustainability. Everyday decisions and actions can have unexpected 

implications for risk management and, therefore, should be viewed through the mitigation lens to 

help build a culture of preparedness. Leaders at the state, tribal, territorial, insular area, and Federal 

levels support local leadership by facilitating effective ongoing mitigation by setting a vision, 

aligning programs, and supporting local efforts as needed. 

Engaged Partnerships and Inclusiveness

Mitigation is advanced through the actions of many groups to collectively reduce risk vulnerability to 

the whole community. No one entity can accomplish these goals. These partnerships may include, 

but are not limited to: 

 

6 The National Mitigation Framework builds on the definition of resilience as defined in the National Preparedness 

Goal.
National Mitigation Framework

 5 

 All levels of government 

 Faith-based organizations 

 Nonprofit organizations 

 Private/corporate entities

 Advocacy groups 

 Community associations

 Academia

 Professional groups 

 Neighbors. 

The most effective partnerships within a community capitalize on multidiscipline coalitions and all 

available resources—identifying, developing, fostering, and strengthening new and existing 

coordinating structures to create a unity of effort and expand the capacity of all those involved to 

increase resilience. Many community organizations and partners have active roles in the other 

mission areas as well.

Establishing trusted relationships among leaders and communities prior to a disaster is essential to 

preparedness, and community resilience, and sustainability. These relationships enhance and 

strengthen day-to-day mitigation efforts and are critical for timely and effective response and 

recovery activities. Effective and meaningful inclusiveness generates public awareness and support 

to reach the common objective of mitigating risk and promoting resilience. 

Participation within these partnerships should include seniors, people with disabilities, and others 

with access and functional needs, racially, culturally, and ethnically diverse communities, people 

with limited English proficiency, and advocates for children. In addition to advocates for diverse 

populations, it is also important to include experts and advocates for important community concerns 

such as the needs of pets and other animals, the environment, and historical and cultural assets.

A Shared Risk-conscious Culture

A risk-conscious culture is founded on the shared understanding that future disasters will occur and 

that every person has a responsibility to prepare for and respond appropriately to these risks. The 

American people, resources, economy, and way of life are bolstered and made more resilient by the 

whole community acknowledging, anticipating, communicating, and preparing for future threats and 

hazards—both internal and external—through comprehensive and deliberate risk management. The 

value of a risk management approach or strategy to decision makers is not in the promotion of a 

particular course of action, but rather in the ability to distinguish among various risk management 

choices for accepting, avoiding, reducing, or transferring the risk within the larger context. 

Acknowledging the risk of future incidents fosters a risk-conscious culture that enables community 

leaders to routinely and systematically evaluate a wide variety of threats and hazards. However, 

future conditions are not necessarily reflective of past conditions, requiring a consideration of 

science-based data and expertise to help inform decisions. Community leaders can then prioritize 

strategies, resources, and efforts using a well-informed comprehensive approach to preparedness. A 

risk-conscious culture involves providing clear, meaningful, consistent, and accessible information. 

Resilience is an end-state of effective risk management and a mature culture of preparedness. Risk 

management, in this context, includes identifying opportunities to build resilience into planning, 
National Mitigation Framework

6 

resourcing to reduce risk in advance of a hazard, and mitigating the consequences of disasters that 

occur. By focusing on the preparedness and resilience of the community as a whole, the community’s 

adaptive capacity to mitigate and recover is enhanced, whether that risk has been identified or not. 

All the mission areas rely on an understanding of the risk of potential threats and hazards and the 

impacts of those threats and hazards to inform the development and maintenance of capabilities and 

work towards building resilience. 

Risk Basis

Risk is the potential for an unwanted outcome resulting from an incident or caused by systemic 

degradation, as determined by its likelihood, associated consequences, and vulnerability to those 

consequences. The whole community must maintain the ability to conduct mission-essential 

functions during an actual hazard or incident to ensure delivery of core capabilities for all mission 

areas.

Results of the Strategic National Risk Assessment, contained in the second edition of the National 

Preparedness Goal, indicate that a wide range of threats and hazards continue to pose a significant 

risk to the Nation, affirming the need for an all-hazards, capability-based approach to preparedness 

planning. The results contained in the Goal include: 

 Natural hazards, including hurricanes, earthquakes, tornadoes, drought, wildfires, winter

storms, and floods, present a significant and varied risk across the country. Climate change

has the potential to cause the consequence of weather-related hazards to become more severe.

 A virulent strain of pandemic influenza could kill hundreds of thousands of Americans, affect

millions more, and result in considerable economic loss. Additional human and animal

infectious diseases, including those undiscovered, may present significant risks.

 Technological and accidental hazards, such as transportation system failures, dam failures,

and chemical spills or releases, have the potential to cause extensive fatalities and severe

economic impacts. In addition, these hazards may increase due to aging infrastructure.

 Terrorist organizations or affiliates may seek to acquire, build, and use weapons of mass

destruction. Conventional terrorist attacks, including those by “lone actors” employing

physical threats such as explosives and armed attacks, present a continued risk to the Nation.

 Cyber-attacks can have catastrophic consequences, which in turn, can lead to other hazards,

such as power grid or financial system failures. These cascading hazards increase the

potential impact of cyber incidents. Cybersecurity threats exploit the increased complexity

and connectivity of critical infrastructure systems, placing the Nation’s security, economy,

and public safety and health at risk.

 Some incidents, such as explosives attacks or earthquakes, generally cause more localized

impacts; while other incidents, such as human pandemics, may cause impacts that are

dispersed throughout the Nation, thus creating different types of impacts for preparedness

planners to consider.

In addition to these findings, climate change has the potential to adversely impact a number of threats 

and hazards. Rising sea levels, increasingly powerful storms, and heavier downpours are already 

contributing to an increased risk of flooding. Droughts and wildfires are becoming more frequent and 

severe in some areas of across the country. 

Cybersecurity poses its own unique challenges. In addition to the risk that cyber-threats pose to the 

Nation, cybersecurity represents a core capability integral to preparedness efforts across the whole 

community. In order to meet the threat, the whole community must not only consider the unique core 
National Mitigation Framework

 7 

capability outlined in the Protection mission area, but must also consider integrating cyber mitigation 

tasks throughout the Mitigation core capabilities. 

Mitigation, as a mission area, is specifically intended to minimize risks associated with these threats 

and hazards. No single threat or hazard exists in isolation. As an example, a hurricane can lead to 

flooding, dam failures, and hazardous materials spills. The National Preparedness Goal, therefore, 

focuses on Mitigation core capabilities that can be applied to deal with cascading effects as well as 

other unknown risks. Figure 1 depicts some of the threats and hazards that guided the development of 

this Framework. Communities should consider them in their analyses. 

Figure 1: Examples of Threats and Hazards by Category

Planning for and managing the “greatest risks” are fundamental components of the National 

Preparedness Goal and the National Preparedness System. Regardless of whether mitigation occurs at 

the individual, community, regional, or national level, each entity coordinates with mitigation 

partners vertically and horizontally to identify, clarify, and prioritize risks.

Roles and Responsibilities

Resilience depends on the whole community—individuals and communities, the private and 

nonprofit sectors, faith-based organizations, and all levels of government (local, 

regional/metropolitan, state, tribal, territorial, insular area, and Federal) nongovernmental 

organizations; private (see Figure 2). Inclusiveness and partnership throughout these levels can 

ensure the best use of available knowledge, resources, and efforts. All levels of public and private 

entities have a role in community resilience and sustainability and being able to perform essential 

functions during a wide range of emergencies to ensure resiliency. With a long-term view, mitigation 

leaders need to ensure that resilience is an outcome of their overall preparedness. Leaders strengthen 

community and economic vitality while reducing the long-term vulnerabilities when they support, 

promote, align, and implement these policies and activities. This is complemented by research, 

development, and investment—the basis of new and improved long-term vulnerability reduction 
National Mitigation Framework 

8 

capabilities—making these investments an increasingly effective, cost-efficient, and sustainable 

approach for the whole community to build resilience. 

Figure 2: Composition of the Whole Community

Individuals, Families, and Households

A prepared individual or family is the foundation of a resilient community. Mitigation begins with 

individual awareness and action. Informed decisions facilitate actions that reduce risk and enable 

individuals, families, and households to better withstand, absorb, or adapt to the impacts of threats 

and hazards and quickly recover from future incidents. Adverse incidents can compromise safety, 

physical and behavioral health, property, and financial well-being. Safe, secure, and prepared 

individuals, families, and households are often less dependent on response services, which, in turn, 

places fewer responders in hazardous response situations. Individuals, families, and households 

should take actions and the basic steps to prepare themselves for emergencies. Joint planning and 

participation by diverse populations are essential to increasing and sustaining community resilience. 

Members of the whole community benefit from mitigation actions, as they can expect fewer 

disruptive disaster impacts and a decreased need for supplemental resource support. 

Possible individual, family, and household efforts to increase their resilience may include:

 Preparing an emergency supply kit and household emergency plans and practicing 

what to do in an emergency. 

 Maintaining appropriate insurance coverage. 

 Ensuring that a tornado safe room or shelter is quickly and easily accessible. 

 Routinely removing pine needles from the roof and gutters to reduce the likelihood of a

home catching fire from wildfire embers and creating a space free of ignitable 

vegetation around the home. 

 Ensure family members are vaccinated as medically appropriate.

 Installing a home generator. 

 Elevating heat pumps, water heaters, and air conditioners high enough to stay dry 

during a flood event. 
National Mitigation Framework

 9 

Communities

Communities are unified groups that share goals, values, or purposes rather than geographic 

boundaries or jurisdictions. Communities bring people together in different ways for different 

reasons, but each provide opportunities for sharing information and promoting collective action. 

Communities have the ability to promote and implement mitigation activities without necessarily 

holding a formal position of authority within a jurisdiction. 

Communities advancing mitigation can include social and community service groups and 

institutions, neighborhood partnerships, communities representing and/or including those with 

disabilities and others with access and functional needs, online communities, hazard-specific 

coalitions, and communities of practice. While the scale will vary, communities may be the most 

effective actors to take specific action to manage and reduce their specific risks. In many 

communities, local Citizen Corps Councils7

 assist in bringing government and civic leaders and 

organizations together. These local Citizen Corps Councils engage broad participation in assessing 

and reviewing community risks and are positioned to integrate resources from the community. 

Nongovernmental Organizations

Nongovernmental organizations and nonprofit organizations—including voluntary organizations, 

faith-based organizations, national and professional associations, and educational institutions—play 

an essential role in facilitating resilience across the whole community. These organizations are 

inherently independent and committed to specific interests and values. They can augment 

government efforts and provide services to groups such as children, people with disabilities and 

others with access and functional needs, ethnically and racially diverse communities, people with 

limited English proficiency, and animal owners, including those with household pets and service 

animals. Nongovernmental organizations can provide training and education to communities, 

including how-to guides. They can represent communities and many groups in mitigation policy 

discussions. 

Private Sector Entities

Private sector entities (e.g., local businesses, large corporations, healthcare providers, childcare 

providers, and other service providers) are integral parts of the community, and their perspectives are

indispensable in mitigation efforts. Mitigation is a sound business practice that reduces disaster 

losses and quickens restoration of normal operations. Private sector investments in continuity and 

vulnerability reduction have broad benefits. 

As the owners and operators of the majority of the Nation’s infrastructure, private sector entities are 

essential to improving resilience through planning and long-term vulnerability reduction efforts. A 

more resilient private sector strengthens community resilience by helping to sustain economic vitality 

and ensuring the delivery of goods and services in the aftermath of a disaster. Among numerous 

activities that promote and implement the mitigation core capabilities, businesses analyze and 

manage their own risks, volunteer time and services, operate business emergency operations centers, 

 

7 The mission of Citizen Corps is to harness the power of every individual through education, training, and volunteer 

service to make communities safer, stronger, and better prepared to respond to the threats of terrorism, crime, public 

health issues, and disasters of all kinds. The Citizen Corps Councils bring together leaders from relevant sectors of 

communities to coordinate the Citizen Corps effort. The purpose of the Council is to have all decision makers at the 

table to manage existing volunteer resources, leverage mutually supportive endeavors among the represented groups, 

and direct the overall local plans to implement Citizen Corps in the community.
National Mitigation Framework 

10 

help protect America’s infrastructure, and promote the return on investment realized from increased 

resilience, developed continuity of operations plans, and reduced vulnerability. 

Local Governments

Working to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the people they represent, local governments 

also bear responsibility for mitigation activities. Across multiple levels of public service, they 

develop, assess, and implement mitigation core capabilities with consideration given to the economy, 

housing, health and social services, infrastructure, and natural and cultural resources. Local 

governments often join together and take a regional approach to mitigation, such as across 

watersheds or nuclear emergency planning zones. 

Most mitigation occurs at the local level, where communities apply a localized understanding of risks 

to effective planning and identify strategic mitigation options. Since local governments are directly 

connected to community plans and goals, they can provide a better understanding of local 

vulnerabilities as they relate to risk reduction activities. Making the connection between community 

resilience priorities and private sector development is a challenge most often addressed directly at the 

local level. Actions to reduce long-term vulnerability, such as effective building code adoption and 

enforcement, are applied in both the pre-disaster planning and the post-disaster recovery activities of 

the jurisdiction. Local governments must also improve resiliency by preparing for recovery and 

integrating mitigation policies into the recovery phase to ensure opportunities are not lost for risk 

reduction during rebuilding. Mitigation and recovery planning should work hand-in-hand to 

operationalize mitigation through recovery after disasters. 

State, Tribal, Territorial, and Insular Area Governments

State, tribal, territorial, and insular area governments are responsible for the public safety, security, 

health, and welfare of the people who live in their jurisdictions. These levels of government serve an 

integral role as a conduit for vertical coordination among Federal agencies and local governments. 

They implement mitigation core capabilities through designated officials, such as State or Tribal 

Hazard Mitigation Officers or National Flood Insurance Program Coordinators. State, tribal, 

territorial, and insular area governments can promote resilience through their legislative bodies by 

implementing legislation that facilitates mitigation in all relevant functional components of the 

government, such as laws governing local land use and development decisions or building codes. 

As sovereign nations, tribal governments govern and manage the safety and security of their lands 

and community members along with their Federal partners. Local, state, and Federal governments 

work with the sovereign tribal governments to ensure integration of their mitigation efforts. 

Federal Government

The President leads the Federal Government mitigation efforts to prepare the Nation for all hazards, 

including natural disasters, acts of terrorism, and other manmade disasters. Supporting the whole 

community with Federal resources, data, information, and leadership requires an engaged and 

responsive Federal role in mitigation. All Federal departments and agencies must cooperate with one 

another and with local, state, tribal, and territorial governments, community members, and the private 

sector to the maximum extent possible. The Secretary of Homeland Security has the broad 

responsibility of coordinating preparedness activities, including mitigation activities, to respond to 

and recover from terrorist attacks, natural disasters, and other emergencies to ensure Federal unity of 

effort. As described in the Coordinating Structures and Integration section, most Executive Branch 

departments and agencies also play important roles in advancing mitigation and resilience in the 

Nation. For example, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) plays a role in 
National Mitigation Framework

11

coordinating Federal mitigation policy and the effectiveness of mitigation capabilities as they are 

developed and deployed across the Nation. 

Further, several Executive Branch departments and agencies, including those identified by 

Presidential directive as Sector-Specific Agencies (SSA) for the critical infrastructure sectors,8 play a 

leadership role in coordinating programs to address the effects of deliberate efforts by criminals and 

terrorists to destroy or exploit elements of the Nation’s infrastructure and to strengthen the national 

resilience of that infrastructure to all hazards. The Federal Government, in coordination with local, 

state, tribal, and territorial partners and the private sector, also contributes to the development and 

delivery of the core capabilities in a way that ensures the protection of privacy, civil rights, and civil 

liberties.

Collaboration Across Roles

Many of the activities within the Mitigation mission area require a cross-section of stakeholders in 

order to achieve success. While not intended to be exhaustive, Table 1 illustrates the responsibilities 

and demonstrates the various roles that need to be involved. 

 

8 See the National Infrastructure Protection Plan for more information on the SSAs.
National Mitigation Framework 

12 

Table 1: Examples of Roles and Responsibilities That Advance Mitigation

Role/Responsibility

Individuals, Families, 

and Households

Communities

Nongovernmental 

Organizations

Private Sector Entities

Local Governments

State, Tribal, 

Territorial, and Insular 

Area Governments

Federal Government

Work with the Federal Government to inform the assessment, development, and 

coordination of mitigation core capabilities. X X X X X 

Coordinate the national assessment and report on the progress made within the 

mitigation core capabilities. X 

Provide leadership to promote, integrate, and enable an outcome of state and 

community empowerment to risk reduction and/or adaptation across all mission areas. X X X X X X 

Use regulatory authorities and provide funds, incentives, expertise, and leadership to 

promote the development, implementation, and assessment of mitigation core 

capabilities. For example, use financial incentives and targeted capital improvement 

projects to reduce long-term vulnerabilities.

X X X 

Contribute to the general understanding of risk through the collection, development, 

analysis, and sharing of information about threats, hazards, and vulnerabilities, as well 

as through constant evaluation and enhancement of risk assessment methodologies.

X X X X X 

In coordination with other mission areas, develop, fund, and deliver training curricula for 

grades K–12, trade/technical schools, colleges and universities, continuing education, 

and the whole community to develop proficiency in understanding risks and mitigation.

X X X X X X X 

Engage with local leaders and planners to share perspectives on localized threats and 

hazards, vulnerabilities, and priorities for incorporating mitigation into community 

planning and development, as well as continuity and recovery plans, therefore making 

achieving resilience a part of the community both before and after a disaster.

X X X X X X X 
National Mitigation Framework

13

Role/Responsibility

Individuals, Families, 

and Households

Communities

Nongovernmental 

Organizations

Private Sector Entities

Local Governments

State, Tribal, 

Territorial, and Insular 

Area Governments

Federal Government

Assess risks and disaster resilience. Maintain awareness of threats, hazards, and 

vulnerabilities. X X X X X X X 

Incorporate resilience principles and priorities into ongoing activities, including family 

preparedness plans, economic and community planning and development, construction 

and assessment of infrastructure, comprehensive plans, disaster response and 

recovery support, homeland security research and development, training, and 

exercises. Identify leaders who will be responsible for applying mitigation capabilities to 

these areas and identify ways to incentivize integration into existing organizational 

processes.

X X X X X X X 

Acquire funding or resources and take action to reduce risk through projects, such as 

home elevation, or processes, such as enforcing building codes. X X X X X X 

Provide functional capacity and technical expertise to implement long-term vulnerability 

reduction projects across the whole community, whether engineering a bridge to 

withstand an earthquake, planning a future development for resilience, or building 

redundancies into critical infrastructure and lifeline systems.

X X X X X X 

Identify loss reduction and loss control methods and resources to develop mitigation 

strategies that reduce risks from threats and hazards to personnel, assets, and 

operations. Maintain continuity of government and/or continuity of operations/business 

continuity.

X X X X X X X 

Become familiar with public information and warning systems, share information with 

friends and neighbors, build skills to enhance behavioral health resilience, plan ahead, 

and promote mitigation efforts within communities.

X X X X X 
National Mitigation Framework 

14 

Role/Responsibility

Individuals, Families, 

and Households

Communities

Nongovernmental 

Organizations

Private Sector Entities

Local Governments

State, Tribal, 

Territorial, and Insular 

Area Governments

Federal Government

Conduct and fund outreach and education to effectively communicate successful 

practices, local mitigation priorities, and event-specific warnings and information in ways 

that are clear, consistent, accessible, and culturally and linguistically appropriate. Plan 

ahead and incorporate the needs of those with disabilities and others with access and 

functional needs.

X X X X X X 
 National Mitigation Framework

15

Core Capabilities

Building on the National Preparedness Goal, this section explains what each mitigation core 

capability entails, the context in which it is employed, and the critical tasks associated with it. This is 

not an exhaustive list of mitigation capabilities but rather a description of the core capabilities used 

across the Nation. Individuals and households, communities, private sector and nongovernmental 

organizations, and all levels of government should evaluate their particular risks and existing 

resources to determine whether and how to further develop and deploy these capabilities. Table 2 

lists the core capabilities associated with each of the five mission areas, including the mitigation core 

capabilities. 

Table 2: Core Capabilities by Mission Area9

Prevention Protection Mitigation Response Recovery

Planning

Public Information and Warning

Operational Coordination

Intelligence and Information Sharing Community 

Resilience

Long-term 

Vulnerability 

Reduction

Risk and Disaster 

Resilience 

Assessment

Threats and 

Hazards 

Identification

Infrastructure Systems

Interdiction and Disruption Critical Transportation

Environmental 

Response/Health and 

Safety

Fatality Management 

Services

Fire Management and 

Suppression

Logistics and Supply 

Chain Management

Mass Care Services

Mass Search and 

Rescue Operations

On-scene Security, 

Protection, and Law 

Enforcement

Operational 

Communications

Public Health, 

Healthcare, and 

Emergency Medical 

Services

Situational 

Assessment

Economic 

Recovery

Health and 

Social Services

Housing

Natural and 

Cultural 

Resources

Screening, Search, and Detection

Forensics and 

Attribution

Access Control 

and Identity 

Verification

Cybersecurity

Physical 

Protective 

Measures

Risk 

Management for 

Protection 

Programs and 

Activities

Supply Chain 

Integrity and 

Security

9 Planning, Public Information and Warning, and Operational Coordination are common to all mission areas.
National Mitigation Framework 

16 

Comprehensive mitigation strategies consider the systems that make up communities and the Nation.

Mitigation activities are implemented through the core capabilities with consideration given to the 

economy, housing, health and social services, infrastructure, and natural and cultural resources 

(shown in Figure 3).10

Figure 3: Comprehensive Mitigation Includes Strategies for All Community Systems

Figure 4 depicts the seven core capabilities. The Threats and Hazards Identification and Risk and 

Disaster Resilience Assessment capabilities enable risk-based decision making based on both general 

and localized information about threats, hazards, and vulnerabilities. The Planning capability enables 

a process that evaluates and prioritizes mitigation options for reducing risk, which are then 

implemented through the Long-term Vulnerability Reduction capability by taking actions to reduce 

risk and increase resilience. The whole community contributes to and benefits from the Operational 

Coordination capability, which promotes effective collaboration and avoids duplication of effort. The 

whole community also shares information about risks to increase awareness and ongoing or 

recommended mitigation activities through the Public Information and Warning capability. The 

Community Resilience capability enables all of the other capabilities by providing the leadership and 

 

10 The community systems listed here intentionally parallel the components of the National Disaster Recovery 

Framework. These are the essential systems that constitute the backbone of effective communities.
 National Mitigation Framework

17

collaboration necessary to identify, build support for, initiate, and sustain mitigation efforts that 

reflect the needs and priorities of all pertinent stakeholders. 

There are three capabilities that cross all five mission areas: Planning, Public Information and 

Warning, and Operational Coordination. These capabilities are shared and provide direct linkages 

among the mission areas.

Figure 4: Mitigation Core Capabilities

Threats and Hazards Identification

Identify the threats and hazards that occur in the geographic area; determine the 

frequency and magnitude; and incorporate this into analysis and planning processes so 

as to clearly understand the needs of a community or entity. 

Capability Description

In the context of mitigation, this capability involves the continual process of collecting timely and 

accurate data on threats and hazards, including accounting for the future impacts of climate change 

on weather hazards, to meet the needs of analysts and decision makers. Threats and Hazards 

Identification relies on two-way data collaboration—nationally generated and locally derived data. 

The bottom-up approach requires proactive, self-reliant, and empowered communities to gather data. 

Partners at all levels in the community make use of local, regional, state, tribal, territorial, and 

national data. Modeling and tools are refined by more specific local data. This approach ensures that 

existing national data can be reinforced and verified at the local level and improved as new data are 

generated. 

Both approaches generate a strategic, holistic picture that the community can share and use. Outputs 

derived from Threats and Hazards Identification activities may be used to inform planning activities 
National Mitigation Framework 

18 

in the other mission areas, especially Protection and Response. In return, lessons learned in the other 

mission areas can be used to augment Threats and Hazards Identification data, models, and tools.

Effective Threats and Hazards Identification is supported by standardized data sets, platforms, 

methodologies, terminologies, metrics, and reporting to unify levels of effort across all layers of 

government and society, reducing redundancies. Threats and Hazards Identification also requires the 

ability to synthesize real-time, static, prospective, and historical data to accurately assess risk.

Critical Tasks for Threats and Hazards Identification

 Identify data requirements across stakeholders. 

 Develop and/or gather required data in a timely and accurate manner in order to effectively 

identify threats and hazards. 

 Deploy and maintain continuous, long-term hazards data collection systems. 

 Ensure that the right data are received by the right people at the right time. 

 Share appropriate data on natural, technological, and human-caused threats and hazards in a 

transparent and usable manner. 

 Strike a proper balance between dissemination and classification of national security and 

intelligence information.

 Build cooperation among private and public sectors by protecting internal interests, but 

sharing threats and hazards identification resources and benefits. 

 Leverage available third-party data, tools, and information; social media; and open-source 

technology. 

 Translate data into meaningful and actionable information through appropriate analysis and 

collection tools to aid in preparing the public. 

Risk and Disaster Resilience Assessment

Assess risk and disaster resilience so that decision makers, responders, and community 

members can take informed action to reduce their entity’s risk and increase their 

resilience. 

Capability Description

Risk and Disaster Resilience Assessment is the evaluation of threats, hazards, vulnerabilities, 

consequences, needs, and resources through algorithms or other methods to define and prioritize 

risks, so community members, decision makers, and responders can make informed decisions and 

take the appropriate action. Such an assessment directly connects threats and hazards data and 

information in order to analyze and understand the potential effects on a community. A robust Risk 

and Disaster Resilience Assessment capability allows a comparison and prioritization of risks from 

disparate threats and hazards across a variety of communities and jurisdictions. Outcomes from Risk 

and Disaster Resilience Assessments can be leveraged to increase risk awareness, inform planning 

efforts, and allocate resources across the mission areas.
 National Mitigation Framework

19

Critical Tasks for Risk and Disaster Resilience Assessment

Data

 Share risk assessment data, both new and existing, to establish common operations across

mission areas and standardized data requirements and guidance. Secure sensitive data as

appropriate. Establish standard data formats to enable sharing of vulnerability data and risk

assessment outputs.

 Provide the right data to the right people at the right time.

 Incorporate vulnerability data sets, such as population, demographic, infrastructure inventory

and condition assessment information; climatological, geological, and environmental factors;

critical infrastructure, lifelines, and key resources; building stock; and economic data to

calculate the risk from the threats and hazards identified.

 Incorporate data from lessons learned and statistical information to target consideration of

populations (such as for people with disabilities or access and functional needs, limited

English proficiency populations, and racially, culturally, and ethnically diverse

communities).

 Update risk assessments to include changes to the risks and the physical environment. This

includes aging infrastructure, new development, new mitigation projects and initiatives, postevent verification/validation, new technologies or improved methodologies, and better or

more current data.

 Create and maintain redundant systems for storing and protecting information and essential

records.

Analysis

 Perform credible risk assessments using scientifically valid and widely used risk assessment

techniques. 

 Understand social and structural vulnerabilities.

 Incorporate knowledge gained by those who have experienced incidents to help understand

all the interdependencies, cascading impacts, and vulnerabilities associated with threats and

hazards.

 Validate, calibrate, and enhance risk assessments by relying on experience and knowledge

beyond raw data or models.

 Develop analysis tools to provide information more quickly to those who need it and make

use of tools and technologies, such as geographic information systems.

 Consolidate analysis efforts to remove useless duplication and provide a more uniform

picture of the risks.

Education and Training 

 Build the capability within communities to assess, analyze, and apply the knowledge of risk

and resilience. 

 Ensure that data users and assessment stakeholders get the best available data and understand

the assumptions/estimations made in the methodology.
National Mitigation Framework

20

 Train stakeholders to develop risk assessments and have the same accurate and

comprehensive standards of assessment outputs.

 Use risk assessments to design exercises for response activities and to determine the

feasibility of mitigation projects and initiatives.

Planning

Conduct a systematic process engaging the whole community as appropriate in the 

development of executable strategic, operational, and/or tactical-level approaches to 

meet defined objectives. 

Capability Description

Planning is vital to mitigation, whether it happens at the individual level; in neighborhoods, cities, 

regions, tribal communities or states; at the national level; or in groups that do not share the same 

geographic area. Within mitigation, planning is a systematic process that translates risk assessment 

data and information into prioritized goals and actions for the whole community. Federal agencies, 

states, businesses, individuals, and groups all develop plans for increasing their resilience. Effective 

plans are living documents that evolve over time and address new risks and vulnerabilities as they 

arise.

The planning process is a tool to integrate risk analysis and assessment of local capabilities and 

authorities into community priorities and decision making. This includes the development of plans 

related to family emergencies, land use, critical infrastructure, transportation, capital improvement, 

business improvement districts, sustainability, continuity, disaster recovery, climate adaptation, 

energy assurance, housing, public health, and multi-hazard mitigation. Wherever possible, mitigation 

planning should capitalize on existing community efforts. Integrating planning efforts across sectors, 

disciplines, and mission areas and sharing risk analyses and vulnerability assessments eliminate 

redundancy, conserve resources, and identify common solutions. 

To these ends, it is vital that plans reflect the values of the whole community. Planning is most 

effective when it is driven by local, regional, state, tribal, and/or territorial need rather than Federal

mandates. Individuals and the private sector bring specific, valuable expertise and resources to the 

table when developing and executing plans. Planning teams should be integrated and represent a 

broad spectrum of the population, both public and private, so that plans result in strategies and 

actions that are more meaningful and relevant to the mitigation process and the community. 

Local, state, tribal, territorial, insular area, and Federal governments that integrate the rights of 

people with disabilities and others with access and functional needs into mitigation planning reduce 

adverse consequences and barriers that create risk for them and those associated with them and 

increase independence. For example, the design, construction, alteration, and implementation of 

access to emergency management facilities and programs permit people with disabilities and others 

with access and functional needs with the equal opportunity to participate in and benefit from 

emergency preparedness. Advance planning to ensure disability-related assistance/access and 

functional needs support services, durable medical equipment, and consumable medical supplies 

mitigate the adverse effects that disasters have on people with disabilities and others with access and 

functional needs. 
 National Mitigation Framework

21

Hazard Mitigation Planning Program

Hazard 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 planning process to develop these plans is as important as the plan itself. 

The process promotes risk-based decision making to reduce damage to lives, property, 

and the economy from future disasters. Local, state, tribal, territorial, insular area, and 

Federal governments benefit from mitigation planning by:

•Identifying cost-effective 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 people, organizations, and businesses;

•Increasing education and awareness of hazards and risk;

•Communicating priorities to state and Federal officials; and

•Aligning risk reduction with other community objectives.

Critical Tasks for Planning

 Embed risk-based decision making into the planning processes.

 Collaborate, cooperate, and build consensus across other disciplines that impact plans.

 Understand the demographics and systems that make up the community and their

vulnerabilities and interdependencies with each other.

 Include disability and other access and functional needs subject matter experts in mitigation

planning to address considerations, such as architectural accessibility through compliance

with the Americans with Disabilities Act architectural standards; disability and other access

and functional needs advocacy organizations, such as independent living centers; and

providers of disability and other access and functional needs-related assistance/functional

needs support services. Also, understand the civil rights of service animal users, such as

being able to use all parts of facilities the public uses without being separated from their

service animals.

 Assess the full range of animal11populations and potential issues they post in the community;

this will ensure that the jurisdiction is equipped to comprehensively address human and

animal issues and take steps to mitigate vulnerabilities in this area before, during, or after a

disaster.

 Incorporate the findings from the assessment of risk and disaster resilience into planning

processes.

 Seek out and incorporate the whole community in planning efforts.

 Build on the expertise, knowledge, and systems in place within the community.

 Coordinate the planning and development of interconnected initiatives that may have

geographic, functional, or funding connections.

11 As members of the community who may be affected by incidents, animals may include household pets, service 

and assistance animals, working dogs, livestock, wildlife, exotic animals, zoo animals, research animals, and

animals housed in shelters, rescue organizations, breeding facilities, and sanctuaries.
National Mitigation Framework 

22 

 Share success stories where resilience-based planning has demonstrated measureable 

effectiveness in creating economic vitality within communities.

 Engage in a peer-to-peer and regional partnership (coalitions) mentoring structure that 

promotes best practices, particularly when the planning capability is not present in a 

community. 

 Foster public-private partnerships to promote resilience and maximize the use of available 

resources. 

 Promote planning initiatives through multiple media sources. 

Effective Planning Practices

 Provide incentives, information, and tools for businesses to exceed minimum standards; 

 Strengthen building codes and enforcement to address appropriate local threats and 

hazards; 

 Create economic development opportunities that reduce vulnerabilities; 

 Implement strategies before a disaster to ensure post-incident continuity and expedite 

decision making and planning during the recovery period; 

 Create communications networks to reach all partners in the community; 

 Exercise the decision-making process outlined in the plan; 

 Include a timetable for implementation of mitigation actions; 

 Monitor plan usefulness; 

 Account for stakeholder values in light of hazard mitigation—find planning initiatives that 

build off longstanding community values; and

 Include mitigation strategies in community development comprehensive plans.

Community Resilience

Enable the recognition, understanding, communication of, and planning for risk and 

empower individuals and communities to make informed risk management decisions 

necessary to adapt to, withstand, and quickly recover from future incidents. 

Capability Description

In the context of a core capability, Community Resilience provides the initiative and energy to 

increase resilience in all the areas that make up a community - economic, health and social sciences, 

housing, infrastructure, and natural and cultural resources - through risk management and employing 

the other core capabilities. Community Resilience requires leadership, collaboration, partnership 

building, education, and skill building. A community uses these skill sets to increase awareness of, 

understand, and assess its risks and to lead, plan, coordinate, and execute actions that reduce 

vulnerability over the long term. The Community Resilience capability supports and orchestrates all 

mitigation activities and builds the capacity of the whole community. 

Each community contributes to the Goal by preparing for the risks that are most relevant and urgent 

for them individually. Official and informal leaders at all levels are important messengers, models, 

and change agents to ensure that mitigation elements are included in plans and actions on a routine 

basis. A whole community approach to building sustainable and resilient communities requires 
 National Mitigation Framework

23

finding ways to support and strengthen the institutions, assets, and networks that already work well in 

communities and are working on a daily basis to address issues important to community members. 

Aspects of the Community Resilience Capability

Leadership: The ability to bring together a group that collaborates to make well-informed, timely 

decisions.

A resilient community embodies the risk-based culture—one of vigilance, periodic assessment, and 

continuous improvement. Establishing resilience often requires improvements to the processes, task 

organization, prioritization, and sometimes even the culture of a community’s everyday business. 

Leading such change, or merely maintaining the resilient character of a community, requires 

embracing and adopting mitigation principles. Leaders need to demonstrate to community members 

the intrinsic benefits of implementing change and then project a vision of the future that inspires 

community members to change mindsets and behaviors to adopt a more resilient outlook. 

Keeping mitigation activities credible and relevant to a community will also help address 

complacency when there has not been an incident in recent history to highlight the need for ongoing 

mitigation. Maintaining a continual dialogue in a trusted environment is essential for connecting 

public and private sector interests, as well as individual and shared values, interests, and priorities 

across multiple communities.

Collaboration: A broad engagement and ongoing dialogue about threats and vulnerabilities and 

meaningful, sustained participation in community preparedness activities, planning, and decision 

making. 

Meaningful risk reduction measures will frequently include collaboration among private sector 

interests in community development, public sector or law enforcement interests in community safety, 

and various other interest groups, such as those representing children, seniors, and those with 

disabilities and others with access and functional needs. Creating an environment that capitalizes on 

shared interests and addresses differences is crucial to accomplishing resilience. Collaboration 

among and by communities provides valuable information, resources, knowledge, skills, and support 

that facilitate actions and planning to adapt and withstand an emergency or disaster. Further 

collaboration includes schools and childcare; public, agricultural/animal, and environmental health 

departments; hospitals/hospital associations; and behavioral health services. A community will 

recover more effectively with intact school, childcare, and health and medical systems. Leadership 

should foster inclusion of the whole community, including members with disabilities and others with 

access and functional needs, limited English proficiency, and ethnically and racially diverse groups. 

Partnership Building: The establishment of long-term relationships—well before, during, and 

after incidents—that support ongoing communication and awareness building, decision making, 

and the implementation of plans and decisions.

Resilient communities utilize education and outreach tools to create opportunities that advance 

mitigation. Partnership building is a key to resilient communities. Mitigation capabilities are 

coordinated through new and existing partnerships at all levels of government with the private sector 

and nongovernmental organizations. Partnerships and coalitions facilitate the timely exchange of 

information and provide a potential source of shared resources through mutual aid and assistance 

agreements. Partnerships also support a vital educational component, promoting or sharing risk 

management knowledge and strategies within communities, and supporting a variety of skill sets and 

stakeholders. The continued use of a partnership model promotes the coordinated delivery of 

mitigation capabilities.
National Mitigation Framework 

24 

Education and Skill Building

Resilient communities utilize education and outreach tools to create opportunities that advance 

mitigation. They build skills for society that is robust, adaptable, and has the capacity to withstand an 

incident that enables rapid recovery. Resilient communities are capable of adapting to change and 

can integrate new information or educate communities on how to change systems to improve their 

resilience. Partnerships and professional groups capture mitigation success stories from communities 

across the country, share experiences, and develop new resources and skills within their own 

communities. There is a wealth of information on risk reduction activities (available from the private 

sector; local, state, tribal, territorial, and insular area governments; and Federal sources), as well as a 

wide range of educational and outreach material available from communities with expertise. 

Educational institutions—from preschool to graduate-level programs—professional certification 

groups, and continuing education programs have a unique opportunity to incorporate resilience topics 

into their curriculum, affecting education in multiple disciplines. 

Resilient communities leverage these resources and integrate them into their training and outreach 

efforts. Participation in preparedness campaigns fosters a culture of preparedness and highlights the 

benefits of increased resilience, which lends credibility to all mitigation efforts. Providing individuals 

and communities with equal access to information and resources will facilitate actions to adapt and 

withstand an emergency or disaster. By empowering individuals and communities with knowledge 

and skills, we build a collective understanding of our roles and responsibilities in crisis.

Critical Tasks for Community Resilience

 Know the systems which make up the community and how to build constructive partnerships 

between those systems. 

 Assess and understand the risks facing a community, including physical, social, cultural, 

economic, and environmental vulnerabilities to all threats and hazards and foster risk 

adaptive behaviors. 

 Recognize and communicate the reinforcing relationships between environmental 

stewardship and natural hazard risk reduction (e.g., enhancement of flood storage through 

wetland protection/restoration and holistic floodplain management). 

 Communicate and utilize the best available localized climate projections, so that the public 

and private sectors can make informed decisions about adaptation. 

 Know the community’s permanent and transient population demographics and use that 

information to plan ahead to address resilience for the whole community, including people 

with disabilities and others with access and functional needs. 

 Foster sustained communication, civic engagement, and the development and implementation 

of proactive planning, response, and long-term risk reduction actions in the whole 

community. 

 Conduct community preparedness activities that empower individuals and communities with 

information and resources that facilitate actions to enhance their resilience and consider 

accessibility and cultural sensitivities based upon the community makeup. 

 Promote mitigation and resilience to the public through preparedness campaigns to increase 

public awareness and motivate individuals to build societal resilience prior to an event. 

 Promote neighborhood activities and encourage volunteerism that advances preparedness. 
 National Mitigation Framework

25

 Convince community members of the value of mitigation for reducing the impact of disasters

and the scale of response and recovery efforts.

 Identify and promote sound choices and discourage choices that increase vulnerabilities and

risks.

 Promote transparency in risk management decision making, so that individuals, communities,

private organizations, and all levels of government demonstrate how resilience is considered.

 Recognize the interdependent nature of the economy, health and social services, housing

infrastructure, and natural and cultural resources within a community.

 Acknowledge and seek out naturally occurring relationships within communities and build

partnerships and coalitions before disasters or incidents occur.

 Educate the next generation of community leaders and resilience professionals; learn from

the past and from what is working in the present.

Community resilience is expressed through a holistic approach to risk reduction. The 

success of one element relies upon the resilience capacity of other elements. For 

example, when a large business facility is retrofitted to account for wind and flood 

hazards, the community is also motivated to strengthen area schools, employee housing, 

and transportation infrastructure to ensure that workers will be able to quickly rebound 

from an incident, return to work, and restore the community’s tax base. Similarly, when a 

school district or parks department ensures that its facilities, which are used as 

emergency shelters, are architecturally accessible for people with disabilities and others 

with access and functional needs, the community strengthens its school or park system 

and emergency management system and maximizes the independence of people with 

disabilities and others with access and functional needs. 

Collaborative steady-state Prevention and Protection activities support the Community Resilience 

capability. Increased resilience, brought about through engaged leadership, collaborative 

partnerships, and education efforts, lessens the Response requirements following an incident. 

Resilient communities are likely to be better coordinated and prepared for Recovery activities, 

including the restoration of physical, economic, and social infrastructures. Lessons learned from the 

other mission areas can be incorporated in subsequent resilience-building initiatives and planning 

efforts.

Public Information and Warning

Deliver coordinated, prompt, reliable, and actionable information to the whole community 

through the use of clear, consistent, accessible, and culturally and linguistically 

appropriate methods to effectively relay information regarding any threat or hazard and, 

as appropriate, the actions being taken and the assistance being made available. 

Capability Description

Effective mitigation is powered throughout its capabilities by risk-informed decision making. For 

mitigation, the Public Information and Warning capability includes all information targeted toward 

creating resilient communities. Ideally, the whole community shares information; communicates 

analytical findings; conducts outreach, engagement, and education; and builds consensus as part of 

ongoing actions. This capability provides a continuous flow of risk and hazard information to the 

whole community, in particular to people who authorize action before and following a disaster and 

drive risk-informed recovery decisions. 
National Mitigation Framework 

26 

Timely, accurate, and open information sharing, along with mutual regard and respect for all 

stakeholders, provides the foundation for effective engagement. Information should be delivered 

using multiple platforms and modalities to ensure that a diverse community has the opportunity for 

full participation. The most critical elements of information concerning hazards, risk, responsibilities, 

successful practices, preventive measures, situational awareness, capabilities, and available 

assistance should be clearly and openly communicated by leaders to the whole community—

including people with disabilities and others with access and functional needs, the socially isolated, 

children, seniors, ethnically, culturally, and racially diverse communities, and people with limited 

English proficiency. 

Critical Tasks for Public Information and Warning

Steady-state/Ongoing Operations 

 Persuade the public that it is worthwhile to build a resilient community. Encourage private 

and public sector partners to work together to communicate the benefits of mitigation action 

and arrive at solutions. 

 Increase awareness of the risks and the actions they can take to mitigate those risks through 

mechanisms like preparedness campaigns. 

 Communicate priorities and actions identified through risk analysis and plans to stakeholders 

and those expected to take action to reduce risk. 

 Refine and consider options to publicly release potentially sensitive risk information.

 Use social media, Web sites (e.g., Ready.gov), and smartphone applications, as well as more 

traditional mechanisms, such as community meetings, social networks, or diverse media 

outlets, to inform the public of actions to take to connect preparedness to resilience.

Information and messaging should ensure effective communication with people who have 

disabilities or access and functional needs, including those who are deaf, hard-of-hearing, 

blind, or have low vision, through the use of appropriate auxiliary aids and services, such as 

sign language and other interpreters and the captioning of audio and video materials. Target 

messages to reach organizations representing children, people with disabilities or access and 

functional needs, diverse communities, and people with limited English proficiency to ensure 

that the information is accessible and effective, so that people are able to understand and act 

on the information.

 Support and increase the number of communities that develop and share risk reduction 

products (e.g., building codes, design standards, floodplain management principles and 

practices, and architectural accessibility standards). 

Incident-driven Operations

 Provide the tools necessary to make decisions quickly, such as a synchronization matrix that 

allows multiple leaders to make independent decisions.

 Share information obtained through coordinating activities to inform prevention, protection, 

response, and recovery decision making by effectively communicating threat and hazard risk 

analysis. Conduct outreach with atypical partners. Coordinate common messaging and 

verified source communications through local community leaders. 

 Capitalize on the critical post-disaster window of opportunity and the media information 

cycle to influence public opinion to take steps toward future mitigation. 
 National Mitigation Framework

27

Change Management 

 Address evolving risk perception and risk communication within a community.

 Practice science-based methods, such as community-based social marketing, to create

behavior change.

Long-term Vulnerability Reduction

Build and sustain resilient systems, communities, and critical infrastructure and key 

resources lifelines so as to reduce their vulnerability to natural, technological, and 

human-caused threats and hazards by lessening the likelihood, severity, and duration of 

the adverse consequences. 

Capability Description

The Long-term Vulnerability Reduction capability encompasses a variety of actions that reduce 

vulnerability. A resilient community has taken stock of the threats and hazards it faces; analyzed its 

available resources, processes, programs, and funding opportunities; and adopted successful practices 

as it promotes individual and community safety and resilience. The result is an informed action that 

leads to lasting reductions in vulnerability. 

Building this capability enhances resilience and vitality across economic, housing, health and social, 

natural and cultural resources, and infrastructure considerations. Further, it lessens the effects of 

natural, technological/accidental, or adversarial/human-caused incidents. Reducing vulnerability over 

the long term can include actions as varied as including mitigation measures in construction and 

development plans and projects, adopting and enforcing hazard-resistant building codes and 

standards, establishing redundant data storage and processing systems, or initiating and maintaining 

neighborhood civic associations. The Long-term Vulnerability Reduction capability includes 

initiatives and investments that reduce Response and Recovery resource requirements in the wake of 

a disaster or incident. Individuals and organizations active across all mission areas can help identify 

opportunities to reduce risk and build resilience through this capability. 

Long-term Vulnerability Reduction requires a commitment to the long-term planning and investment 

processes to ensure community resilience and vitality after an incident. Community partners and 

stakeholders should be engaged and educated on risks, vulnerabilities, and mitigation activities. They 

should share necessary resources to avoid duplication of effort. Reducing long-term vulnerabilities, 

combined with continuity of operations and recovery planning before a disaster, increase resiliency 

and the likelihood that communities and organizations can perform essential functions and deliver 

core capabilities after an event. The result is a safer community that is less reliant on external 

financial assistance.

Critical Tasks for Long-term Vulnerability Reduction

Mitigation actions are successfully implemented with commitment from the community. Engaging 

the whole community with a stake in vulnerability reduction ensures that public and private entities, 

as well as individuals, are invested, fully active partners.

Individual and Local Community

 Broaden the use of natural hazards and catastrophic insurance.

 Develop plans and recognize that a prepared individual or family is the foundation of a

resilient community.
National Mitigation Framework 

28 

 Promote neighborhood activities and encourage volunteerism that advances preparedness

awareness campaigns.

 Incorporate mitigation measures into construction and development projects that take into 

account future conditions based on physical changes as well as climate change. 

 Capitalize on opportunities during the recovery building process to further reduce 

vulnerability. 

Private Sector

 Determine the level of appropriate risk reduction to incorporate in operational and capital 

improvement projects. 

 Advance projects and activities that do not increase the residual risk in nearby neighborhoods 

and communities.

 Coordinate with government and community organizations to reduce duplication of effort 

and encourage complementary efforts. 

Government

 Put community plans that include mitigation and resilience to work. 

 Execute identified risk management actions and projects resulting from analysis and planning 

processes in the community.

 Make risk avoidance and reduction a priority in capital improvement projects. 

 Adopt and enforce a suitable building code to ensure resilient construction. 

 Adopt appropriate land use measures to limit development in hazardous areas commensurate 

with identified risk. 

 Employ a variety of incentives, statutory and regulatory requirements, and voluntary 

initiatives to implement successful practices throughout communities. 

 Be transparent and explicit about mitigation efforts in order to increase and sustain whole 

community investment, reduce duplication of effort, and encourage complementary efforts by 

partners. 

 Establish standards and practices to reduce long-term vulnerability.

 Capitalize on opportunities during the recovery building process to further reduce 

vulnerability, including pausing to evaluate and update current codes, policies, and 

approaches to redevelopment. 

Operational Coordination

Establish and maintain a unified and coordinated operational structure and process that 

appropriately integrates all critical stakeholders and supports the execution of core 

capabilities. 

Capability Description

Incorporating mitigation efforts into everyday activities, as well as response and recovery efforts 

following disasters, requires operational coordination. Operational Coordination is an important 

component in achieving successful mitigation through coordinating structures (see the following 
 National Mitigation Framework

29

section, Coordinating Structures and Integration) that connects mitigation practitioners with other 

communities of interest, practice, and expertise. The Operational Coordination capability is 

fundamental to all the other mitigation capabilities and is necessary to build whole community 

resilience.

More specifically, it leverages other mitigation capabilities and other mission areas to promote 

resource sharing, collaboration, and whole community mitigation. This capability is broad and could 

refer to a physical coordinating body or a document that outlines procedures. Effective Operational 

Coordination enables efficient information flow and contains a feedback mechanism that 

incorporates improvements back into the governing process and structures. 

Some threats, hazards, or disasters require highly disciplined and uniform operational coordination. 

This is particularly true during initial response and recovery activities where incident command and 

control structures are in place to ensure the safety of responders and provide continuity and 

accountability for survivors. Other situations, such as daily building enforcement operations or 

community planning efforts, are more decentralized and organic in their coordinating structures, 

bringing together varied and complex stakeholders with unique authorities and responsibilities. 

Whatever the coordination required, mitigation works effectively as part of all operational 

environments and brings risk-informed decisions to support activity across the whole community of 

national preparedness. 

Critical Tasks for Operational Coordination

Steady-state/Ongoing Operations 

 Establish procedures and build partnerships and coalitions across the whole community that

emphasize a coordinated delivery of mitigation capabilities.

 Identify mitigation roles and responsibilities and engage stakeholders across the whole

community to support the information-sharing process.

 Recognize the complexity of various interest groups and integrate organizations across

communities, including public-private partnerships.

Incident-driven Operations

 Emphasize mitigation technique integration into Incident Command System (ICS)12 planning

cycles by command and general staff representatives and educate whole community partners.

 Use and leverage mitigation products and capabilities, such as the identification of threats

and the assessment of risk, to support incident operations.

 Contribute to the situational awareness and a common operating picture for the entire Federal

Government and for local, state, tribal, territorial, and insular area governments, as

appropriate, in the event of a natural disaster, act of terrorism, or other manmade disaster.

 Capitalize on opportunities for mitigation actions following disasters and incidents.

12 ICS is a standardized, on-scene, all-hazards incident management approach that allows for the integration of 

facilities, equipment, personnel, procedures, and communications operating within a common organizational 

structure, enables a coordinated response among various jurisdictions and functional agencies, both public and 

private, and establishes common processes for planning and managing recourses.
National Mitigation Framework 

30 

Change Management 

 Adapt to evolving risks and changing conditions including those as a result of climate 

change. 

 Look for ways to include new stakeholders in mitigation capabilities.

Coordinating Structures and Integration

Coordinating structures are composed of representatives from multiple departments or agencies, 

public and/or private sector organizations, or a combination of these. Coordinating structures are able 

to facilitate preparedness and delivery of capabilities, and they provide guidance, support, and 

integration to aid in the preparedness of the whole community and building resilience at the local, 

regional, and national levels. They ensure ongoing communication and coordination among all 

parties involved in preparing and delivering capabilities before and after disasters. Continuity and 

recovery planning at all levels support coordinating structures being able to provide uninterrupted 

guidance, support, and integration following an incident. 

At the Federal level, the Secretary of Homeland Security coordinates Federal preparedness activities, 

and multiple departments and agencies provide guidance, support, and integration in order to 

facilitate community preparedness by delivering core capabilities, except for those activities that may 

interfere with the authority of the Attorney General or the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) 

Director, as the Attorney General of the Department of Justice has lead responsibility for criminal 

investigations of terrorist acts or terrorist threats by individuals or groups inside the United States, or 

directed at United States citizens or institutions abroad, where such acts are within the Federal 

criminal jurisdiction of the United States, as well as for related intelligence collection activities 

within the United States, subject to the National Security Act of 1947 (as amended), and other 

applicable law, Executive Order 12333 (as amended), and Attorney General-approved procedures 

pursuant to that Executive Order. Generally acting through the FBI, the Attorney General, in 

cooperation with other Federal departments and agencies engaged in activities to protect our national 

security, shall also coordinate the activities of the other members of the law enforcement community 

to detect, prevent, preempt, and disrupt terrorist attacks against the United States. Generally acting 

through the FBI Director, the Attorney General has primary responsibility for searching for, finding, 

and neutralizing WMD within the United States. 

Federal agencies facilitate the ongoing communication and coordination of all involved parties. The 

preponderance of the coordinating structures originates and is sustained at a regional and local scale.

The coordinating structures for mitigation should focus on creating a national culture shift that 

embeds risk management and mitigation in all planning, decision making, and development. 

Regardless of the level of the coordinating structure, consideration of risk management and 

mitigation will reduce the Nation’s risk and associated consequences. Coordinating structures at the 

national level, particularly the Federal Government, should always strive to make Federal programs 

most useful and reduce the time it takes to go through processes. Figure 5 illustrates examples of 

coordinating structures. 
 National Mitigation Framework

31

Figure 5: Examples of Coordinating Structures

Local Coordinating Structures

Local communities have specific cultures, values, norms, and laws that reflect their history, residents, 

and geography. The National Mitigation Framework seeks to use—not dismiss—the local 

organizations and entities within a community that can build resilience and community vitality. 

These include, but are not limited to: 

 Local and regional economic development organizations

 Public works agencies

 Private development enterprises

 Planning commissions

 Community emergency response teams

 Faith-based organizations

 Citizen Corps Councils

 Service groups

 Voluntary organizations

 Public and private schools

 Resources and referral/advocacy agencies for children, families, and those with disabilities

and others with access and functional needs

 Local mitigation committees.
National Mitigation Framework 

32 

It may be appropriate to establish neighborhood-level resilience teams that focus on long-term 

vitality across the systems that make up a community of economic, health and social, housing, 

infrastructure, and natural and cultural resources. 

Through multi-jurisdictional, territorial, state, sector, and national coordinating structures, specific 

efforts should be made to generate and sustain neighborhood and local coordinating structures, 

which, in turn, help to build a community’s economic vitality and sustainability.

Multi-jurisdictional, State, Tribal, Territorial, and Sector 

Coordinating Structures

Multi-jurisdictional, state, tribal, territorial, and sector-coordinating structures adopt the character of 

the people and geography they serve. A set of structures has long been in place to advance 

mitigation. Through the National Mitigation Framework, efforts will be made to use and, where 

appropriate, expand the scope of existing structures to implement mitigation capabilities. National 

associations and hazard-specific coalitions offer particularly strong avenues to advance and 

coordinate mitigation capabilities. Existing structures that can advance elements of mitigation 

capabilities include: 

 State hazard mitigation planning committees 

 Long-term recovery groups 

 State Disaster Recovery Coordinators and related coordination structures associated with the 

National Disaster Recovery Framework

 Water conservation boards 

 Coastal commissions

 Regional/Metropolitan planning organizations 

 Region healthcare coalitions 

 Mutual aid compacts.

State and major urban area fusion centers and Joint Terrorism Task Forces can take particular 

advantage of threat, hazard, risk, and resilience data generated through mitigation capabilities.

Each of the Nation’s critical infrastructure sectors has a Coordinating Council structure that should 

attend to resilience and the deployment of mitigation capabilities. Leveraging the efforts of the State, 

Local, Tribal, and Territorial Government Coordinating Council; the Regional Consortium 

Coordinating Council, the Sector and Government Coordinating Councils can encourage multijurisdictional and cross-sector leadership and decision making.

Even with the value these existing structures offer, additional integrating structures may be 

necessary. For example, the Silver Jackets Program developed through the U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers brings together multiple state, Federal, and sometimes tribal and local agencies to learn 

from one another and apply their knowledge to reduce risk at the state level. State agencies come 

together with the Federal family of agencies in a common forum to address the state's flood risk 

management priorities. Effective and continuous collaboration among state and Federal agencies is 

critical to successfully reduce the risk of flooding and other natural disasters in the United States and 

enhance response and recovery efforts when such incidents do occur. No single agency has all the 

answers; however, multiple programs can often be combined to provide a cohesive solution. Each of 
 National Mitigation Framework

33

these entities brings a cross-section of leadership from the whole community to work together on 

behalf of the people they serve. 

Federal Coordinating Structures

While the preponderance of mitigation activities and the investment therein flows from the local and 

regional level, Federal agencies play a critical role in supporting and incentivizing these actions 

through the use of Federal resources. 

The President leads the Federal Government Mitigation efforts to prepare the Nation for all hazards, 

including natural disasters, acts of terrorism, and other manmade disasters. Pursuant to Presidential 

directive, the Secretary of Homeland Security is the principal Federal official for domestic incident 

consequence management. The Secretary is also responsible for coordinating preparedness 

activities13 within the United States to respond to and recover from terrorist attacks, major disasters, 

and other emergencies. 

Risk-based mitigation activities are a key component of preparedness. Consequently, the Secretary of 

Homeland Security developed the National Mitigation Framework as part of a series of integrated 

National Planning Frameworks designed to ensure effective domestic incident management. While 

local, state, and tribal governments generally bear primary responsibility for executing mitigation 

activities, the Secretary has the broad responsibility to coordinate “preparedness activities,” which 

encompass the coordination of the Federal unity of effort to protect against, prevent, and, when 

necessary, mitigate terrorist attacks, major disasters, and other emergencies. 

Federal unity of effort supports local, state, tribal, and territorial mitigation activities, as appropriate; 

does not interfere with the supervisory, command, or statutory authorities of relevant Federal 

departments and agencies; and ensures that Federal response and recovery operations and 

preparedness activities, such as mitigation, are complete, synchronized, and mutually supportive. 

National Coordinating Structures

The National Security Council (NSC) is the principal policy body for consideration of national 

security policy issues requiring Presidential determination. The NSC advises and assists the President 

in integrating all aspects of national security policy as it affects the United States—domestic, foreign, 

military, intelligence, and economic (in conjunction with the National Economic Council). Along 

with its subordinate committees, the NSC is the President’s principal means for coordinating 

Executive Branch departments and agencies in the development and implementation of national 

security policy. 

Another example of existing coordinating structures that support the Mitigation mission area are 

Sector-Specific Agencies (SSA). The SSAs were created by Presidential directive in recognition of 

the statutory and/or regulatory authorities that exist in Federal departments and agencies to leverage 

expertise and institutional knowledge to enhance the protection and resilience of the Nation’s critical 

infrastructure. In accordance with the National Infrastructure Protection Plan, SSAs serve as a 

Federal interface to infrastructure owners and operators for the prioritization and coordination of 

sector-specific security and resilience efforts for all-hazards. The SSAs are also tasked with 

strengthening national preparedness, timely response, and rapid recovery of critical infrastructure in 

the event of an attack, natural disaster, or other emergency. The SSAs work with both public and 

private sector partners to develop protection and mitigation programs and resilience strategies. The 

13 Protection, prevention, and mitigation activities are preparedness activities.
National Mitigation Framework 

34 

SSAs also work with local, state, tribal, territorial, and Federal governments and nonprofit 

organizations. 

A Mitigation Framework Leadership Group (MitFLG) coordinates mitigation efforts across the 

Federal Government and assesses the effectiveness of mitigation capabilities as they are developed 

and deployed across the Nation. The MitFLG includes representatives from local, state, tribal, and 

Federal Government. It is chaired by FEMA in consultation with Department of Homeland Security 

leadership. Consistent with Presidential Policy Directive 1: Organization of the National Security 

Council System, the MitFLG coordinates with the relevant National Security Council Interagency

Policy Committees. Non-Federal members of the MitFLG ensure appropriate integration of Federal 

efforts across the whole community. Private industry and nongovernmental coordination with the 

MitFLG comes through other mechanisms, such as structures available to SSAs. 

The MitFLG serves as a coordinating structure for integrating Federal efforts. Related councils, task 

forces, and committees can coordinate through the MitFLG. The operation of the MitFLG is not 

intended to alter or impede the ability of Executive Branch departments and agencies to carry out 

their authorities or perform their responsibilities under law and consistent with applicable legal 

authorities and other Presidential guidance. 

Mitigation Framework Leadership Group

Non-Federal membership includes:

 Local, state, tribal, and territorial government representatives. 

Federal membership includes, but is not limited to:

 Department of Agriculture

 Department of Commerce

 Department of Defense

 Department of Energy

 Environmental Protection Agency

 General Services Administration

 Department of Health and Human Services

 Department of Homeland Security

 Department of Housing and Urban Development

 Department of the Interior

 Department of Justice

 Small Business Administration

 Department of Transportation

 Department of the Treasury.

Integration

While the National Mitigation Framework focuses on risk rather than incidents, the mitigation 

capabilities serve critical roles that support prevention, protection, response, and recovery efforts. 

During incidents, the focus in response should be on public safety, yet mitigation resources are still 

present and will align with the response and recovery coordinating structures. In the immediate 

aftermath of an event, there is tremendous opportunity to obtain new hazard data, as well as develop 
 National Mitigation Framework

35

and implement mitigation techniques in preparation for potential future incidents. After an event, 

there is political will, immediate experience, and strong opportunities for education that promote 

mitigation strategies and successful practices. The coordinating structures should take advantage of 

this to ensure that the opportunities available during this unique time are captured and used. 

Embedding mitigation activities in the recovery process assures that every opportunity is taken to 

rebuild stronger and smarter in a way that increases the resilience of communities and sustains the 

economic vitality that is developed before—and recovered after—an incident. 

Science and Technology

Science and technology (S&T) capabilities and investments are essential for enabling the delivery

and continuous improvement of National Preparedness. The whole community should design, 

conduct, and improve operations based on the best, most rigorous scientific data, methods, and 

science-based understandings available. Commitments and investments that ensure global leadership 

in science and technology will yield leading-edge technology and scientific understanding to guide 

National Preparedness actions. In addition, coordination across the whole community, including 

scientific researchers, will ensure that scientific efforts are relevant to National Preparedness. 

Effective mitigation relies upon the whole community’s ability to establish science-based 

understanding of their threats and hazards and make well-informed decisions to reduce risks as a 

result. Mitigation requires technical analyses of vulnerabilities and the ability to invent, design, 

implement, and validate actions that reduce risk. Science and technology investments in the 

mitigation mission area include improving fundamental understanding of evolving hazards and 

threats; design and testing of hazard resilient buildings, materials, and infrastructure; development of 

improved building, land-use and engineering codes and standards; improved methods to assess 

vulnerabilities, and science-based approaches to communicating effectively about risk and the value 

of risk reduction. 

Some natural hazards, such as hurricanes, heat waves, extreme precipitation events, and droughts in 

the Southwest U.S., are expected to increase in intensity due to climate change. Consider, for 

example, that uncertainty about these climate change effects on natural hazards complicates 

mitigation-action decision making. Scientific investments providing more reliable and localized 

information on climate change will enable more effective mitigation and adaptation, such as 

improved model engineering standards and codes for resilient design and construction, as well as 

improved communication and incentive structures to encourage communities and business mitigate 

risk. 

Ensuring long-term S&T investments advance the ability to mitigate against hazards, and sustaining 

a healthy science and technology workforce, supports the mitigation mission area core capabilities 

for years into the future. Coordination between those with mitigation mission responsibilities and 

U.S. science and technology communities and institutions will be necessary to ensure that scientific 

efforts, education, and investments are relevant to mitigation. 

Relationship to Other Mission Areas

Mitigation reduces the impact of disasters by supporting protection and prevention activities, easing 

response, and speeding recovery to create better prepared and more resilient communities. As a 

critical component of national preparedness, Mitigation capabilities should inform and support the 

other four mission areas. Many, if not all, frameworks could be in effect simultaneously across the 
National Mitigation Framework 

36 

full spectrum of operations. Mitigation depends on successful coordination and collaboration with 

each of the mission areas.

Planning, Operational Coordination, and Public Information and Warning are the core capabilities 

that span all five mission areas. Within the National Mitigation Framework, the Planning capability 

builds upon existing processes, focusing on the incorporation of risk information to inform decision 

makers. Planning for critical infrastructure will be coordinated between the Protection and Mitigation 

mission areas to support shared objectives. Pre- and post-disaster recovery planning will also build 

on the community-based planning performed under mitigation. Under the Operational Coordination 

capability, mitigation works effectively as part of all operational environments and brings riskinformed decisions to support activities across the whole community of national preparedness. This 

can include being a part of command and control structures during response and recovery and part of 

decentralized structures during steady-state operations. For mitigation, the Public Information and 

Warning capability focuses on sharing information and communicating risk awareness and mitigation 

messages among elements of the whole community. 

Mitigation activities exist in all of the national preparedness mission areas. Risk management and 

resilience activities take different forms for different mission areas but are based on the same 

mitigation principles and practices. In particular, threats and hazards identification and risk 

assessment products become the basis for each of the other mission areas, providing a clear 

understanding of the impacts from threats and hazards and providing an assessment of risk and 

resilience in the built environment and community before, during, and after an event. Insights and 

lessons learned from the other mission areas can be used to inform mitigation activities and 

resilience-building efforts. 

Prevention Mission Area

Threats and hazards identification and risk assessment information provides decision makers with 

awareness of and context for a threat or hazard event. Once specific threats and risks are ascertained, 

communities can then devise appropriate measures for mitigating those threats, thereby ultimately 

reducing vulnerability. Since prevention is the shared responsibility of all levels of government, the 

private and nonprofit sectors, and individuals, the risk management process is the means by which all 

stakeholders can integrate their insights and expertise and collaborate for long-term sustainability and 

overall community resilience. 

The law enforcement, intelligence, and homeland security communities play a significant role in the 

Mitigation mission area. Outreach and community involvement help to establish and maintain strong 

partnerships to increase awareness of potential threats. Intelligence-focused relationships among 

local, state, tribal, territorial, insular area, and Federal law enforcement; intelligence and homeland 

security entities; and with the public and private sector, academia, and other community 

organizations and nongovernmental organizations facilitate information sharing. In turn, this creates 

more opportunities to thwart acts of terrorism and to lessen the effects of large-scale, manmade 

catastrophes should they occur. Through these dialogues, communities may better deter and detect 

specific threats and mitigate vulnerabilities. They may also develop new ways of reducing risks and 

reporting successful practices. Finally, through integrated and risk-informed planning efforts, law 

enforcement and homeland security partners can help improve the whole community’s ability to 

avoid future loss of life and property. 
 National Mitigation Framework

37

Protection Mission Area

Activities in the Mitigation and Protection mission areas are typically performed in a steady-state or 

well before an incident. Protection places particular attention on security and deterrence of threats, 

while mitigation emphasizes achieving resilience by reducing vulnerabilities. Both seek to minimize 

consequences and have a shared focus on critical infrastructure. Addressing the security of that 

infrastructure falls within the Protection mission area, and addressing the resilience of the 

infrastructure falls within the Mitigation mission area. Threat, hazard, and risk analysis is necessary 

to effectively design successful strategies for mitigation and protection. Integration of risk 

information, planning activities, and coordinating structures reduces duplication of effort and 

streamlines risk management actions in both mission areas. 

Response Mission Area

Effective community mitigation efforts directly limit the impact of an emergency or disaster, thereby 

reducing the required scale of response operations and associated costs of response. Threat and 

hazard information and risk assessment data can trigger crucial lifesaving and life-sustaining 

operations, particularly during natural disasters. Tools, such as inundation mapping for flood events, 

can be used to plan and determine appropriate lifesaving actions. Most importantly, these data can be 

used to develop a better understanding of the situation in order to deliver information for decision 

making while easing transition to recovery. When incidents impede the ability to communicate 

effectively or develop impact assessments, risk analysis and hazard modeling can provide operational 

assumptions for first responders to help them understand more about the situation and better prepare 

to respond. 

Recovery Mission Area

The Mitigation and Recovery mission areas share a focus on a sustainable economy and rebuilding 

with overall resilience. Both use the same community systems considerations—economic, health and 

social services, housing, infrastructure, and natural and cultural resources (see Figure 3). Crossmission area integration following a disaster is essential to identify risk avoidance and risk reduction 

actions being taken during the recovery process. Collaboration across the whole community provides 

an unmatched opportunity to integrate mission-essential functions by infusing mitigation, resilience, 

and sustainability into the community’s short and long-term recovery goals. Integrating mitigation 

actions into pre- and post-disaster recovery plans embeds systematic risk management actions that 

ensure a community is building resilience to future impacts. Linking recovery and mitigation breaks 

the cycle of damage-repair-damage resulting from rebuilding without mitigation following disasters.

During recovery, effective planning-related mitigation actions can include moratoriums on 

reconstruction or development until the vulnerabilities have been accurately assessed, 

and the need for higher or additional regulatory standards to reduce those vulnerabilities 

has been explored and approved.

Operational Planning

The National Planning Frameworks explain the role of each mission area in national preparedness 

and provide the overarching strategy and doctrine for how the whole community builds, sustains, and 

delivers the core capabilities. The concepts in the frameworks are used to guide operational planning, 

which provides further information regarding roles and responsibilities, identifies the critical tasks an 

entity will take in executing core capabilities, and identifies resourcing, personnel, and sourcing 

requirements. Operational planning is conducted across the whole community, including the private 
National Mitigation Framework 

38 

and nonprofit sectors and all levels of government. At the Federal level, each framework is supported 

by a mission area-specific Federal Interagency Operational Plan (FIOP). Comprehensive 

Preparedness Guide (CPG) 101 provides further information about the various types of plans and 

guidance on the fundamentals of planning. 

The following sections outline how operational planning is applied within the Mitigation mission 

area.

Mitigation Operational Planning

The goal of the FIOP is to address critical tasks; responsibilities; and resourcing, personnel, and 

sourcing requirements necessary to achieve the desired end-state for the Mitigation mission area as 

described in the National Preparedness Goal. The FIOP addresses the enabling and delivery of the 

core capabilities described in this Framework. Critical tasks based on the capability targets listed in 

the National Preparedness Goal are included in the FIOP. Building on the relationships and 

coordination mechanisms developed while preparing the Framework, whole community engagement 

will continue during the implementation of the Framework and FIOP. In addition to including diverse 

representation (e.g., seniors and people with disabilities and others with access and functional needs) 

during the planning process, the FIOP addresses the unique needs of these specific populations and 

demonstrate a commitment to delivering core capabilities that will serve all members of the whole 

community. 

Synchronization and integration of the Mitigation FIOP with the remaining mission area FIOPs is 

critical to achieving a unified system and approach. This includes horizontal and vertical integration 

across plans and among core capabilities. Synchronizing core capabilities across mission areas 

should address three integrating and coordinating factors: risk; command, control, and coordination; 

and resources. In addition to aligning and integrating plans, the FIOP describes processes for ongoing 

interagency coordination, planning, information sharing, and coordinated program implementation. 

FIOP Structure and Contents 

The FIOP begins with a list and brief description of planning assumptions that establish context for 

the Concept of Operations, Authorities and References, and Annexes sections. Next, the Concept of 

Operations section describes how Federal capabilities that support mitigation activities throughout 

the whole community are integrated, synchronized, managed, and delivered. 

A concept of operations is a written or graphic statement that clearly and concisely explains what the 

decision maker/leader intends to accomplish in an operation using the available resources. The 

concept of operations describes how an organization (or group of organizations) accomplishes a 

mission or set of objectives in order to reach a desired end-state. It includes organizing and assigning 

responsibilities and identifies primary and supporting Federal departments and agencies based on 

existing authorities. Critical tasks, responsibilities, assignments, and resources and a supporting 

resource structure for executing those tasks with detailed resource, personnel, and sourcing 

requirements are identified for each Federal department and agency consistent with existing statutes 

and authorities. 

The FIOP describes the specific roles and responsibilities for the representatives of the MitFLG. 

Responsibilities of specific coordinating structures required to ensure delivery of mitigation core 

capabilities are identified and the roles of these structures during the steady-state, response, and 

recovery phases are explained. For the support mitigation capabilities provided during response and 

recovery, thresholds for activation are identified. The FIOP describes how structures that deliver 
 National Mitigation Framework

39

mitigation core capabilities and resources during response and recovery will be integrated with and 

support the established coordinating structures of those mission areas. 

After describing the concept of operations, the FIOP lists the relevant authorities and references to 

other resources, including laws, statutes, ordinances, executive orders, regulations, and formal 

agreements relevant to mitigation. The list specifies the extent and limits of the authorities granted, 

including the conditions under which these authorities become effective. 

FIOP Review Cycle

The FIOP describes a review cycle with a clear frequency and timeline, monitoring process, and 

assigned roles and responsibilities. It identifies a responsible entity and process for recording and 

documenting lessons learned from exercises, disasters, and other incidents that have made a 

significant impact on the Mitigation mission area. The section describing the review cycle will assign 

roles and responsibilities to all Federal departments and agencies that will review, adjudicate policy 

level issues, and approve the Mitigation FIOP. To ensure continued vertical integration, the whole 

community will be involved in the review cycle.

Department-level Operational Planning

Each Federal executive department and agency will develop and maintain department-level 

operations plans, as deemed necessary by the respective department or agency. Department-level 

operations plans describe how the organization will deliver mitigation core capabilities to fulfill their 

statutory responsibilities and authorities as described in the Framework and FIOP. Existing plans, 

standard operating procedures, or guides may be used for the development of these plans. The 

department-level plan should contain the level of detail necessary to identify clearly the department’s 

or agency’s specific critical tasks, responsibilities, and resources required to fulfill its mission area 

tasks. The frequency for reviewing and updating these plans will depend on each department’s or 

agency’s internal business practices. 

Planning Assumptions

 Federal funding exists at current levels. No new funding sources are created by the

Framework. 

 The Framework is based upon a broad definition of mitigation within the context of national

preparedness that extends beyond its definition in the Stafford Act. Mitigation activities and

actions are not limited to what is eligible within the Stafford Act.

 Current authorizations and legislative language remain in effect. The National Mitigation

Framework does not create new requirements for the whole community. The term

“community resilience” is purposefully used with two distinct meanings.

• Community Resilience is an inclusive, informed process that addresses social, economic,

natural and cultural, technical, and organizational dimensions within a community—

preparing a community to consciously mitigate rather than ignore risks.

• Resilience is an outcome—the state of being able to adapt to changing conditions and

then withstand and rebound from the impacts of disasters and incidents.

Framework Application

The National Mitigation Framework can advance operational planning throughout the whole 

community by facilitating the goal of a secure and resilient Nation. It offers a comprehensive 
National Mitigation Framework 

40 

approach to reducing the loss of life and property by reducing the impact of disasters through the 

development, implementation, and coordination of seven mitigation core capabilities. 

Nongovernmental organizations, private sector entities, local governments, and state, tribal, 

territorial, and insular area governments can draw upon the Framework as a reference when creating 

or revising the capabilities described in their own operational planning efforts. The Framework can 

serve as a resource for the whole community to ensure that mitigation efforts are appropriately 

integrated and synchronized across mission areas. 

Supporting Resources

To assist National Mitigation Framework users, FEMA maintains an online repository that contains 

electronic versions of the National Mitigation Framework documents, as well as information, training 

materials, and other tools to assist mitigation partners in understanding and executing their roles 

under the National Mitigation Framework. 

Conclusion

Mitigation has long existed at every level—from the family that creates a sheltering plan in case of a 

tornado, to corporate emergency plans for opening manufacturing plants to the community, to local 

codes and zoning that systemically address risks in a community’s buildings. Building and sustaining 

a culture of preparedness and widespread resilience throughout communities, however, is a priority 

for the Nation. Responsibility is shared by individuals; businesses; nonprofit organizations; and local, 

state, tribal, territorial, insular area, and Federal governments. Drawing upon the support and 

guidance of the whole community, risk and vulnerability can be managed and community residents 

can feel confident knowing they live in safer, more secure, and resilient communities. 

Working together, risks can be recognized and addressed through a culture of preparedness and 

mitigation that is built and sustained over time. This begins with a comprehensive understanding of 

risk that is translated into plans and actions through partnerships. Aiming toward the ultimate goal of 

sustainability and resilience, mitigation requires a process of continuous learning, adapting to change, 

managing risk, measuring successes, and evaluating progress. 

In implementing the National Mitigation Framework to build national preparedness, partners are 

encouraged to develop a shared understanding of broad-level, strategic implications as they make 

critical decisions in building future capacity and capability. The whole community should be 

engaged in examining and implementing the strategy unifying principles and doctrine contained in 

this Framework, considering both current and future requirements in the process. This means that this 

Framework is a living document, and it will be regularly reviewed to evaluate consistency with 

existing and new policies, evolving conditions, and the experience gained from its use. Reviews of 

this Framework will be conducted in order to evaluate the effectiveness of the Framework on a 

quadrennial basis. 

The Department of Homeland Security will coordinate and oversee the review and maintenance 

process for the National Mitigation Framework. The revision process includes developing or 

updating any documents necessary to carry out capabilities. Significant updates to the Framework 

will be vetted through a Federal senior-level interagency review process. This Framework will be 

reviewed in order to accomplish the following: 

 Assess and update information on the core capabilities in support of Mitigation goals and 

objectives. 

 Ensure that it adequately reflects the organization of responsible entities. 
 National Mitigation Framework

41

 Ensure that it is consistent with the other four mission areas.

 Update processes based on changes in the national threat/hazard environment.

 Incorporate lessons learned and effective practices from day-to-day operations, exercises, and

actual incidents and alerts.

 Reflect progress in the Nation’s Mitigation mission activities and the need to execute new

laws, executive orders, and Presidential directives, as well as strategic changes to national

priorities and guidance, critical tasks, or national capabilities.

The implementation and review of this Framework will consider effective practices and lessons 

learned from exercises and operations, as well as pertinent new processes and technologies. Effective 

practices include continuity planning, which ensures that the capabilities contained in this 

Framework can continue to be executed regardless of the threat or hazard. Pertinent new processes 

and technologies should enable the Nation to adapt efficiently to the evolving risk environment and 

use data relating to location, context, and interdependencies that allow for effective integration across 

all missions using a standards-based approach. 

America’s security and resilience work is never finished. While the Nation is safer, stronger, and 

better prepared than a decade ago, the commitment to safeguard the Nation against the greatest risks 

it faces, now and for decades to come, remains resolute. By bringing the whole community together 

to support the collective and integrated action needed now to address the shared future needs, the 

Nation will continue to ensure its preparedness to face whatever challenges unfold. 
National Mitigation Framework

42 

This page intentionally left blank.