GAO-13-116R National Capital Region Disaster Preparedness

United States Government Accountability Office

Washington, DC 20548

January 25, 2013

The Honorable Mark L. Pryor

United States Senate

Subject: Performance Measures and Comprehensive Funding Data Could Enhance 

Management of National Capital Region Preparedness Resources

Given its political and historical significance as home to the most important 

institutions in the nation, protecting the National Capital Region (NCR) from both 

man-made incidents and natural disasters is of particular concern. Regional 

stakeholders at the local and state levels receive preparedness funding from a 

variety of federal grant programs, but the Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI) grant 

program is the primary source of federal homeland security funding for the NCR. 

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) allocated over $560 million through 

the UASI grant program to the NCR from fiscal years 2003 through 2012. However, 

the region’s response to emergencies in 2011, including a significant snowstorm and 

an earthquake, as well as a severe storm in June 2012, raised questions regarding 

the effectiveness of regional preparedness capabilities. 

The NCR is a geographic region that includes the District of Columbia and local 

jurisdictions in the State of Maryland and the Commonwealth of Virginia.1 A network 

of committees—composed of senior federal, state, and local officials and subject 

matter experts—works together to build the preparedness capabilities needed to 

implement the homeland security strategic plan for this region.2 A key federal 

stakeholder in this network is a federal office called the Office of National Capital 

Region Coordination (NCRC), established by the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to 

oversee and coordinate federal programs for and relationships with state, local, and 

regional authorities in this region.3 In 2007, the Post-Katrina Emergency 

Management Reform Act of 2006 (Post-Katrina Act), transferred NCRC into the 

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).4 FEMA is responsible for 

coordinating national preparedness efforts in response to natural and man-made 

disasters. 

 

1

10 U.S.C. § 2674(f)(2). 2

UASI grant recipients must create a working group with representation from the region that will be responsible 

for coordinating development and implementation of program elements. Before funding can be distributed, DHS 

also requires each UASI recipient to develop and submit a strategic plan that outlines the region’s common 

goals, objectives, and steps for implementation. The strategy is intended to provide each recipient with direction 

for enhancing regional capability and capacity to prevent and reduce vulnerability.

3

6 U.S.C. § 462. NCRC began operations in March 2003, within the office of the Secretary of Homeland Security. 4

6 U.S.C. § 315. 
Page 2 GAO-13-116R National Capital Region Disaster Preparedness

Since May 2004, we have reported on long-standing challenges to emergency 

preparedness in the NCR—including the lack of performance measures to assess 

preparedness capability gaps as well as a reliable, central source of data on funds 

available. As we reported in May 2004, without these basic elements, it is difficult to 

assess preparedness capabilities, identify funding priorities for the region, and 

evaluate the use of all federal funds in a way that maximizes their effectiveness in 

improving the region’s homeland security.5 As a result, we recommended that DHS 

through the NCRC, among other things, identify and address gaps in emergency 

preparedness and evaluate the effectiveness of expenditures by conducting 

assessments of preparedness capabilities in the NCR based on established 

standards and guidelines. DHS concurred with our recommendations. However, the 

NCRC’s efforts to implement these recommendations have been unsuccessful. At 

the national level, we reported in March 2012 that FEMA continued to face 

challenges in managing preparedness grants and had made limited progress in 

managing preparedness grants and assessing capabilities to measure the use of 

federal assistance at the state and local levels, and assess how federal assistance 

programs are supporting national preparedness.6 Most recently, in September 2012, 

we reported that FEMA had not yet finished developing measures and was limited in 

its ability to comprehensively assess jurisdictions’ disaster preparedness and 

capabilities.7 We recommended, among other things, that FEMA develop a 

methodology to more accurately assess a jurisdiction’s capability to respond to and 

recover from a disaster without federal assistance. FEMA concurred with this 

recommendation and officials stated that they would conduct a review before taking 

additional action. 

Establishing and measuring preparedness capabilities is essential to determining the 

impact of prior investments, identifying future needs, and prioritizing funding 

available from local, state, and federal funding sources. Without this information, 

decision makers at all levels cannot effectively answer three key questions of 

preparedness: How prepared do we need to be? How prepared are we? How do we 

prioritize efforts to close the gap?

 

You asked us to review the status of FEMA’s efforts in the NCR to enhance 

capabilities to prepare for, protect from, and respond to major hazards. This report 

addresses the extent to which FEMA has assisted regional officials in establishing 

performance measures and identifying federal funding available to prioritize 

preparedness investments in the NCR.

To respond to this question, we interviewed the senior leadership that represent the 

NCR as well as FEMA’s NCRC officials, and observed their interactions in regional 

management review meetings where the issues of the performance measures and 

the development of preparedness capabilities through the region’s strategic plan 

were discussed. We reviewed the NCR strategic plan, reports on preparedness 

activities, spending plans, and other grant management tools. We also analyzed 

 

5

GAO, Homeland Security: Management of First Responder Grants in the National Capital Region Reflects the 

Need for Coordinated Planning and Performance Goals, GAO-04-433 (Washington, D.C.: May 28, 2004). 6

GAO, Managing Preparedness Grants and Assessing National Capabilities: Continuing Challenges Impede 

FEMA's Progress, GAO-12-526T (Washington, D.C.: Mar. 20, 2012). 7

GAO, Federal Disaster Assistance: Improved Criteria Needed to Assess a Jurisdiction's Capability to Respond 

and Recover on Its Own, GAO-12-838, (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 12, 2012).
Page 3 GAO-13-116R National Capital Region Disaster Preparedness

regional emergency coordination plans and after-action reports from regionwide 

exercises and actual events since 2008. We reviewed our prior work on strategic 

plans, internal controls, coordination, and performance measures in evaluating the 

strategic plan and activities of the NCR.8 To review the activities of FEMA’s NCRC, 

we also analyzed documents such as NCRC’s 2008 strategic plan and its most 

recent annual report to Congress in 2011. 

We conducted this performance audit from April 2012 through January 2013 in 

accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. Those 

standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain sufficient, appropriate 

evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on 

our audit objectives. We believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable 

basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. 

Results in Brief

FEMA’s NCRC officials are not assisting regional officials in (1) developing 

performance measures to better assess the implementation of their strategic plan 

and (2) identifying federal funding available to prioritize preparedness investments. 

They are not doing so because they view their role as that of acting as a coordinator 

for other federal agencies, although they agreed that they could do more to support 

regional efforts and are positioned to do so. The NCR Strategic Plan helps regional 

officials identify the capabilities needed to strengthen the region’s homeland security 

efforts and defines the framework for achieving those capabilities. NCR 

preparedness officials said that they have been working to develop preparedness 

measures since 2003, but noted that these measures are difficult to link to a 

measured improvement in regional preparedness. For example, while the region 

identified more than $25 million in UASI grant projects invested in providing public 

alerts and warnings, regional officials have not developed a measure to determine 

the effectiveness of these activities. Without such measures, it is unclear to what 

extent the efforts will advance the region’s goals. 

Also, FEMA officials have not yet addressed long-standing challenges to 

establishing a process for collecting comprehensive information on available federal 

preparedness funding related to homeland security and emergency management. 

Aside from UASI grant funding, regional officials do not have access to 

comprehensive information on all local, state, and federal funding sources; instead 

they collect this information on a project-by-project basis. These officials stated that 

awareness of all available homeland security and emergency management federal 

grant funding in the NCR could improve their management of resources. 

FEMA’s NCRC is in a position to assist regional officials in the NCR in (1) 

developing measures so that regional preparedness officials can better assess the 

 

8

GAO, Internal Controls: Standards For Internal Control In The Federal Government, AIMD-98-21.3.1, 

(Washington, D.C.: Nov. 1, 1999); Urban Area Security Initiative: FEMA Lacks Measures to Assess How 

Regional Collaboration Efforts Build Preparedness Capabilities, GAO-09-651 (Washington, D.C.: July 2, 2009); 

Homeland Security: Managing First Responder Grants to Enhance Emergency Preparedness in the National 

Capital Region, GAO-05-889T (Washington, D.C.: July 14, 2005); and Homeland Security: The Status of 

Strategic Planning in the National Capital Region, GAO-06-559T (Washington, D.C.: Mar. 29, 2006).
Page 4 GAO-13-116R National Capital Region Disaster Preparedness

implementation of the region’s strategic plan and (2) collecting comprehensive 

information on federal preparedness grant funding in the region. Assisting regional 

officials in these two efforts would help NCR better prioritize funding. We are making 

recommendations to address these challenges.

Background

The NCR 

The NCR includes the District of Columbia and local jurisdictions in the State of 

Maryland and the Commonwealth of Virginia, as pursuant to the National Defense 

Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1991.9 The region, with a population of about 5 

million, includes the nation’s capital, headquarters to all three branches of the 

federal government, with federal departments such as Defense housed throughout 

the jurisdictions surrounding Washington, D.C. There is no single operational 

authority for emergency response in the NCR because these responsibilities reside 

with state and local jurisdictions. Nonetheless, the terrorist attacks of September 11, 

2001, highlighted the need for regional coordination, and in response, the region’s 

jurisdictions created a collaborative network of committees to serve as a governance 

structure to coordinate regional homeland security planning and emergency 

management operations and funding. These committees worked together to create 

the strategic plan called for by DHS’s UASI grant program requirements, as well as 

regional coordination and communications plans.10 Additional information on the 

NCR is included in enclosure I. 

The NCR Strategic Plan is intended to help regional officials identify the capabilities 

needed to strengthen the region’s homeland security efforts and defines the 

framework for achieving those capabilities. The plan identifies a vision and mission 

statement, the region’s four goals, and corresponding objectives and initiatives. 

Specifically, the four broad goals are: (1) ensure interoperable communications 

capabilities, (2) enhance information sharing and situational awareness, (3) enhance 

critical infrastructure protection, and (4) ensure development and maintenance of 

regional core capabilities. A full list of the NCR Strategic Plan’s goals, objectives and 

initiatives can be found in enclosure I. According to regional policies, the projects 

implemented under the NCR Strategic Plan may be local in nature, but must support 

a regional capability. For example, the plan includes an objective to share situational 

awareness with NCR partners so they have the necessary information to make 

informed decisions. 

Situational awareness, regional coordination, and public alerts and warnings were 

cited by regional officials as capabilities needing enhancement in the region’s 

assessment of the response to the January 26, 2011, snowstorm and the August 23, 

2011, earthquake. During the January 26, 2011, snowstorm, for example, many 

commuters experienced 8- to12-hour commutes due to snow- and ice-covered 

 

9

10 U.S.C. § 2674(f)(2). This definition of the NCR encompasses the District of Columbia and parts of Maryland

and Virginia, including the cities of Alexandria, Fairfax, Falls Church, Manassas, and Manassas Park, and the 

counties of Arlington, Fairfax, Loudoun, and Prince William in Virginia, and Montgomery and Prince George’s in 

Maryland, which include the municipalities of Bowie, College Park, Gaithersburg, Greenbelt, Rockville, and 

Takoma Park.

10For additional information on the grant requirements under the UASI program, see GAO-09-651.
Page 5 GAO-13-116R National Capital Region Disaster Preparedness

roads; abandoned and disabled cars, trucks, and buses; as well as outages to traffic 

signals lacking backup power. A report in November 2011 by regional officials found 

that some of the problems cited during the snowstorm were caused by early 

dismissal of many of the region’s employees, which resulted in a compressed rush 

hour just as weather and traffic conditions were deteriorating.11 Regional officials 

found that, despite the worsening traffic, no regional officials initiated a conference 

call to exchange information, discuss regional coordination, or consider a regionwide message to the public. Most jurisdictions’ emergency operation centers were 

never activated because that was not part of the protocol for a storm of the 

magnitude forecasted (3-5 inches of snow). 

Because the operation centers were not activated, the central information-sharing 

tool that allows emergency managers across the region to share information to 

assist with decision making was not used. An organization that was in the relatively 

early stages of implementation, the Metropolitan Area Transportation Operations 

Coordination Program, was monitoring traffic continuously throughout the storm, but 

was able to communicate and coordinate only among the region’s transportation 

agencies and not the broader community of emergency response stakeholders 

across the region. Additionally, once the snowstorm was underway, there was no 

coordinated message from authorities to the media or the general public to advise 

area residents. Also, regional officials cited a lack of real-time, situational awareness 

of all local events occurring within the region and the maintenance of a common 

operating picture, and found that existing tools for emergency managers to share 

information were underutilized. Regional officials concluded that coordinated 

messages and real-time information were needed so the public could make informed 

decisions. To address the need for better coordination of public alerts and warnings, 

regional officials recommended the creation of a Virtual Joint Information Center to 

support media representatives and disseminate press releases, i.e., be the “public 

face" of an incident. The report also proposed the creation of a Regional Incident 

Coordination Program to provide situational awareness of the region as a whole to 

decision makers and appropriate officials. 

The UASI grant program is the primary source of federal homeland security funding 

for the NCR.12 The purpose of the UASI program is to provide grants to assist highrisk urban areas to build and sustain regional preparedness capabilities necessary to 

prevent, protect against, respond to, and recover from acts of terrorism. From fiscal 

years 2003 through 2012, the federal government allocated over $560 million 

through the UASI grant program to the NCR to enhance the region’s disaster 

management capabilities.13 The jurisdictions in the NCR have also received 

preparedness grant funding through a variety of other federal grant programs during 

 

11 See Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, Report of the Steering Committee on Incident 

Management and Response: A proposal for a Regional Incident Coordination Program and Over A Dozen Other 

Improvements to Enhance Incident Management and Response in the National Capital Region, (Washington, 

D.C.: Nov. 9, 2011).

12A report in September 2010 by the Local, State, Tribal, and Federal Preparedness Task Force found that state 

and local funding represents the majority of preparedness-related spending, as federal grant spending 

represented 2.59 percent of total preparedness-related expenditures in fiscal years 2007, and 2.23 percent in 

fiscal year 2008. See DHS, Local, State, Tribal, and Federal Preparedness Task Force, Perspective on 

Preparedness: Taking Stock Since 9/11 (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 2010). 13The region received about $7 million less in UASI grant funds for fiscal year 2012 than it did in fiscal year 2011 

because of budget cuts across all DHS preparedness grant programs.
Page 6 GAO-13-116R National Capital Region Disaster Preparedness

this period.14 The District of Columbia, through its Homeland Security and 

Emergency Management Agency, is the lead agency for managing the region’s 

UASI grants.15 Regional preparedness leadership is provided by a Senior Policy 

Group committee of designated state and district officials and the chief 

administrative officers. The NCR is the only region that has a statutorily created and 

federally funded office devoted to supporting coordination and cooperation of 

homeland security activities within the region—NCRC. NCRC is a member of the 

NCR’s Senior Policy Group. Additional information on the NCR’s governance 

structure can be found in enclosure I.

FEMA’s Role in the NCR

NCRC was established by the Homeland Security Act of 2002, which also created 

DHS.16 The office’s statutory mission is to oversee and coordinate federal programs 

for and relationships with state, local, and regional authorities in the region, and 

among its responsibilities are to provide state, local, and regional authorities with 

regular information, research, and technical support and facilitate access to federal 

grants and other programs. The act also requires NCRC to submit an annual report 

to Congress that includes the identification of resources required to fully implement 

homeland security efforts in the NCR, an assessment of the progress made by the 

NCR in implementing homeland security efforts, and recommendations to Congress 

regarding the additional resources needed to fully implement homeland security 

efforts. See enclosure II for a complete list of NCRC’s legislative requirements. 

The statutorily defined role of NCRC and its relationship to the preparedness efforts 

in the NCR reflect the larger role that FEMA now plays in national preparedness 

efforts as a result of the Post-Katrina Act. Specifically, the Post-Katrina Act moved 

NCRC from DHS’s Preparedness Directorate to FEMA.17 The Post-Katrina Act also 

transferred DHS’s preparedness grant programs to FEMA, and FEMA’s Grant 

Programs Directorate (GPD) is responsible for managing all DHS disaster 

preparedness grant programs, including the UASI grant program.18 The Post-Katrina 

Act also requires that FEMA develop a national preparedness system and assess 

preparedness capabilities—capabilities needed to respond effectively to disasters—

to determine the nation’s preparedness capability levels and the resources needed 

 

14As we reported in GAO-04-433, NCR jurisdictions used at least 16 funding sources we reviewed to address a 

variety of emergency preparedness activities. 

15Under the UASI program, the D.C. government is the “State Administrative Agency” that is responsible for 

carrying out the administrative requirements of federal homeland security grants, including making sure 

application requirements are satisfied, ensuring funds are properly allocated, meeting required deliverables, and 

submitting necessary paperwork. As we reported in GAO-09-651, FEMA requires each UASI region to create its 

own regional working group that includes representation from the jurisdictions and response disciplines that are 

collectively responsible for coordinating development and implementation of the projects and programs being 

conducted with UASI grant funds. Each UASI region is to develop a charter and a strategic plan that outlines the 

region’s common goals. After funds are awarded, grantees are required to report regularly on their progress as 

part of the grant reporting process. Performance data submitted by grantees as part of required reports are to be 

reviewed and validated through program monitoring by FEMA. 

166 U.S.C. § 462. NCRC began operations in March 2003. 176 U.S.C. § 315. After NCRC was established in the Office of the Secretary, it was moved as part of the SecondStage Review to the Preparedness Directorate. 

18The Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007, also directed DHS and certain other 

federal agencies to compile a comprehensive list of federal preparedness grant programs, among other things. 6 

U.S.C. § 611(c).
Page 7 GAO-13-116R National Capital Region Disaster Preparedness

to achieve desired levels of capability.19 To implement these responsibilities for 

measuring and assessing national preparedness capabilities, FEMA established the 

National Preparedness Directorate (NPD) in April 2007. All three organizations with 

responsibilities related for the National Capital Region, national grants management, 

and national preparedness assessment—NCRC, GPD, and NPD—are component 

offices within FEMA’s Protection and National Preparedness office, as illustrated in 

figure 1.20 (A detailed organization chart of all FEMA components is included in 

enclosure II.) 

Figure 1: FEMA Organization Chart: Offices within the Protection and National 

Preparedness Division with Responsibilities for the National Capital Region, National 

Grants Management, and National Preparedness Assessment

NPD’s mission, among other things, is to provide national strategy, programs, and 

resources to evaluate overall national preparedness and the effectiveness of 

preparedness programs. The directorate, which— in FEMA’s fiscal year 2012 budget 

request —had a staff of 23 and a budget of $14 million, leads FEMA’s evaluation 

and assessment activities, such as the National Preparedness Report and State 

Preparedness Reports. It also collaborated with the National Academy of Public 

Administration in developing performance measures for both the UASI and State 

Homeland Security Grant programs.21 Further, in September 2011, FEMA published 

the National Preparedness Goal, which describes the nation’s strategic approach to 

preparing for the threats and hazards that pose the greatest risk to the nation’s 

security, and identified 31 capabilities as a basis for assessing national 

preparedness. One example of a core capability is to provide public information and 

warnings, which requires responsible officials to deliver coordinated, prompt, 

reliable, and actionable information to the whole community through the use of clear, 

consistent, and accessible methods to effectively relay information. Such information 

 

196 U.S.C. § 749. 20FEMA’s Protection and National Preparedness (PNP) is responsible for the coordination of preparedness and 

protection related activities throughout FEMA, including grants, planning, training, exercises, individual and 

community preparedness, assessments, lessons learned, continuity of government, and national capital region 

coordination.

21National Academy of Public Administration, Improving the National Preparedness System: Developing More 

Meaningful Grant Performance Measures (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 2011).
Page 8 GAO-13-116R National Capital Region Disaster Preparedness

should include the nature of the threat or hazard, the actions being taken, and the 

assistance being made available. 

Related GAO Work

As we reported in April 2009, FEMA has made progress in developing a national 

preparedness system that includes, among other things, planning and allocating 

resources and identifying any gaps in capabilities.22 At that time, we found that

FEMA had made progress in developing a system for assessing national 

preparedness capabilities, but faced challenges in completing the system and 

required reports to assess preparedness. FEMA generally concurred with our 

recommendations related to establishing national measures and repeatedly reported 

plans to develop them, but has not yet done so. Similarly, in our July 2009 

assessment of FEMA’s implementation of the UASI grant program, we found that 

FEMA lacks measures to assess how regional collaboration efforts build 

preparedness capabilities.23 FEMA concurred with our recommendation to develop 

measures but has not yet done so. In March 2011, the White House issued 

Presidential Policy Directive/PPD-8 for National Preparedness, which called for “a 

comprehensive approach to assess national preparedness that uses consistent 

methodology to measure the operational readiness of national capabilities at the 

time of assessment, with clear, objective and quantifiable performance measures, 

against the target capability levels identified in the national preparedness goal.”24 We 

reported in March 2012 that FEMA officials continued to experience challenges that 

impeded their progress in managing preparedness grants and assessing capabilities 

to measure the use of federal assistance at the state and local levels, and assess 

how federal assistance programs are supporting national preparedness.25 

More recently, we reported in September 2012 that FEMA has not yet finished 

developing metrics to assess state preparedness capability and was limited in its 

ability to comprehensively assess jurisdictions’ disaster preparedness and 

capabilities.26 We recommended, among other things, that FEMA develop a 

methodology to more accurately assess a jurisdiction’s capability to respond to and 

recover from a disaster without federal assistance, a recommendation with which 

FEMA concurred. 

 

22GAO, National Preparedness: FEMA Has Made Progress, but Needs to Complete and Integrate Planning, 

Exercise, and Assessment Efforts, GAO-09-369 (Washington, D.C.: Apr. 30, 2009). 23GAO-09-651. 24The White House, Presidential Policy Directive/PPD-8, Subject: National Preparedness (Washington, D.C.: 

Mar. 30, 2011). 25GAO, Managing Preparedness Grants and Assessing National Capabilities Continuing Challenges Impede 

FEMA's Progress, GAO-12-526T (Washington, D.C.: Mar. 20, 2012). 26GAO, Federal Disaster Assistance: Improved Criteria Needed to Assess a Jurisdiction's Capability to Respond 

and Recover on Its Own, GAO-12-838 (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 12, 2012).
Page 9 GAO-13-116R National Capital Region Disaster Preparedness

FEMA Officials Could Better Assist the NCR in Establishing Measures and 

Identifying Available Federal Funding in the NCR

NCR Officials Have Taken Steps to Develop Measures, but FEMA Could Do More to 

Assist in These Efforts

Although establishing performance measures for preparedness capabilities is not a 

requirement for UASI grant recipients like the NCR, regional officials have been 

working since 2003 to develop measures to assess and approve grant projects 

through a strategic management review process. NCR officials have identified 

national standards and have taken steps to help inform their efforts to develop 

measures. All of the 37 initiatives under the NCR’s strategic plan are implemented 

by committees of subject matter experts, the progress of which is then reviewed on a 

bimonthly basis by the region’s leadership.27 As we have reported, leading 

management practices recognize the importance of establishing performance 

measures in achieving results.28 When designed effectively, performance measures 

help managers (1) determine how well a program is performing, (2) identify gaps in 

performance, and (3) determine where to focus resources to improve results. 

Further, while performance measures should distinguish between outcomes (i.e., the 

intended result of carrying out a program or activity) and outputs (i.e., the level of 

activity that will be provided over a period of time), there must be a reasonable 

connection between them, with outputs supporting (i.e., leading to) outcomes in a 

logical fashion.29 To illustrate in the preparedness realm, for a tornado warning 

system, outputs could be the number of operating outdoor sirens within a 

jurisdiction, while outcomes could be the number of lives saved. However, this 

outcome measure could also be influenced by other variables whose impact may not 

be readily identifiable or measurable. 

Reflecting these challenges, NCR regional preparedness officials said that although 

they have been working to develop outcome measures since 2003, such measures 

are difficult to link to a measurable improvement in regional preparedness. 

Accordingly, for example, NCR regional preparedness officials identified past 

projects totaling more than $25 million in UASI grant and local funds to date to build 

the preparedness capability for providing public alerts and warnings regionwide, and 

have another $3.5 million in ongoing projects, but have not established measures to 

determine the effectiveness of these efforts. As a result, the extent to which these 

investments have improved the region’s public alerts and warnings capabilities or 

addressed the gaps for this capability identified by the region is unclear. For 

example, one of these projects encourages jurisdictions to establish and use social 

media outlets (i.e., Facebook and Twitter). However, regional officials have not 

developed an associated measure to determine the effectiveness of these outlets in 

providing public alerts and warnings. We recognize the challenge that these officials 

 

27A full list of the NCR’s 2010 Strategic Plan’s goals, objectives, and initiatives can be found in enclosure I. 28GAO, Executive Guide: Effectively Implementing the Government Performance and Results Act, GAO/GGD96-118 (Washington, D.C.: June 1996). Additionally, other past GAO work identified best practices that agencies 

have used to better articulate their results through their performance plans, which could be more useful in 

helping guide decisions and, subsequently, assess actual performance. See GAO, Agency Performance Plans: 

Examples of Practices That Can Improve Usefulness to Decisionmakers, GAO/GGD/AIMD-99-69 (Washington, 

D.C.: Feb. 26, 1999).

29GAO/GGD/AIMD-99-69 and GAO-09-651.
Page 10 GAO-13-116R National Capital Region Disaster Preparedness

face in trying to develop outcome-oriented measures. For example, determining the 

number of people who took preparedness actions on the basis of an alert on 

Facebook might require officials to administer a survey, which could be difficult and 

costly to develop and implement in a way that provides meaningful and valid data. 

However, identifying feasible, cost-effective measures is essential for prioritizing 

preparedness investments in a time of decreasing resources to ensure that the 

highest-priority capability gaps are effectively addressed. For example, measuring 

the amount of activity on social media sites could be an initial proxy measure to 

determine the extent to which the general public has been alerted through the social 

media outlets.

As a result of the reorganization of DHS’s responsibilities as called for in the PostKarina Act, NCRC is a part of FEMA’s Protection and National Preparedness 

component, which includes the National Preparedness Directorate (NPD). The 

directorate is responsible for developing the National Preparedness System, which 

is designed to improve public officials’ ability to allocate scarce resources, and 

incorporates the use of performance measures to allow for a direct and defensible 

assessment of progress against clearly defined goals.30 Part of the system includes 

31 Core Capabilities that the National Preparedness Directorate uses for developing 

and analyzing performance measures to assess grants, community preparedness, 

and the nation’s overall preparedness. Now that NCRC is within PNP, with its 

responsibilities, programs, and resources for developing preparedness metrics and 

assessments, NCRC is in a better position to assist regional preparedness officials 

in the NCR in developing measures to assess the implementation of the NCR’s 

strategic plan. Doing so could help ensure that funds are being spent in the most 

effective and efficient manner to enhance regional preparedness capabilities. NCRC 

officials stated that they are not assisting the region in developing performance 

measures because they view their role as a coordinator for other federal agencies, 

although they agreed that they could do more to support regional efforts and are 

positioned to do so. 

In addition, the statute that established NCRC requires officials to submit an annual 

report to Congress that includes an assessment of the progress made by NCR 

officials in implementing homeland security efforts in the region.31 Measuring 

preparedness capabilities is also essential to determining the impact of the more 

than $560 million DHS has allocated to the NCR from fiscal years 2003 through 

2012. Without this information, decision makers are unable to determine how 

prepared the region is and how to prioritize investments to close the gap. Because 

FEMA uses the core capabilities defined in the National Preparedness Goal to 

assess preparedness and allocate resources, assisting NCR regional officials in 

developing measures to determine quantifiable preparedness goals, assess the 

status of current capabilities, and prioritize federal grant funding would also enhance 

the quality and usefulness of NCRC’s annual report to Congress. 

 

30The components of the National Preparedness System include identifying and assessing risk, estimating the 

level of capabilities needed to address those risks, building or sustaining the required levels of capability, 

developing and implementing plans to deliver those capabilities, validating and monitoring progress, and 

reviewing and updating efforts to promote continuous improvement.

316 U.S.C. § 462(c).
Page 11 GAO-13-116R National Capital Region Disaster Preparedness

FEMA Has Not Yet Established a Process for Collecting Comprehensive Information 

on Available Federal Preparedness Funding to Assist NCR Officials 

While regional preparedness officials are working to identify additional funding 

sources needed to implement the NCR’s strategic plan, FEMA officials have not yet 

addressed long-standing challenges to establishing a process for collecting 

comprehensive information on all available federal preparedness funding in the 

region. Regional preparedness officials collect and maintain a list of historic and 

current UASI grant funding, but they do not collect information on homeland security 

and emergency management funding to all the region’s jurisdictions, other than that 

provided by the UASI program.32 Regional officials’ strategic management review 

process is intended to ensure that the allocation of all available preparedness funds 

within the region is effective, and officials said that while they focus on the allocation 

of UASI funds, they attempt to consider other funding sources. For example, during 

the strategic management review process, regional officials were able to identify 12 

proposed projects—totaling $17.8 million—that are priorities for UASI funding, which

could be funded from other sources, if needed to offset potential reductions in future 

UASI grant funding.33 Regional officials collect this type of information on a projectby-project basis during their strategic management review process, but they do not 

have access to comprehensive information on all local, state, and federal funding 

sources. As a result, regional officials said it was more difficult to coordinate and use 

multiple sources of funds to achieve specific objectives. 

While regional officials have been able to identify other grant-funding sources in 

some cases, they said that gathering comprehensive data on all funding sources is a 

complex and resource-intensive task that is complicated by (1) the varying abilities 

of the different state and local jurisdictional stakeholders to collect and report federal 

funding information and (2) sensitivities in balancing local and state jurisdictional 

interests with regional needs. Regional officials further stated that their attempt to 

develop a spreadsheet of federal grant funding information was hampered by 

reporting inconsistencies from jurisdictions and resulted in data of limited reliability. 

They said that a full awareness of all available homeland security and emergency 

management federal grant funding could improve their management of regional 

resources by helping them budget for, and prioritize investments in, preparedness 

capabilities. 

As a part of FEMA’s PNP division, which also includes FEMA’s Grants Programs 

Directorate, NCRC could have the ability to collect information on DHS grant funding 

and other federal grants that are relevant to homeland security and emergency 

management capabilities. However, NCRC officials have not collaborated with GPD 

to determine how to collect and maintain comprehensive data on such funding 

sources to assist regional officials. NCRC officials said that maintaining a 

comprehensive data set of federal homeland security and emergency management 

 

32Officials in the District of Columbia are required to maintain this information for the region because of their grant 

management responsibilities under the UASI grant program. The District of Columbia also is a grantee under 

other DHS grant programs such as the State Homeland Security Grant Program, Transit Security Grant 

Program, Citizen Corps Program, and Emergency Management Performance Grants. Maryland and Virginia also 

receive separate grants under these DHS programs.

33For fiscal year 2012, DHS preparedness grants were reduced by nearly $1 billion from the fiscal year 2011 

enacted levels. For the UASI program, this represented a $172 million reduction.
Page 12 GAO-13-116R National Capital Region Disaster Preparedness

funding that could be used to enhance regional preparedness is a complex and 

resource-intensive task and in providing comments on our draft report, DHS officials 

commented that the NCRC does not have the legal authority to compel other federal 

agencies to provide their grant data to NCRC for analysis. However, NCRC officials 

agreed that they could do more to support regional efforts and they are positioned to 

do so.

Regarding the complexity of the task, another office in FEMA has already taken 

steps to gather federal preparedness funding information. Specifically, the PostKatrina Act transferred DHS’s preparedness grant programs to FEMA, and GPD 

manages all of DHS’s preparedness grant programs in an effort to better integrate 

and coordinate grant management.34 In providing comments on our draft report, 

DHS officials commented that its grant management data could be used by state 

and local officials to assess capabilities strengths and areas for improvements. 

Further, in response to a mandate in 2009, GPD and other federal agencies issued a 

report to Congress that included a comprehensive list of federal preparedness grant 

programs.35 In preparing this report, GPD documented the process by which it 

gathered this information across federal departments and agencies. Thus, NCRC 

officials could collaborate with GPD to better determine how to gather this 

information and share it with NCR officials.

Regarding the authority to compel other federal agencies to provide grant data, we 

recognize that FEMA does not have this authority; however, FEMA is in a position, 

through its preparedness offices and the NCRC, to collaborate with other agencies 

that have roles in supporting emergency preparedness in the region. Congress 

established NCRC to oversee and coordinate programs across federal, state, local, 

and regional authorities, and its responsibilities include facilitating access to federal 

grants. As we noted, for example, FEMA preparedness offices have collaborated 

with other federal agencies through efforts such as the report on preparedness 

programs described above as well as NCRC officials serving as chair of the NCR’s 

Joint Federal Committee.36 In addition, NCRC officials are required by law to submit 

an annual report to Congress that includes the identification of the resources 

required to fully implement homeland security efforts in the region and make 

recommendations to Congress regarding the additional resources needed. 37

Information on current funding sources for the region could help NCRC better 

determine areas in which grants are currently supporting efforts and areas for which 

grant funding may be needed. However, NCRC’s 2010-2011 report to Congress—

its most recent—only generally referenced the types of other federal funding sources 

 

34GPD is responsible for managing all of DHS’s disaster preparedness grant programs, including the UASI grant 

program. According to FEMA officials, GPD collects detailed information on DHS grant investments made by 

states and UASIs. It contains investment data at the project level, such as project description, core capability 

supported by the project, and whether funding sustains or builds new capabilities. Additionally, these data can be 

filtered and combined to provide detailed reports on specific investment trends, summary reports on total core 

capability, or regional investments.

35Interagency Report on Preparedness Grant Programs Report to Congress May 2009. See 6 U.S.C. § 611(c). 36The Joint Federal Committee is composed of representatives from the executive, legislative, and judicial 

branches of the federal government with offices in the NCR. The committee meets monthly to coordinate federal 

homeland security efforts in the region and is designed to serve as a multijurisdictional, multiagency forum for 

policy discussions and resolution of homeland security–related issues to promote a focused regional effort 

among federal representatives to improve emergency preparedness and response capabilities in the NCR.

376 U.S.C. § 462(c).
Page 13 GAO-13-116R National Capital Region Disaster Preparedness

that are available to enhance preparedness in the NCR; the report did not specify 

amounts of grant dollars used and which projects and capabilities the money was 

used to fund. Thus, collecting this information could help NCRC more effectively 

meet its legislative requirement.

In addition, we reported in May 2004 that the fragmented nature of the multiple 

federal grants available to first responders—some awarded to states, some to 

localities—may make it more difficult to collect and maintain regionwide data on the 

grant funds received and the use of those funds in the NCR.38 Our previous work on 

federal grants management suggested that fragmentation in federal grants may 

reinforce state and local fragmentation and can also make it more difficult to 

coordinate and use those multiple sources of funds to achieve specific objectives.39

In our May 2004 report, we recommended that DHS monitor the NCR strategic 

plan’s implementation to ensure that funds are used in a way that promotes effective 

expenditures that are not unnecessarily duplicative. DHS concurred with our 

recommendation, but officials said they have not implemented this recommendation 

because they lacked the authority to compel other federal agencies to provide such 

information, and the resources to collect and maintain it.

Given the inherent difficulties regional officials face in collecting and analyzing 

comprehensive data on available federal preparedness grant funding, FEMA’s 

NCRC is in a position to assist regional preparedness officials in collecting 

comprehensive information on federal homeland security and emergency 

management grant funding in the region, including using the information provided by 

GPD. This is consistent with NCRC’s statutory mission to assess, and advocate for, 

the resources needed by state, local, and regional authorities in the NCR to 

implement efforts to secure the homeland. Thus, a process for collecting and 

maintaining comprehensive information on available federal preparedness funding in 

the NCR could better position NCRC to help the NCR regional officials better 

prioritize funding to fill the largest capability gaps. This information would also 

enhance the quality and usefulness of NCRC’s annual report to Congress.

Conclusions

Over the last decade, the NCR has received over $560 million through the UASI 

grant program and millions more through a variety of other federal grant programs. 

Recent severe weather events in the region have continued to test the preparation of 

capabilities and the coordinated efforts of the jurisdictions and organizations that 

make up the NCR. In addition, these events serve as reminders of the potential 

consequences that a truly catastrophic event could have on the region. Assisting

regional officials in establishing performance measures and a reliable, central source 

of data on the federal funds that are available to enhance preparedness is a 

responsibility for which NCRC is better positioned as a result of its relocation into 

FEMA’s Protection and National Preparedness component. The Protection and 

National Preparedness component has the national responsibilities, the programs, 

and the resources for developing and analyzing performance measures and 

 

38GAO-04-433. 39See GAO, Homeland Security: Reforming Federal Grants to Better Meet Outstanding Needs, GAO-03-1146T

(Washington, D.C.: Sept. 3, 2003).
Page 14 GAO-13-116R National Capital Region Disaster Preparedness

collecting information on grant funding at the national level that could be leveraged 

to enhance preparedness at the regional level in the NCR. As noted earlier, 

measuring preparedness capabilities is essential to determining the impact of 

current and future funding invested in the NCR. Such measures and a mechanism 

for collecting and maintaining this information could also improve the quality and 

value of future submissions of NCRC’s annual reports to Congress by providing 

Congress with more actionable information on the state of preparedness in the 

region and a measurable estimate of the additional resources needed to achieve 

specific capability goals. 

Recommendations for Executive Action

To address long-standing challenges that continue to hinder regional preparedness 

efforts in the NCR, we recommend that the FEMA Administrator require that the 

Director of NCRC take the following two actions:

• assist regional officials in developing measures to better assess the 

implementation of the NCR’s strategic plan and

• collect and maintain available information for NCR jurisdictions on DHS grant 

funding, and other federal grant funding that are relevant to homeland 

security and emergency management capabilities. 

Agency Comments and Our Evaluation

We provided a draft of this report to DHS for comment and received written 

comments from DHS which are summarized below and reproduced in full in 

enclosure III. DHS concurred with both recommendations. 

DHS concurred with the recommendation that FEMA assist regional officials in 

developing measures to better assess the implementation of the NCR’s strategic 

plan. DHS stated that the use of performance metrics is necessary for assessing 

overall preparedness in the region, and noted that FEMA’s NCRC office is uniquely 

positioned to assist in this effort because the office is embedded within the region’s 

preparedness coordinating councils and groups. Additionally, DHS stated that NCRC 

will continue to work with other offices within FEMA to ensure the region’s 

performance management efforts are consistent with national preparedness 

guidance and policy. DHS commented that FEMA has established a preparedness 

baseline and a foundation for assessing future preparedness of states and territories 

through State Preparedness Reports (SPR) and the Threat and Hazard Identification 

and Risk Assessments (THIRA), which when combined provide a complete picture 

of capability needs for the NCR. As DHS noted, however, FEMA does not collect 

comparable data on NCR jurisdictions as a separate entity through the SPR. We 

believe that, because FEMA’s SPRs are not intended to include UASI-specific data, 

the state preparedness reports do not provide a meaningful basis for identifying key 

capability needs and gaps in the NCR or measures to assess the implementation of

the NCR’s strategic plan. 

 

DHS also concurred with the recommendation that FEMA collect and maintain 

available information for NCR jurisdictions on DHS grant funding as well as other 
Page 15 GAO-13-116R National Capital Region Disaster Preparedness

federal funding that is relevant to homeland security and emergency management 

capabilities.40 DHS stated that NCRC will work with FEMA’s Grant Programs 

Directorate and National Preparedness Directorate to advise FEMA leadership on 

how best to collect and analyze all federal grant information relevant to homeland 

security and emergency management in the region, as well as work with the region 

to explore options to establish a timely reporting structure for collecting grant data 

from the jurisdictions. Further, DHS stated that while FEMA agrees in principle, the 

NCRC does not have the authority to compel other federal agencies responsible for 

grant allocation to provide their grant data to the NCRC for analysis, and that the 

task could overwhelm the NCRC’s current resource capacity. In addition, DHS 

stated that enhanced collection of additional federal grant data would not necessarily 

result in a more informed approach to UASI grant management. However, in our 

February 2012 review of FEMA grant programs, we identified multiple factors that 

contributed to the risk of FEMA potentially funding unnecessarily duplicative 

projects, which included differing levels of information that FEMA had available 

regarding grant projects and recipients. We also reported that FEMA lacked a 

process to coordinate application reviews across the four grant programs.41 We 

recognize that FEMA’s role is often to coordinate, guide, and support, rather than 

direct, and that collaboration is an essential element of FEMA’s efforts. At the same 

time, we continue to believe that FEMA has opportunities for and a responsibility to 

further develop its relationships with national preparedness stakeholders at the local, 

state, and federal levels and to instill a shared sense of responsibility and 

accountability on the part of all stakeholders for the successful development and 

implementation of the national preparedness system. As noted in this report and in 

multiple reports issued since May 2004, our assessments have identified longstanding challenges to emergency preparedness in the NCR—including the lack of 

performance measures to assess preparedness capability gaps as well as the lack 

of a reliable, central source of data on funds available. Without these basic 

elements, it is difficult to assess preparedness capabilities, identify funding priorities 

for the region, and evaluate the use of all federal funds in a way that maximizes their 

effectiveness in improving the region’s homeland security. Given the long-standing 

nature of these issues and the $560 million in UASI grants that DHS has allocated to 

the NCR from fiscal years 2003 through 2012, we believe it is appropriate for FEMA 

and its preparedness component to focus its resources in addressing them. 

DHS also provided technical comments, which we incorporated, as appropriate.

In addition, we provided a draft of this report to the NCR’s Senior Policy Group for 

comment and received written comments which are reproduced in full in enclosure 

IV. The NCR described current preparedness efforts and capabilities as well as its 

performance measurement process. The NCR also provided technical comments, 

which we incorporated, as appropriate.

 

40After discussions with DHS and FEMA officials, we revised the second draft recommendation from collecting 

and maintaining information on “all federal grant funding within the NCR” to focus more specifically on grant 

funding related to homeland security and emergency management. 

41 GAO, Homeland Security: DHS Needs Better Project Information and Coordination among Four Overlapping 

Grant Programs, GAO-12-303 (Washington, D.C.: Feb. 28, 2012).
Page 16 GAO-13-116R National Capital Region Disaster Preparedness

As agreed with your office, unless you publicly announce the contents of this report 

earlier, we plan no further distribution until 6 days from the report date. At that time, 

we will send copies of this report to the Secretary of Homeland Security, the NCR’s 

Senior Policy Group, and other interested congressional committees. In addition, this 

report will be available at no charge on the GAO website at http://www.gao.gov. 

If you or your staff members have any questions about this report, please contact 

me at (202) 512-8777 or caldwells@gao.gov. Contact points for our Offices of 

Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last page of this 

report. GAO staff who made key contributions to this report are listed in enclosure V. 

Stephen L. Caldwell

Director

Homeland Security and Justice Issues

Enclosures – 5 
Page 17 GAO-13-116R National Capital Region Disaster Preparedness

Enclosure I: Highlights of the National Capital Region (NCR) and Its 2010 

Strategic Plan

The NCR 

The NCR includes the District of Columbia and local jurisdictions in Maryland and 

Virginia, as pursuant to the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1991, 

as shown in figure 2.42

Figure 2: The National Capital Region 

The physical, political, and demographic attributes in the NCR both heighten the 

threat and raise the consequences of natural and man-made incidents for the region. 

According to the NCR’s 2010 strategic plan, the region is the home of the nation’s 

capital and headquarters to all three branches of the federal government, 271 

federal departments and agencies, and more than 340,000 federal workers.43

Further, the NCR is also a hub of international governmental and business activity, 

as 4,000 diplomats work at more than 170 embassies, and more than 8,000 

individuals work at international organizations such as the World Bank, the 

International Monetary Fund, and the Organization of American States. The plan 

also states that the NCR receives more than 20 million tourists each year and 

includes some of the most important symbols of national sovereignty and democratic 

heritage within its boundaries. Additionally, the region has a population of more than 

5 million, and federal departments such as Defense, Health and Human Services, 

and Energy are housed throughout the jurisdictions surrounding Washington, D.C. 

Further, the NCR’s populace relies on a vast array of critical infrastructure and key 

 

4210 U.S.C. § 2674(c). This definition of the NCR encompasses the District of Columbia and parts of Maryland 

and Virginia, including the cities of Alexandria, Fairfax, Falls Church, Manassas, and Manassas Park, and the 

counties of Arlington, Fairfax, Loudoun, and Prince William in Virginia, and Montgomery and Prince George’s in 

Maryland, which include the municipalities of Bowie, College Park, Gaithersburg, Greenbelt, Rockville, and 

Takoma Park. 43 See National Capital Region, Homeland Security Strategic Plan (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 2010).
Page 18 GAO-13-116R National Capital Region Disaster Preparedness

resources including transportation, energy, and water. Lastly, the region’s 

transportation system illustrates the complexity of protecting the critical infrastructure 

from attack and disruption, as the NCR hosts two major airports, its transportation 

system is an intricate network of major highways and bridges, and it contains the 

nation’s second-largest rail transit and fifth-largest bus systems.

The ongoing risk assessment process conducted by regional officials identified key 

threats and vulnerabilities and the impact that various incidents could have on the 

region. These assessments underscore the need to be prepared for natural events 

such as ice, snowstorms, and flooding; special events such as international 

summits, inaugurations, and parades; and man-made threats such as terrorist 

attacks. 

NCR Governance Structure for Preparedness

The NCR is a collaborative network of state and local jurisdictions and planning 

organizations with no single operational authority for emergency response; the 

responsibility for this resides instead with state and local jurisdictions. The terrorist 

attacks of September 11, 2001, and the subsequent anthrax attacks in the 

Washington area highlighted the need for a regional coordination plan containing 

new policies, protocols, and procedures to improve coordination and communication 

in anticipation of potential future regional emergencies. The region’s jurisdictions 

created a governance structure to coordinate regional homeland security planning 

and emergency management operations and funding, which is supported by the 

Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments (MWCOG).44 See figure 3 for 

more details on the NCR’s governance structure.

 

44Founded in 1957, MWCOG is an independent, nonprofit association composed of elected officials from 22 local 

governments, members of the Maryland and Virginia state legislatures, and members of Congress. MWCOG is 

supported by financial contributions from its participating local governments, federal and state grants and 

contracts, and donations from foundations and the private sector.
Page 19 GAO-13-116R National Capital Region Disaster Preparedness

Figure 3: NCR Governance Structure

As of fiscal year 2012, the NCR was also one of the 31 Urban Area Security Initiative 

(UASI) grant regions. The UASI grant program is the primary single source of federal 

homeland security funding for the NCR. The purpose of the UASI program is to 

support regional collaboration among local jurisdictions and emergency response 

organizations to build and sustain regional preparedness capabilities necessary to 

prevent, protect against, respond to, and recover from acts of terrorism.45 From fiscal 

years 2003 through 2012, the federal government allocated over $560 million 

through the UASI grant program to the NCR to enhance the region’s disaster 

management capabilities. The NCR has also received preparedness grant funding 

through a variety of other federal grant programs during this period.46 The District of 

Columbia, through its Homeland Security and Emergency Management Agency, is 

the lead agency—also known as the State Administrative Agency (SAA)-—for 

managing the region’s UASI grants. The SAA is responsible for carrying out the 

 

45As we reported in GAO-09-651, FEMA requires each UASI region to create its own regional working group that 

includes representation from the jurisdictions and response disciplines that are collectively responsible for 

coordinating development and implementation of the projects and programs being conducted with UASI grant 

funds. Each UASI region is to develop a charter and a strategic plan that outlines the region’s common goals. 

After funds are awarded, grantees are directed to report regularly on progress as part of the grant reporting 

process. Performance data submitted through grant reporting are to be reviewed and validated through program 

monitoring by FEMA.

46As we reported in GAO-04-433, NCR jurisdictions used at least 16 funding sources we reviewed to address a 

wide variety of emergency preparedness activities. 
Page 20 GAO-13-116R National Capital Region Disaster Preparedness

administrative requirements of federal homeland security grants. Additional roles 

include the following: 

 applying for grants on behalf of the District of Columbia and the NCR 

urban area,

 providing oversight of local grant recipients—subgrantees,

 coordinating with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) 

on grant-related issues,

 determining how grant funds can be used,

 serving as the initial point of contact for federal audits, and

 conducting record keeping of current and historical data.
Page 21 GAO-13-116R National Capital Region Disaster Preparedness

Below, in table 1, is NCR’s Strategic Plan from September 2010, which represents 

the NCR’s strategy for improving regional preparedness to address critical risks in 

the region.

Table 1: 2010 NCR Strategic Plan

Goal Objectives Initiatives

Ensure interoperable 

communications capabilities

Ensure response partners have the 

ability to transmit and receive voice, 

data, and video communications

Ensure response partners can 

communicate by voice in all 

environments on a day-to-day basis

Increase access to voice systems 

capable of transmitting and 

receiving voice information to and 

from NCR response partners.

Ensure response partners can 

communicate and share necessary, 

appropriate data in all environments 

and on a day-to-day basis

Develop and maintain secure data 

communications governed by 

common standards and operating 

procedures.

Share Computer Aided Dispatch 

data between jurisdictions and other 

related data systems to streamline 

the process of capturing 911 

information and responding to 

incidents.

Share Geographic Information 

System data between jurisdictions 

and other related data systems.

Ensure response partners can 

communicate and share necessary, 

appropriate video information in all 

environments on a day-to-day basis

Increase access to video systems 

capable of transmitting and 

receiving video information to and 

from NCR response partners.

Enhance information sharing and 

situational awareness

Ensure NCR partners share the 

information needed to make 

informed and timely decisions; take 

appropriate actions; and 

communicate accurate, timely 

information with the public.

Ensure the public has all 

information necessary to make 

appropriate decisions and take 

protective actions

Improve the dissemination of 

accurate, timely information to the 

public using multiple venues, 

including social media outlets, to 

ensure that the content of

emergency messages and alerts is 

easily accessible and available to 

the public.

Define, obtain, and share 

appropriate situational information 

with NCR partners so that they 

have the necessary information to 

make informed decisions

Define essential elements of data 

and information for situational 

awareness for each discipline and 

all partners in the NCR. Then 

develop, maintain, and utilize 

business practices and common 

technical standards for situational 

awareness in order to make 

informed decisions.a

Improve the NCR’s ability to collect, 

analyze, share, and integrate 

intelligence and law enforcement 

information so that NCR partners 

receive appropriate information

Ensure all NCR fusion centers share 

information through secure and 

open systems, produce relevant and 

standardized analytical products, 

and share information in a timely 

manner with appropriate NCR 

partners. b
Page 22 GAO-13-116R National Capital Region Disaster Preparedness

Goal Objectives Initiatives

Ensure NCR partners have the 

systems, processes, security 

clearances, tools, and procedures to 

access, gather, and share 

appropriate intelligence, law 

enforcement, and classified data.

Enhance critical infrastructure 

protection

Enhance the protection and 

resilience of critical infrastructure 

and key resources (CI/KR) in the 

NCR to reduce their vulnerability to 

disruption from all-hazards events

Understand and prioritize risks to 

CI/KR

Catalog all CI/KR in the NCR and 

conduct a consequence-of-loss 

analysis.

Conduct a comprehensive risk

analysis of the NCR CI/KR, 

including a review of the critical 

systems upon which they depend 

and the interdependencies of those 

systems.

Develop and implement a plan for 

sharing CI/KR information among 

public and private entities 

throughout the NCR.

Reduce vulnerabilities and enhance 

resiliency of CI/KR

Develop and implement sector 

vulnerability reduction plans.

Conduct a technology feasibility 

assessment and develop a plan for 

technology investments for CI/KR.

Develop and implement a 

cybersecurity plan for NCR critical 

systems.

Ensure continuity of critical services 

required during emergencies and 

disaster recoveryc

Identify key facilities throughout the 

NCR that require backup critical 

services.

Assess facilities’ plans for loss of 

critical services.

Promote broad participation in 

CI/KR community outreach and 

protection programs

Develop a community awareness 

training and education program.

Develop a strategy for using CI/KR 

data to inform law enforcement.

Establish a regional business 

information-sharing committee.

Monitor critical infrastructure to 

provide situational awareness and 

to promote rapid response

Develop and implement a plan for a 

comprehensive CI/KR monitoring 

program

Develop and implement a plan that

integrates CI/KR monitoring 

information into response 

operations.
Page 23 GAO-13-116R National Capital Region Disaster Preparedness

Goal Objectives Initiatives

Ensure development and 

maintenance of regional core 

capabilities

Develop and maintain the basic 

building blocks of preparedness and 

response by ensuring the NCR 

develops a baseline of capabilities 

including mass casualty, health 

care system surge, and mass 

prophylaxis; mass care and 

evacuation; citizen participation, 

alert, and public information; 

chemical, biological, radiological, 

nuclear, and explosive detection 

and response; and planning, 

training, and exercises

Increase the region’s capacity for 

medical surge preparedness and 

response to an all-hazards event to 

reduce deaths and injuries

Ensure that private health care, 

federal, state, and local public 

health, and emergency medical 

services programs and providers in 

the NCR can increase surge 

capacity to respond to mass 

casualty incidents and events 

requiring mass prophylaxis.d

Establish a regional monitoring and 

response system that allows for 

health and medical response 

partners to track patients, hospital 

bed availability, alerts, and 

EMS/hospital activity in a shared, 

secure environment.

Ensure the ability to track patients 

from the start of pre-hospital care to 

discharge from the health care 

system during both daily operations 

and mass casualty incidents.

Improve the region’s capacity to 

evacuate and provide mass care for 

the public, including special needs 

individuals, when affected by an allhazards event

Develop, coordinate, and integrate

local and state evacuation plans so 

that evacuation polices and routes 

complement one another to ensure 

the NCR’s ability to coordinate 

evacuation across the region.

Ensure the NCR’s ability to provide 

sheltering and feeding for the first 72 

hours following an incident for 

individuals in the general population, 

persons with special needs, persons 

with special medical needs, and 

pets.

Strengthen individual, community, 

and workplace preparedness for 

emergency events through public 

engagement and citizen 

participation designed to reach the 

general population and special 

needs citizens in response to and 

recovery from all-hazards events

Sustain the NCR’s ability to alert 

and warn residents, businesses, and 

visitors using multiple methods 

including social media.
Page 24 GAO-13-116R National Capital Region Disaster Preparedness

Goal Objectives Initiatives

Bolster recruitment, management, 

and retention of volunteers through 

Community Emergency Response 

Team, other citizen corps programs, 

Volunteer Organizations Active in 

Disaster member agencies, the 

Medical Reserve Corps, and 

registration in Emergency System 

for Advance Registration of 

Volunteer Health Professionals 

programs.

Ensure post-incident human 

services and recovery assistance 

throughout the NCR, including case 

management, emergency housing, 

behavioral health, spiritual care, and 

family reunification.

Ensure the NCR has regionwide 

capacity to detect, respond to, and 

recover in a timely manner from 

Chemical, Biological, Radiological, 

Nuclear and Explosives (CBRNE)

events and other attacks requiring 

tactical response and technical 

rescue

Enhance the NCR’s ability to detect 

chemical, biological, radiological, 

and other types of contamination.

Ensure regionwide access to Type 1 

hazardous material (HazMat), bomb 

response/explosive ordnance device 

units, and tactical teams and ensure

each unit/team is able to respond in 

a reasonable amount of time.

Ensure all responders in the NCR 

have access to personal protective 

equipment and apparatus that 

match the identified capability 

needs.

Establish a regional monitoring and 

response system that provides 

health and medical response 

partners with central access to 

biosurveillance.

Improve capacity to develop and 

coordinate plans among all NCR 

partners and ensure the availability 

of regionwide training and exercise 

programs to strengthen 

preparedness, response, and 

recovery efforts from all-hazards 

events

Develop and exercise key regional 

emergency response and recovery 

plans

Ensure regional procedures, 

memorandums of understanding, 

and mutual aid agreements are in 

place to allow for rapid coordination 

of resources, including health 

assets, across jurisdictional 

boundaries.

Develop and update a matrix of 

training and exercises that meet 

Homeland Security Exercise and 
Page 25 GAO-13-116R National Capital Region Disaster Preparedness

Goal Objectives Initiatives

Evaluation Program standards 

needed to maintain core regional 

capabilities. This matrix should 

address new and emerging threats 

and concerns raised in gap analyses 

and after-action reports from events 

and exercises.

Source: 2010 National Capital Region Homeland Security Plan.

a

Although the specific elements needed for situational awareness vary according to the field and area of 

expertise, the term “situational awareness” here refers to the ability to identify, monitor, and process important 

information, understand the interrelatedness of that information and its implications, and apply that 

understanding to make critical decisions in the present and near future. For example, if the region is threatened 

by a hurricane, awareness of the status of roads, shelters, traffic, available medical resources, power outages, 

and the like is important in making decisions about what type of assistance is needed and where it is needed. To 

coordinate an effective response, NCR partners need to share their information and have access to the 

information of others.

b

The NCR fusion centers include the Maryland Coordination and Analysis Center, the Washington Regional 

Threat and Analysis Center, the NCR Intelligence Center, and the Virginia Fusion Center. A fusion center is a 

physical location where data can be collected from a variety of sources, including but not limited to police 

departments, fire departments, health departments, and the private sector. Experts analyze the incoming 

information and create intelligence products, which can be used to maximize resources, streamline operations, 

and improve the ability to address all-hazards incidents and threats. Fusion centers help to prevent terrorism and 

criminal activities as well as support preparedness for man-made and natural hazards to trigger quick and 

effective response to all-hazards events.

c

Critical services are defined as life sustainment services during an emergency and include energy (electric 

power and gas), water supply, transportation, food, and communications. These are all supplied routinely by the 

CI/KR sectors. During a disaster, providing critical life-sustaining services ensures that government and private 

health, safety, and emergency services continue, and that plans are in place to compensate for losses among 

interdependent systems.

d

Mass prophylaxis is defined as the capability to protect the health of the population through the administration of 

critical interventions in response to a public health emergency in order to prevent the development of disease 

among those who are exposed or are potentially exposed to public health threats. This capability includes the 

provision of appropriate follow-up and monitoring of adverse events, as well as risk communication messages to 

address the concerns of the public. 
Page 26 GAO-13-116R National Capital Region Disaster Preparedness

Enclosure II: NCRC’s Statutory Requirements and Placement in FEMA

FEMA’s Office of National Capital Region Coordination (NCRC) was established 

under the Homeland Security Act of 2002, which created the Department of 

Homeland Security (DHS).47 The purpose of NCRC is to oversee and coordinate 

federal programs for and relationships with state, local, and regional authorities in 

the region. The Department of Homeland Security appropriations act for fiscal year 

2007 expanded NCRC’s scope,48 and the Post-Katrina Act moved the office from 

DHS’s Preparedness Directorate to FEMA, where the office reports directly to the 

FEMA Administrator.49 See table 2. 

Table 2: NCRC’s Statutory Responsibilities 

1) Coordinate the activities of the department relating to the NCR, including 

cooperation with the Office for State and Local Government Coordination

2) assess, and advocate for, the resources needed by state, local, and regional 

authorities in the NCR to implement efforts to secure the homeland

3) provide the state, local, and regional authorities in the NCR with regular 

information, research, and technical support to assist the efforts of state, 

local, and regional authorities in the NCR in securing the homeland

4) develop a process for receiving meaningful input from state, local, and 

regional authorities and the private sector in the NCR to assist in the 

development of the homeland security plans and activities of the federal 

government

5) coordinate with federal agencies in the NCR on terrorism preparedness, to 

ensure adequate planning, information sharing, training, and execution of the 

federal role in domestic preparedness activities

6) coordinate with federal, state, local, and regional agencies, and the private 

sector in the NCR on terrorism preparedness to ensure adequate planning, 

information sharing, training, and execution of domestic preparedness 

activities among these agencies and entities, and

7) serve as a liaison between the federal government and state, local, and 

regional authorities, and private sector entities in the NCR to facilitate access 

to federal grants and other programs.

Source: 6 U.S.C. § 462.

 

476 U.S.C. § 462. 48The appropriations act and accompanying conference report affirmed that the State of West Virginia and the 

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania shall be involved in the office’s efforts to integrate mass evacuation activities in 

the NCR. Pub. L. No. 109-295, 120 Stat. 1355, 1368 (2006). 496 U.S.C. § 315.
Page 27 GAO-13-116R National Capital Region Disaster Preparedness

Below, in figure 4, is FEMA’s organization chart as of September 2012. The offices 

shaded in blue denote specific FEMA offices, including NCRC, discussed in this 

report.

Figure 4: FEMA Organization Chart
Page 28 GAO-13-116R National Capital Region Disaster Preparedness

Enclosure III: Comments from the Department of Homeland Security 
Page 29 GAO-13-116R National Capital Region Disaster Preparedness
Page 30 GAO-13-116R National Capital Region Disaster Preparedness
Page 31 GAO-13-116R National Capital Region Disaster Preparedness

Enclosure IV: Comments from the National Capital Region
Page 32 GAO-13-116R National Capital Region Disaster Preparedness
Page 33 GAO-13-116R National Capital Region Disaster Preparedness
Page 34 GAO-13-116R National Capital Region Disaster Preparedness
Page 35 GAO-13-116R National Capital Region Disaster Preparedness

Enclosure V: GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments

GAO Contact

Stephen L. Caldwell, (202) 512-8777 or caldwells@gao.gov

Acknowledgments

In addition to the contact named above, Christopher Keisling, Assistant Director; 

Michelle R. Su; and John Vocino made significant contributions to the work under 

the direction of William O. Jenkins, Jr. Thomas Beall, Laura M. Craig, Eric 

Hauswirth, Tracey King, Lara Miklozek, and Linda Miller also contributed to this 

report. 

(441073)
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the 

United States. The published product may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety 

without further permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain 

copyrighted images or other material, permission from the copyright holder may be 

necessary if you wish to reproduce this material separately.
The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation, and 

investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its 

constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and 

accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO 

examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and 

policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance 

to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. 

GAO’s commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of 

accountability, integrity, and reliability.

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no 

cost is through GAO’s website (www.gao.gov). Each weekday afternoon, 

GAO posts on its website newly released reports, testimony, and 

correspondence. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products, 

go to www.gao.gov and select “E-mail Updates.”

The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO’s actual cost of 

production and distribution and depends on the number of pages in the 

publication and whether the publication is printed in color or black and 

white. Pricing and ordering information is posted on GAO’s website, 

http://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm. 

Place orders by calling (202) 512-6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or 

TDD (202) 512-2537. 

Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card, 

MasterCard, Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional information.

Connect with GAO on Facebook, Flickr, Twitter, and YouTube. 

Subscribe to our RSS Feeds or E-mail Updates. Listen to our Podcasts. 

Visit GAO on the web at www.gao.gov. 

Contact:

Website: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470

Katherine Siggerud, Managing Director, siggerudk@gao.gov, (202) 512-

4400, U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 

7125, Washington, DC 20548

Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov, (202) 512-4800

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, DC 20548

GAO’s Mission

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony

Order by Phone

Connect with GAO

To Report Fraud, 

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs

Congressional 

Relations

Public Affairs

Please Print on Recycled Paper.