U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

52–957 PDF 2009

LOOKING OUT FOR THE VERY YOUNG, 

THE ELDERLY, AND OTHERS WITH 

SPECIAL NEEDS: LESSONS FROM 

KATRINA AND RELATED DISASTERS 

(111–71) 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON 

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, PUBLIC BUILDINGS, AND 

EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON 

TRANSPORTATION AND 

INFRASTRUCTURE 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

October 20, 2009 

Printed for the use of the 

Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

( 

COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE 

JAMES L. OBERSTAR, Minnesota, Chairman 

NICK J. RAHALL, II, West Virginia, Vice 

Chair 

PETER A. DEFAZIO, Oregon 

JERRY F. COSTELLO, Illinois 

ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of 

Columbia 

JERROLD NADLER, New York 

CORRINE BROWN, Florida 

BOB FILNER, California 

EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas 

GENE TAYLOR, Mississippi 

ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland 

LEONARD L. BOSWELL, Iowa 

TIM HOLDEN, Pennsylvania 

BRIAN BAIRD, Washington 

RICK LARSEN, Washington 

MICHAEL E. CAPUANO, Massachusetts 

TIMOTHY H. BISHOP, New York 

MICHAEL H. MICHAUD, Maine 

RUSS CARNAHAN, Missouri 

GRACE F. NAPOLITANO, California 

DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois 

MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii 

JASON ALTMIRE, Pennsylvania 

TIMOTHY J. WALZ, Minnesota 

HEATH SHULER, North Carolina 

MICHAEL A. ARCURI, New York 

HARRY E. MITCHELL, Arizona 

CHRISTOPHER P. CARNEY, Pennsylvania 

JOHN J. HALL, New York 

STEVE KAGEN, Wisconsin 

STEVE COHEN, Tennessee 

LAURA A. RICHARDSON, California 

ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey 

DONNA F. EDWARDS, Maryland 

SOLOMON P. ORTIZ, Texas 

PHIL HARE, Illinois 

JOHN A. BOCCIERI, Ohio 

MARK H. SCHAUER, Michigan 

BETSY MARKEY, Colorado 

PARKER GRIFFITH, Alabama 

MICHAEL E. MCMAHON, New York 

THOMAS S. P. PERRIELLO, Virginia 

DINA TITUS, Nevada 

HARRY TEAGUE, New Mexico 

VACANCY 

JOHN L. MICA, Florida 

DON YOUNG, Alaska 

THOMAS E. PETRI, Wisconsin 

HOWARD COBLE, North Carolina 

JOHN J. DUNCAN, JR., Tennessee 

VERNON J. EHLERS, Michigan 

FRANK A. LOBIONDO, New Jersey 

JERRY MORAN, Kansas 

GARY G. MILLER, California 

HENRY E. BROWN, JR., South Carolina 

TIMOTHY V. JOHNSON, Illinois 

TODD RUSSELL PLATTS, Pennsylvania 

SAM GRAVES, Missouri 

BILL SHUSTER, Pennsylvania 

JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas 

SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia 

JIM GERLACH, Pennsylvania 

MARIO DIAZ-BALART, Florida 

CHARLES W. DENT, Pennsylvania 

CONNIE MACK, Florida 

LYNN A WESTMORELAND, Georgia 

JEAN SCHMIDT, Ohio 

CANDICE S. MILLER, Michigan 

MARY FALLIN, Oklahoma 

VERN BUCHANAN, Florida 

ROBERT E. LATTA, Ohio 

BRETT GUTHRIE, Kentucky 

ANH ‘‘JOSEPH’’ CAO, Louisiana 

AARON SCHOCK, Illinois 

PETE OLSON, Texas 

(II) 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, PUBLIC BUILDINGS, AND EMERGENCY

MANAGEMENT

ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of Columbia, Chair 

BETSY MARKEY, Colorado 

MICHAEL H. MICHAUD, Maine 

HEATH SHULER, North Carolina 

PARKER GRIFFITH, Alabama 

RUSS CARNAHAN, Missouri 

TIMOTHY J. WALZ, Minnesota 

MICHAEL A. ARCURI, New York 

CHRISTOPHER P. CARNEY, Pennsylvania, 

Vice Chair 

DONNA F. EDWARDS, Maryland 

THOMAS S. P. PERRIELLO, Virginia 

JAMES L. OBERSTAR, Minnesota 

(Ex Officio) 

MARIO DIAZ-BALART, Florida 

TIMOTHY V. JOHNSON, Illinois 

SAM GRAVES, Missouri 

SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia 

MARY FALLIN, Oklahoma 

BRETT GUTHRIE, Kentucky 

ANH ‘‘JOSEPH’’ CAO, Louisiana 

PETE OLSON, Texas 

(III) 

(V) 

CONTENTS Page 

Summary of Subject Matter .................................................................................... vi 

TESTIMONY 

Manning, Tim, Deputy Administrator, National Preparedness Directorate, 

Federal Emergency Management Agency .......................................................... 6 

Riggen, Trevor, Senior Director, Direct Services, American Red Cross .............. 6 

Shriver, Mark, Chairman, National Commission on Children and Disasters .... 6 

Vaughn, John, Chairperson, National Council on Disability ............................... 6 

PREPARED STATEMENTS SUBMITTED BY MEMBERS OF CONGRESS 

Carnahan, Hon. Russ, of Missouri ......................................................................... 40 

Norton, Hon. Eleanor Holmes, of the District of Columbia ................................. 41 

Oberstar, Hon. James L., of Minnesota ................................................................. 43 

PREPARED STATEMENTS SUBMITTED BY WITNESSES 

Manning, Tim ........................................................................................................... 45 

Riggen, Trevor .......................................................................................................... 61 

Shriver, Mark ........................................................................................................... 71 

Vaughn, John ........................................................................................................... 83 

SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD 

Manning, Tim, Deputy Administrator, National Preparedness Directorate, 

Federal Emergency Management Agency, reponses to questions from the 

Subcommittee ....................................................................................................... 50 

Riggen, Trevor, Senior Director, Direct Services, American Red Cross, responses to questions from the Subcommittee .................................................... 68 

Shriver, Mark, Chairman, National Commission on Children and Disasters, 

responses to questions from the Subcommittee ................................................. 78 

Vaughn, John, Chairperson, National Council on Disability, responses to 

questions from the Subcommittee ....................................................................... 110 

ADDITIONS TO THE RECORD 

Office of Emergency Preparedness - City of New Orleans, Lt. Colonel, Jerry 

Sneed: 

Written testimony ......................................................................................... 123 

Fact Sheets .................................................................................................... 129 

vi 


Insert offset folio 1 here 52957.001
vii 


Insert offset folio 2 here 52957.002
viii 


Insert offset folio 3 here 52957.003
ix 


Insert offset folio 4 here 52957.004
x 


Insert offset folio 5 here 52957.005
xi 


Insert offset folio 6 here 52957.006
(1) 

HEARING ON LOOKING OUT FOR THE VERY 

YOUNG, THE ELDERLY AND OTHERS WITH 

SPECIAL NEEDS: LESSONS FROM KATRINA 

AND RELATED DISASTERS 

Tuesday, October 20, 2009 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, PUBLIC

BUILDINGS AND EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT, 

COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE, 

Washington, DC. 

The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 2:12 p.m., in Room 

2167, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Eleanor Holmes Norton 

[chairwoman of the Subcommittee] presiding. 

Ms. NORTON. Welcome to today’s important hearing. 

On September the 7th, 2007, Representative Corrine Brown, who 

is trying to join us this afternoon, introduced H.R. 3495, the Kids 

in Disasters Well-Being, Safety, and Health Act of 2007, a bill I 

was pleased to cosponsor. Provisions of H.R. 3495 were later incorporated into H.R. 2764, the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 

2008, which became public law number as shall be indicated in December. 

H.R. 3495 created a National Commission on Children and Disasters to conduct a comprehensive study, examining and assessing 

the needs of children as they relate to recovery, preparation, and 

response for all hazards, including catastrophes, disasters, and 

emergencies. 

Hurricane Katrina exposed many problems concerning the Nation’s ability to meet the needs of children during disasters. About 

a quarter of the people who lived in areas damaged or flooded by 

Hurricane Katrina were under age 18. More than 400,000 children 

under the age of 5 lived in or were evacuated from counties and 

parishes that were declared disaster areas by FEMA as a result of 

Hurricane Katrina. 

The vulnerability of kids presented many unique issues. For example, 5,192 children were reported missing or displaced by the 

National Center for Missing and Exploited Children as a result of 

Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, and it took 6-1/2 months to reunite 

the last child separated from her family. In addition, 1,100 schools 

were closed immediately following Hurricane Katrina. 

These statistics reveal the importance of examining the special 

needs of children in disasters. A specific focus on children, therefore, is justifiably the Commission’s special concern. 

2 

Although we took a proactive role in directing the creation of a 

commission concerning the well-being, safety, and health of children in disasters, we had previously recognized the importance of 

assuring that FEMA addresses the needs of all vulnerable populations caught in disasters. FEMA is responsible for encouraging 

local and State governments to plan for evacuations of all special 

needs populations. 

Our post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act of 2006 

requires FEMA to other appoint a disabilities coordinator to ensure 

that the needs of individuals with disabilities are properly addressed in a disaster. The special needs population must also include hospital and nursing home patients who may not be able to 

move quickly because of their health. The worst example during 

Hurricane Katrina involved 34 people who died in a nursing home 

waiting for help for days in the heat of August without power, air 

conditioning, sanitation, or running water at temperatures in the 

building approaching 110 degrees. Some of the elderly and disabled 

in New Orleans simply drowned when they were left behind. 

The New York Times reported on the work of Dr. Ann Powell, 

a physician who was working in the middle of Hurricane Katrina 

and was also forced to make several difficult decisions in the absence of clear standards of care for very sick patients trapped in 

her hospital. Since Hurricane Katrina, Dr. Powell has been a leading proponent for changing the law and establishing a standard of 

care in the event of disaster or pandemic. 

Persons with disabilities are the third largest minority group in 

the United States, numbering over 32 million. If people with impairments are included, the number increases to over 51 million. 

In addition, there are approximately 5 million disabled children 

and youth under the age of 18. 

After Hurricane Katrina, Congress recognized that the disabled 

must receive special focused attention. Now FEMA must use the 

National Commission on Children and Disasters’ final interim report to think critically and objectively about guidance to State and 

local jurisdictions on the care of children, in particular in a disaster. Children and other vulnerable populations have unique 

needs that demand focused action plans that ensure the same survival for them in disaster as for other Americans. 

Several of our witnesses today have stories to share that will remind us of what is at stake for children and citizens with disabilities and why there must be no more delay in building a comprehensive plan for addressing the needs of our children and other 

vulnerable populations in a disaster. 

I welcome today’s witnesses, look forward to their testimony and 

am pleased to hear any opening remarks from our Ranking Member, Mr. Diaz-Balart. 

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Let me thank you first, Madam Chairwoman, 

for holding this important hearing. As a Floridian this is the kind 

of hearing that hits home, literally hits home. 

Last month we held a hearing on the Integrated Public Alert and 

Warning System and whether those with disabilities or those with 

limited English proficiency are able to adequately receive alerts 

and warnings when an imminent hurricane, storm, or other disVerDate Aug 31 2005 10:02 Mar 09, 2010 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 P:\DOCS\52957 JASON
3 

aster is coming. Now, unfortunately we found that much work still 

remains to be done. 

Today we are focusing more broadly on the issues of whether 

emergency preparation, response, and recovery—if those efforts 

have adequately or do adequately address the needs of the very 

young, of the elderly, and others who—varied others who may have 

also a number of different special needs. 

In 2004, President Bush issued an executive order establishing 

that it is the policy of the Federal Government to ensure that the 

needs of individuals with disabilities are incorporated in the planning for disasters. 

In 2008, Congress established a National Commission on Children and Disasters to study and report on the needs of children in 

preparing for and to respond after disasters. Congress also charged 

the National Council on Disability with examining the inclusion of 

people with disabilities in emergency preparation and established 

a disability coordinator within FEMA. 

So there have been some efforts and there has obviously been 

some emphasis from both the executive and also Congress. Notwithstanding these efforts, unfortunately, work still remains to be 

done. 

For example, according to the National Council on Disability, 

many emergency managers and people with disabilities remain unprepared for a disaster and disaster planning continues without 

full consultation or even participation of people with disabilities, 

which is obviously contrary to what we are trying to do. And as 

highlighted in the National Commission on Children and Disasters’ 

interim report, there are still inadequacies for the care of children 

in various aspects of emergency management. Again, we still have 

a long way to go. 

This implementation of clear policies is absolutely unacceptable 

because the consequences, as the Chairwoman was saying a little 

while ago, can be very dire and tragic. 

Following Hurricane Katrina, thousands of children were separated from their families and there were so many accounts of individuals with disabilities and seniors who were unable to evacuate, 

and we have seen and we know what resulted from that scenario. 

With nearly half of our population either living with disability or 

under the age of 18, we must ensure that the interests and the 

needs of these individuals are fully, fully incorporated in our planning, in our response to and recovery from disasters. And as we 

will hear today, each of these categories of individuals, whether it 

is children or seniors, people with disabilities, have unique, unique 

issues that must be examined and addressed in our emergency 

management system, again, as the Chairwoman so eloquently said 

a little while ago. Otherwise the consequences can be tragic. 

I again thank you all for being here. It is a privilege to have you 

all here. I appreciate your time. I look forward to hearing from the 

witnesses, Madam Chairwoman, and I thank you for having this 

very important hearing. 

Ms. NORTON. Thank you, Mr. Diaz-Balart. 

In light of the fact that the author of the bill has arrived and is 

a Subcommittee Chair on a parallel Committee, I am going to ask 

Ms. Brown if she has any opening remarks at this time? 

4 

First, I want to ask unanimous consent that the gentlewoman 

from Florida be allowed to participate in today’s Subcommittee 

hearing. 

Without objection, so ordered. 

Ms. BROWN. Thank you, Madam Chair. I thank the Committee 

for letting me join this hearing today. In this Subcommittee this is 

a very important topic. In my home State of Florida we deal with 

the aftermaths of hurricanes every year and have struggled to deal 

with the unique needs of these vulnerable populations. 

I look forward to listening to the comments made by our outstanding panelists and to move forward on this very important 

issue as to how to protect our Nation’s children, elderly citizens, 

and others with special needs during a major disaster. In particular, I want to thank Mark Shriver for his leadership on the 

Children’s Commission. Thank you. 

Nearly 2 years ago, I worked to pass the KIDS WISH Act, a bill 

which established a National Commission on Children and Disaster, the commission whose representative Mark Shriver is here 

today to report back to us on these most important findings and 

recommendations and what have you done in the 2 years of study 

to examine the root causes and challenges as they relate to the 

needs of children during and after all hazardous disasters and 

emergencies. 

During the events and aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, our Nation saw the tremendous gap in our emergency management response and recovery. We saw this to be especially true with regards 

to children. Indeed, children’s needs are unique and are not as easy 

to carry out in an emergency planning for adults. Congress as a 

body, working along with numerous groups on this extremely important issue here today, must identify and invest in and prepare 

response and recovery plans for children to ensure that what we 

saw during Hurricane Katrina does not ever happen again. I want 

to repeat. We in Congress have to make sure that what happened 

with Hurricane Katrina never happens again in this country. 

Perhaps what is most troubling to me about the current state of 

emergency preparedness system as it relates to our children is that 

the questions to this date remain unanswered. For example, will 

the shelter have diapers, baby food, and children’s medication? Are 

there former sex offenders in the shelter? How do disaster survivors find their children if they are separated during an evacuation? 

Certainly if anyone sits down and seriously thinks about all the 

various needs of children, he or she will quickly realize that many 

of our communities, schools, and States and local emergency managers do not have the concrete answers. So over the past 2 years 

this new commission, the Nation’s Commission on Children and 

Disasters, has worked to come up with solution to these questions. 

I understand that just last week the National Commission on Children and Disasters delivered its interim report to President Obama 

and Congress, in which you identify several shortcomings in disaster preparation, response, and recovery and provided recommendations designed to make children an immediate priority to 

disaster planning. 

5 

So again, I look forward to hearing from the panelists today and 

in particular the recommendations being put forward by the Commission so that we can implement as soon as possible. I have instructed my staff to draft the Commission recommendation into 

legislation, and I hope that we as a Congress are able to turn them 

into law. 

Thank you again, Madam Chairwoman, for this opportunity to 

participate in this very important discussion, and I yield back the 

balance of my time. 

Ms. NORTON. Thank you very much, Representative Brown. Mr. 

Carnahan, do you have any opening remarks? 

Mr. CARNAHAN. Thank you, Madam Chairman. Just briefly I 

want to thank you and Ranking Member Diaz-Balart for holding 

this important hearing. I thank the witnesses for being here and 

really shining a light on special needs individuals in the event of 

natural disasters, whether that be children, the elderly, disabled, 

or others. This is a very important component of our overall preparedness, and I thank you for contributing to that. 

We definitely, from looking back, can tell we need to have a more 

holistic approach, a more comprehensive approach to incorporating 

these special needs, and I have particular interest, being a representative from the State of Missouri, in terms of how our State 

is hit and particularly our region along the Mississippi River. We 

are the among the most frequent States for natural disasters, 

floods, tornadoes. We are on the New Madrid fault line, and we 

had a bout of ice storms not long ago. So we have been hit by 

many, but some of the same issues come up and we look forward 

to hearing from you and thank you for your work. 

Ms. NORTON. Thank you, Congressman Carnahan. 

Ms. Edwards, have you any opening remarks? 

Ms. EDWARDS. I do, Madam Chairwoman. Thank you very much 

and thank you in advance to each of the witnesses for your testimony today. 

There is probably not one among us, at least here in the Washington area, that doesn’t remember being separated from a child on 

9/11 and the confusion that that caused and the need for the kind 

of coordinated response that you will be testifying to today. My son 

was actually, in fact, on Capitol Hill on that day, and I remember 

as a parent being very concerned about how to get to him in the 

wake of that disaster. And of course these disasters that we have 

to prepare for are both natural disasters and they are manmade 

disasters. We need only point to the experiences of the Oklahoma 

City bombing and the vulnerability of children in that disaster and 

any number of natural disasters, whether hurricanes, tornadoes, 

fires and the like. So I appreciate your testimony today. 

Just yesterday I was out in Prince George’s County in Maryland 

with first responders looking at the kind of advanced technology 

that they have to identify places, institutions, elder care facilities, 

assisted living facilities, child care facilities, schools of greatest vulnerability, and using their technology to make sure that they have 

their eye on the pulse when it comes to coordinating response in 

the event of an emergency. And obviously we need that in our own 

districts, but certainly in our States and in our region. 

6 

The tragedy of Hurricane Katrina and these other disasters really point to the need to coordinate a response for our most vulnerable populations, children, the elderly, disabled, those who are in 

need of immediate medical attention who might be separated from 

their providers. 

So I hope today that we are also able to look forward at a set 

of standards and a training and assistance for child care providers 

and for those who work in assisted living and other facilities with 

these vulnerable populations who often report that they are at a 

loss as to what they might do in an emergency situation. And so 

I look forward to learning from you today and to working with my 

colleagues. And thank you, especially to the leadership of Representative Brown, to make certain that we consider these vulnerable populations in all of our emergency planning. 

And I yield the balance of my time. 

Ms. NORTON. Thank you, Ms. Edwards. 

We will hear testimony in the order in which you are sitting. 

First Tim Manning, Deputy Administrator, National Preparedness 

Directorate of FEMA. 

TESTIMONY OF TIM MANNING, DEPUTY ADMINISTRATOR, NATIONAL PREPAREDNESS DIRECTORATE, FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY; MARK SHRIVER, CHAIRMAN, 

NATIONAL COMMISSION ON CHILDREN AND DISASTERS; 

JOHN VAUGHN, CHAIRPERSON, NATIONAL COUNCIL ON DISABILITY; AND TREVOR RIGGEN, SENIOR DIRECTOR, DIRECT 

SERVICES, AMERICAN RED CROSS 

Mr. MANNING. Chairwoman Norton, Ranking Member DiazBalart, and other distinguished Members of the Subcommittee, 

good afternoon. It is a privilege to be before you today on behalf 

of FEMA and the Department of Homeland Security, and I am glad 

to join my colleagues from the Red Cross, National Council on Disability, and the National Commission on Children and Disasters. 

I am also pleased to report to you that FEMA has established a 

Children’s Working Group as of August, 2009, to serve as the Agency’s primary advocate for children. The working group is responsible for ensuring that children’s needs are incorporated into all of 

our disaster preparedness, response and recovery efforts, and coordinates the resources necessary to meet the needs of children in 

times of disaster. The group is chaired by a very senior member of 

the Department’s leadership team and its members represent all 

sectors of FEMA. 

Specifically, the Children’s Working Group is focused on the following key areas: child-specific guidance for evacuation, sheltering, 

and relocation; disaster-related needs of children with disabilities; 

tracking and reunification of families; coordinated case management support; enhanced preparedness for child care centers; enhanced national planning, including the incorporation of children 

into national planning scenarios and exercises; incorporation of 

children’s needs into grant guidance; improved recovery coordination across the Federal Government with State, tribal, and local 

partners in support of children’s education, health, and housing; 

consideration as to how the Federal family can help ensure child 

care centers are able to rebuild and restore services more quickly 

7 

following a disaster; and increased public awareness efforts to educate families and protect children during disasters. 

Historically, the U.S. Has approached disaster planning by focusing heavily on the needs of what we may refer to as the general 

population and has not devoted sufficient advanced attention to 

those who may have special needs and thus require special specific 

and immediate attention in a crisis. 

Madam Chairwoman, FEMA is changing this paradigm. We believe that children, the elderly, persons with disability, and other 

special needs populations must be fully and consistently integrated 

into preparedness efforts and planning efforts at every level of government from the beginning. We must avoid putting planning considerations specific to those with special needs in a separate box 

and instead build better disaster response and recovery plans that 

account for the fact that those with special needs comprise a significant percentage of the population. One of our top goals is to institutionalize this approach across our agency and throughout 

emergency management. 

In December of 2007, Congress created the bipartisan National 

Commission on Children and Disasters. The Commission has evaluated existing laws, regulations, policies, and programs that affect 

children in disasters, and we have received the interim report and 

look forward to the time report in 2010. FEMA has been meeting 

with the Commission regularly and looks forward to working with 

the Committee and Congress and implementing the Commission’s 

recommendations. 

Rather than waiting to move forward, however, FEMA has established a Children’s Working Group, allowing us to address the 

Commission’s recommendations in a proactive manner. For example, we have participated in the creation of a shelter supply list in 

concert with the Commission, the Red Cross, and other subject 

matter experts in emergency management and pediatric care. This 

list identifies the basic supplies necessary to sustain and support 

infants and children up to 3 years of age for a 24-hour period. The 

Commission recommends State and local jurisdictions provide 

caches of these supplies that support the care of children in mass 

care shelters for a minimum of 72 hours. 

FEMA has built a strong network of both public and private 

partner organizations that will help unify and strengthen our combined capabilities. For instance, FEMA has worked with the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children to establish a National Emergency Child Locator Center. FEMA is working hard to 

ensure that its own basic planning addresses special needs populations, that we are supporting and assisting our States, tribes and 

localities in this regard. We are reinforcing the critical need and 

personal preparedness to encourage individuals and families to 

adequately prepare themselves for disaster events, recognizing that 

better individual preparedness translates into better community 

preparedness and resilience. 

Madam Chair, in conclusion, FEMA and the Department of 

Homeland Security are committed to advancing our Nation’s preparedness by emphasizing the disaster needs of our Nation’s most 

vulnerable citizens. Our efforts must begin with personal preparedness, a process of individual thinking and consideration of basic 

8 

steps that each of us and our families must take to prevent and 

prepare for the next disaster. 

In times of crisis government plays a critical role in coordinating 

the response and recovery efforts, especially in protecting and providing for the most vulnerable members of our population. Members of our communities with special needs cannot simply fall to 

secondary planning considerations but must be one of the central 

focuses of our planning, response, and recovery. 

Thank you, Madam Chairwoman and Members of the Subcommittee, for allowing me to testify today. I am happy to answer 

any questions that you may have. 

Ms. NORTON. Thank you very much, Deputy Administrator Manning. 

Before we go to Mr. Shriver I note that our very busy Full Committee Chairman has come by this hearing. We very much appreciate his being here for whatever time he can devote, and I think 

it is an indication of the importance of this subject matter to the 

Committee and the Subcommittee that the Chairman, who I believe has more Subcommittees than any other Committee, is here 

and to offer his own comments, which I will ask him to do at this 

time. 

Mr. OBERSTAR. Thank you, Madam Chair. I don’t want to interrupt the flow of testimony but I do want to welcome the Commission and especially Mark Shriver, a friend of very, very longstanding. Not only Mark but his mother, Eunice, whose passing we 

all mourn but who is remembered in my hometown of Chisholm at 

the center, the Range Center, as it is known, center for intellectually and physically challenged people. And Madam Chair, Eunice 

Shriver dedicated that facility—she was the inspiration for it to 

start. She came for its dedication and there is a facility in her 

name, the Eunice Shriver Swimming Pool, which is something she 

suggested for physically and intellectually challenged persons, and 

it is regularly used not only by those who are resident at the center, but also people of the community. She is known and loved and 

her memory is treasured in Chisholm, Minnesota, and elsewhere 

around the country. 

At an event that we had just recently, I noted frequently I would 

see Sarge and Eunice and Mark at mass in Potomac at Our Lady 

of Mercy, and Eunice would never forget to ask about the Range 

Center, its founder Veda Ponikvar, the publisher of our newspaper, 

and always sent her best regards, and let me tell you people were 

in tears when I told that story. And Mark Shriver continues in the 

spirit of the Shriver-Kennedy family of giving of himself to great 

public causes. 

Thank you. You were the inspiration for this legislation to create 

the Commission, and we welcome your testimony here today and 

thank you for your continuing contribution. 

Ms. NORTON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Shriver, you have our condolences. As you know, you have 

the condolences of the Nation on the passing of your mother, who 

contributed so much to the Nation and the world for children and 

people with disabilities. 

We will hear next from the Chairman of the National Commission on Children and Disasters, Mr. Shriver. 

9 

Mr. SHRIVER. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. And Congressman Oberstar, thank you very much for your kind comments, 

and I am very glad that you mentioned me going to mass; so hopefully that will make my father happy as well. So thank you very 

much. 

Ranking Member Diaz-Balart, thank you for your kind comments, Congressman Carnahan, Congresswoman Edwards, and of 

course Congresswoman Brown, thank you for your leadership on 

this issue. You really picked up the ball and made it happen in the 

House under this Committee and we are awfully grateful for your 

support a couple of years ago and making this hearing happen 

today. 

I am Mark Shriver. I am Chair of the National Commission on 

Children and Disasters, and it really is an honor to be up here on 

this panel to discuss this very important issue, Madam Chair. 

I think for the last 10 years when you look at it, and for so many 

of us, especially for children, this will be remembered as a disaster 

decade. Our kids have looked at TV and from their windows they 

have seen skyscrapers collapsing, communities under water, entire 

neighborhoods leveled by tornadoes or engulfed by fire. And during 

so many of those events, children have been left vulnerable because 

of a disaster management system that treats them as little adults 

and doesn’t account for their unique needs. 

You have heard, as you said, Madam Chair, some of the statistics 

that are truly appalling. After Katrina it took up to 6 months to 

reunify the last child with their family. After Ike and Gustav shelters didn’t have enough supplies, including diapers, formula, and 

cribs. In many cases children are not counted separately from the 

general population in the number of shelters, making it difficult to 

provide supplies and services to meet their specific needs. Research 

conducted just a few months ago showed that only seven States 

meet the basic child protection standards for schools and child care 

facilities across this country. And the statistics in New Orleans 

after Katrina and Rita show that there were 15,731 daycare slots 

at 266 licensed centers before the storm hit, and a year after 80 

percent of those centers and 75 percent of those slots were still 

gone. And we often wonder why New Orleans has not had the economic development that it needs. When you don’t have child care 

centers, child care facilities up and running, families with young 

children will not come back to work. 

Children represent 25 percent of the American population. There 

are 74 million kids, 18 and under. We need to put their lives and 

well-being at the front and center. The Federal Government and its 

partners have not made children a higher priority than pets in disaster planning and management. I have to say, Madam Chair, that 

is outrageous. Instead, children are considered at-risk or special 

needs population and they are grouped in among the elderly, persons with disabilities, the medically dependent, persons with limited English proficiency; yet they make up 25 percent of the American population. Consequently, they are given less attention and resources when disaster plans are written and exercised when equipment and supplies are purchased. Congresswoman Edwards, you 

spoke about that. But those efforts are not addressed for children. 

10 

So Congress created the National Commission on Children and 

Disasters to look at this cycle of benign neglect. We issued our interim report last week. We gave it to President Obama and Members of Congress. The interim report identified a couple of disaster- 

- shortcomings in disaster preparedness, response, and recovery 

and provides recommendations to make children an immediate priority in disaster planning. 

For the purpose of today’s hearing I will focus quickly on just a 

few of the 21 recommendations provided in the interim report. 

The first one, Madam Chair, is to incorporate children as an immediate priority within the White House and the Federal Emergency Management Agency. The White House plays a central role 

in leadership and coordinating role in advising the President on 

matters affecting national security, including disaster. 

The Commission has recommended to the President that a coordinating council be formed composed of senior White House staff 

and collaborating with the National Security Council, Domestic 

Policy Council, and the National Security staff to serve as a focal 

point for presidential policy development specific to children and 

disasters. 

As legislators, I would ask you to ask those entities whether they 

ever hear about children’s needs in planning for and responding to 

disasters, and I will tell you the answer is unequivocally no. They 

don’t hear at the higher levels of government about children’s 

needs. 

FEMA also plays a central role in coordinating support during 

disaster planning and management for partners, communities, and 

citizens, and Tim spoke a little bit about that. Administrator 

Fugate created a Children’s Working Group that serves as a centralized platform across the agency, but as Tim mentioned, this 

just started in August of last year and I hope that as legislators 

you will keep pressure on FEMA to make sure that that Children’s 

Working Group has access to the Administrator and really does 

focus on children’s needs. 

Our second recommendation is to provide a safe and secure 

emergency shelter environment for children, including access to 

age-appropriate services and supplies. The Commission facilitated 

the development, as Tim mentioned, of standards and indicators for 

disaster care for children. This is being piloted by the American 

Red Cross during the 2009 hurricane season. Standards and indicators will be evaluated and revised as necessary and incorporated in 

a comprehensive document to provide general shelter guidelines 

and training for shelter managers and staff. The Commission also 

facilitated the development of a list of age-appropriate shelter supplies for infants and toddlers. Based on this list, Federal, State and 

local disaster supplies can be created or expanded to support shelter managers with essential and cost-reimbursable supplies like 

baby formula, diapers, and cribs. 

The third recommendation is that Congress should require 

tougher preparedness requirements for child care providers and increase support for child care services in the immediate aftermath 

of and recovery from a disaster. Congress can take immediate steps 

to prioritize child care disaster preparedness, response, and recovery: Include a requirement in the reauthorization of the Child Care 

11 

and Development Block Grant that requires child care providers to 

have comprehensive all-hazard material plans that at a minimum 

incorporates specific capabilities, such as sheltering in place, evacuation, relocation, family reunification, and children with special 

needs; require child care provider disaster plans to be coordinated 

with State and local disaster operation plans; provide reimbursement from the Stafford Act to support child care services to displaced families, establish temporary disaster child care and repair 

and reconstruction of child care facilities. We know, Madam Chair, 

that Administrator Fugate is looking at that issue, but I would ask 

that the Committee work to make sure that that decision is expedited and we don’t have to wait. 

Finally, and I will wrap up, the Federal Government must make 

up its mind to establish a single holistic disaster case management 

program with an emphasis on achieving positive outcomes for all 

children and families. After Katrina and Rita, the Federal Government provided at least $290 million for disaster case management 

services. These programs had poor outcomes and illuminated the 

need for greater coordination and program evaluation in the provision of disaster case management services. 

The Commission recognizes that FEMA has authorized four pilot 

disaster case management programs following Gustav and Ike, but 

it is unacceptable that after a year FEMA and its partners still 

haven’t worked out a case management system that is comprehensive, effective and deployed in a rapid manner. 

In conclusion, the Commission strongly believes that the best 

way to instill public confidence in the way our Nation prepares for, 

responds to, and recovers from a disaster is to make sure the needs 

of children are an immediate priority. In the aftermath of a disaster, effectively providing for the safety and well-being of kids will 

provide greater stability and help families and communities recover. 

Thank you, Madam Chair and members of the Subcommittee, for 

this time to talk, and we look forward to working with you on legislation that will make a better situation for kids all across the country. 

Ms. NORTON. Thank you, Mr. Shriver and especially for your 

work in chairing this Commission. 

The next witness is John Vaughn, the Chair of the National 

Council on Disability. 

Mr. Vaughn. 

Mr. VAUGHN. Madam Chairwoman, Ranking Member DiazBalart, and Members of the Subcommittee, on behalf of the National Council on Disability, thank you for the opportunity to talk 

about this critical issue here in our country. 

The testimony I will offer today is based on NCD’s work in emergency preparedness that started back in 2004. Simply put, NCD’s 

interest is in a coherent national disaster management framework 

that is inclusive of people with disabilities. When we say ′′coherent′′ 

we are envisioning leadership that involves effective government 

coordination and collaboration across Federal, State and local levels of government. When we say ′′inclusive,′′ we are talking about 

a transparent ongoing consideration of people with disabilities 

within the same framework as nondisabled people. 

12 

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, approximately 54 million 

Americans have disabilities. The incidence of disability cuts across 

all age groups; however, there is a greater prevalence of disability 

as people age. For example, middle-aged people have a disability 

rate of about 22 percent; 65-to 70- year olds about 44 percent; and 

over 80 some 75 percent. By 2030 the population of people 65 and 

older will nearly double, comprising nearly 20 percent of the U.S. 

population. As a consequence, it is likely that disability will touch 

every American’s life either personally or through that of a loved 

one. So when we talk about considerations of ‘‘special needs’’ populations in times of disaster, we are really talking about a topic that 

affects or touches every American. 

I would like to note two of the major policy gaps we have identified through our research. One, there is a lack of involvement of 

people with disabilities in local planning throughout all phases of 

the life cycle of an emergency. Secondly, there is a lack of available 

resources to local communities to address the emergency concerns 

of the local community affecting all people and especially those 

with disabilities. Here are a few quick examples that illustrate 

these gaps: 

One, people with disabilities are routinely excluded from local 

drills, preparedness exercises, and other planning processes. Two, 

one study noted that of 30 disaster sites, only 27 percent of the 

emergency managers had taken advantage of and completed available training on disabilities. Three people with disabilities remain 

largely forgotten during the response phase of a disaster. And, four, 

emergency warnings for people with disabilities is woefully inadequate. Most disaster warnings are only handled through a conventional communication system which is usually inaccessible to people with cognitive hearing and vision disabilities. 

From our research it is clear that much work needs to be done. 

In order to build a coherent and inclusive national disaster management framework, we would suggest the following: That Federal 

grant requirements and incentives be used to ensure the direct involvement of people with disabilities in State and local funding proposals to FEMA and to DHS. Under such an approach, judging of 

State and local funding proposals would necessitate establishing 

benchmarks and evaluation criteria that demonstrate inclusion and 

address the needs of people with disabilities. 

The challenges faced by people with disabilities during emergencies shouldn’t be viewed merely as those of a special interest 

group because planning for and accommodating people with disabilities often means that we are better equipped to serve all people 

during an emergency. History has taught us that failure to plan for 

inclusion is a plan to fail. 

I thank you for the opportunity to be with you, and I will look 

forward to any questions. 

Ms. NORTON. Thank you, Mr. Vaughn. 

The final witness is Trevor Riggen, Senior Director of Direct 

Services, American Red Cross. Mr. Riggen. 

Mr. RIGGEN. Good afternoon, Chairwoman Norton, Ranking 

Member Diaz-Balart, and distinguished Members of the Subcommittee. Thank you for this opportunity to be here today and 

speak to this important issue. 

13 

As mentioned, my name is Trevor Riggen and I lead domestic 

service delivery for the American Red Cross. 

When disaster strikes the American Red Cross is there to provide 

shelter, food, critical resources and support to those in need. Our 

first priority is to ensure that those affected have a safe place to 

stay, food to eat, and the tools they need to start their recovery. 

How our organization and the sector as a whole meets these challenges can go a long way toward ensuring a more effective and inclusive relief effort to benefit those in need. 

Moving forward, as the Ranking Member mentioned, there is a 

lot of work ahead of us to meet the critical challenges and concerns 

laid out in both the interim report by the Commission and NCD. 

To build on that important work, we come today with four key recommendations: One, government and local agencies plan for a more 

permanent housing solution that is critical to families with children, the elderly and people with disabilities that are prioritized 

for assistance. 

Two, that children are best served if the regular routine of their 

day-to-day life can be restored as quickly as possible. Therefore, we 

recommend that we all work together to make sure that schools 

can open as quickly as possible after a disaster. 

Our third recommendation is we support accelerating the development of a national recovery framework. This important resource 

will help to coordinate the vast number of agencies that are willing 

to come forward for long-term recovery. 

And, finally, children, the elderly and people with disabilities 

must be considered as distinct populations and not part of a larger 

special needs category. This last recommendation I would like to 

focus on for the rest of my time. 

Over time the term ′′special needs′′ has become a catch-all for 

any person who may need additional services beyond the, quote/unquote, average survivor. As a result, disaster plans have become a 

lengthy list of appendices in an attempt to capture the multitude 

of possibilities and needs created by disasters. The assumption that 

the majority of persons fit in the average or one-size-fits-all category has proven to be false and plans to meet the needs of this 

entire community must change accordingly. 

In short, special needs is not an adequate description. As we all 

agree, children are not small adults and people with disabilities 

and the elderly have distinct needs that demand our attention. 

Over the past 4 years, the Red Cross has made significant improvements on our focus of these distinct needs. With the help of 

key partners like NCD, Save the Children, and FEMA, we are beginning to both define the needs and build those requirements into 

our general planning. One example of this is the proper resourcing 

of our shelters. Based on the analysis of critical barriers, we have 

strategically stockpiled key resources to increase accessibility and 

provide critical durable medical equipment to our clients. This includes items such as transferable cots, adaptive equipment for 

showers and toilets, and essential communications equipment. 

The Red Cross is also currently working with FEMA on the development of a national capability to resource shelter with caregivers. This will assist local government in the identification of a 

14 

cadre of resources to help fill that gap and provide for the daily living assistance that many of our clients require and deserve. 

Additionally, we have implemented important training to enhance workers’ awareness and their technical ability for assisting 

those with disabilities and the elderly. Over 5,000 Red Cross volunteers have been trained so far, and we anticipate even further enhancements to this curriculum moving forward. 

Most recently we have worked closely with the Commission on 

Children and Disasters to develop some exciting tools to codify the 

standards and best practices for children in shelters. This includes 

the much needed supply list of critical items we need when disaster 

strikes, including diapers, formula, bedding, and other basic necessities. We are beginning now to aggressively move forward to resource our chapter structure with the identified supplies for children and find the appropriate balance of both caches of these supplies and locally accessible items through partners and vendors. 

A great example of this work is right here in the D.C. Area. Our 

local chapter, the National Capital Region, has worked closely with 

the National Organization on Disabilities to ensure that services 

and shelters are accessible to people with disabilities, and this includes a review of all shelters for accessibility and identification of 

specific items that would create a barrier to anyone needing access. 

The chapter has also received key government funding to secure 

additional equipment and supplies here locally. 

In conclusion, Madam Chairwoman and distinguished Members, 

thank you for allowing us to testify today. We must all plan to 

serve our entire community after a disaster, and I thank you for 

your interest and concern on this important issue. I look forward 

to any questions you may have. 

Ms. NORTON. Thank you, Mr. Riggen, and I want to thank all the 

witnesses for their helpful testimony. 

Now I am going to ask one overriding question of all witnesses. 

Then I am going to go to the Ranking Member and to other Members before I ask another set of questions that I have. 

When we are concerned about treatment of people who are identifiably a part of a group, we tend to focus on them as a part of 

that group. As you all are aware and as your testimony makes 

clear, people don’t come in ones and twosies. Some might have 

thought that this report would be called—if it had been any other 

disaster, it would probably have been called ′′families and children.′′ There are very few children in foster care, and if they are 

they are also not supposed to be unsupervised. I want to make sure 

that in fighting the last war we are also fighting the next war. 

The same is true, Mr. Vaughn, when it comes to people with disabilities. Most of them do not live alone. I was particularly impressed with Mr. Vaughn’s testimony about the elderly because a 

good number of them live alone and would be absolutely helpless 

if there were a disaster. They live alone. They get around their 

homes well enough. They may even go to the store and do some 

things for themselves. But you tell them to be at shelter X, we are 

in trouble and they are in trouble. 

So I am a little concerned that in focusing on people of a specified group, whether those people are children or people with disVerDate Aug 31 2005 10:02 Mar 09, 2010 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 P:\DOCS\52957 JASON
15 

abilities, we may lose sight of the context in which—where they 

live. 

I will be very personal with you. I have a child who is now a 

woman with Down’s Syndrome. She is 39 years old and I am 

pleased and proud that she lives with me, and so far as I can make 

possible, always will live with me. I believe that Katherine, if there 

were a terrible hurricane in Washington, Katherine would not be 

traumatized if she were separated from me. And guess what? I 

could be here. She could be at the lovely institute for drama and 

such that she goes to every day. So the chances are, at least given 

the hours that I have and the hours that many parents have, I 

wouldn’t even be there. The fact is that the 6-1/2 months it took 

us to relocate some children with their parents went less to children than to how we treated families. Moreover, our focus on children comes because when we found so many children disconnected 

from the living unit, we were not prepared to deal with them as 

disconnected children. We didn’t have the supplies. We didn’t have 

the personnel. We didn’t have the focus. So you would help me in 

looking at these groups which we see as disparate. We think children and families may live one way and we want to focus on children with families who have to be handled in one way. We see that 

there will be a special focus for people who are disabled and elderly. But when you consider the disability coordinator, the recommendations so far of the Commission and of others, I would like 

to know whether your recommendations conceive of them in the 

units where they are located or should be located were it not for 

the disaster and what your recommendations have—what recommendations you have to us about dealing with, first, family, 

whether it is natural family or other reunifications, as a function 

of whatever services we think we are supposed to provide. 

So beginning with you, Mr. Manning, I would like all four of you 

to address the notion of the units in which these people that we 

are discussing today will either already be a part of or should be 

a part of if we are to provide them with the services they need 

after a disaster. Then I will go down the line. 

Mr. MANNING. Thank you, Madam Chair. I think that is of 

course the most crucial part of our planning and our failure to plan 

in the past, that we have built a planning system for disaster preparedness, for emergency preparedness that focuses on the general 

population, and then when we recognize or we communicate with 

our partners that we have at the table today that bring to our attention that we have forgotten about a segment of our population, 

we tend to respond by the inclusion of an additional planning guidance or the recommendation that we write an additional plan to 

support and provide for those members of the community. 

What we have recognized is that what we need is a better way 

to plan. We need a better system from the ground up so that we 

incorporate the needs of all the members of a community, all the 

members of our society, not a particular disability group or children as an annex or an afterthought or an add-on to our plans and 

our preparedness activities but one that cross cuts from the beginning. 

Administrator Fugate uses the example of having been offered 

the opportunity to buy a certain number of cots for sheltering and 

16 

then a certain number of ADA compliant cots. And he asks the 

question why am I buying two sets of cots? Why don’t we just buy 

ADA cots and they are available for use by everyone? It is that 

kind of thinking that needs to permeate what we do. It is a way 

of doing business, and it is one that we are undertaking with great 

speed and due diligence to bring across the entire mission set of 

FEMA and emergency management. 

Ms. NORTON. Thank you, Mr. Manning. The greatest service 

FEMA could have provided in Katrina was not diapers. A lot of us 

know how to make do on that if you are going to have some to us 

in a few days. The greatest service they could have provided was 

advanced word to families about how to keep their children with 

them no matter what, and then lots of things take care of themselves once you are with your mama or your provider. 

Mr. Shriver. 

Mr. SHRIVER. Madam Chair, I think we need to do a better job 

addressing the issue you have talked about. I mentioned the child 

care issue and the child facilities that weren’t rebuilt in New Orleans and part of the reason that city is still struggling. So I don’t 

think we have looked comprehensively at the needs of families, if 

that is what your question is getting at. So we rebuild or put dollars through the Stafford Act for facilities, for levees, and for 

schools. But if you have a little kid—we have a 4-year-old. If you 

have a little kid who is going to school in second grade and there 

is no place to put your 4-year-old, you are not going to move back 

to New Orleans or you are not going to move to D.C. So we don’t, 

I don’t think, look comprehensively at the needs of families and 

children within those families. 

Child care facilities here in Washington D.C., if a dirty bomb 

were to drop and you were evacuated and your daughter were to 

go to a different place, the facility that she is at or the place that 

she works at, I don’t know if they are clear on where they are going 

to evacuate your child where your child is—and how your child is 

going to be reunified with you. If your phones are jammed, is there 

a backup plan for your daughter to reach out to another family 

member? 

So we don’t set minimum requirements for child care facilities 

across this country or other facilities. Whether it is a juvenile detention facility or the place where your daughter is, I would be 

willing to bet you right now does not have a comprehensive evacuation plan in place because the city, this city, does not require it 

and most States in this country don’t require it. So they are not 

looking at kids’ needs within the family structure and when it is 

a child care facility. 

I have great respect—— 

Ms. NORTON. Is that true, Mr. Manning, that most cities don’t 

have an evacuation plan for special needs facilities? 

Mr. MANNING. Madam Chair, that is a local requirement and 

that is most likely true that the vast majority do not. 

Mr. SHRIVER. I am talking for your daughter, but also through 

child care shelters—child care facilities across this country. It is 

not uniform in Washington, D.C. We are actually working with 

Councilman Evans right now to try to get legislation to make those 

basic standards—or requirements part of the law. And it is a noVerDate Aug 31 2005 10:02 Mar 09, 2010 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 P:\DOCS\52957 JASON
17 

cost or low-cost alternative. So we are not looking at children within the family unit because we don’t really focus in on child care facilities which deal with hundreds of thousands of kids in this city 

and millions of kids across this country. 

I think the present leadership of FEMA has done a great job 

looking at children’s needs and they have only been in office for 4 

months. But unfortunately when we respond—when there was a 

response to American Samoa, when FEMA sent a team out there, 

they did not take within the Department of Health and Human 

Services the Administration for Children and Families which focus 

in on children’s needs. They took ASPR, which focuses in on the 

health needs but is not focused in on the needs of children. 

You know, we can go back and forth about why that didn’t happen. I have great admiration for the Administrator, but I think 

that should have been part of the plan. We should be looking at 

not just the health needs of people impacted in American Samoa 

but have experts on the ground that understand the needs of children, the mental health needs of children. 

If your daughter gets separated from you for hours, if not days, 

that is going to cause some real issues for you and your daughter. 

Imagine if your kid is 2 years old and separated and the mental 

issues they are going to have to deal with, or a 5 or 6-year-old if 

their home is washed away, if they don’t have the resources there 

to deal with that. 

So I think the answer is we have a lot of work to do in making 

sure that children are, in particular in the case in which I am talking, seen as a unit within the family and within the larger society. 

Ms. NORTON. Thank you, Mr. Shriver. Your answer leads me, before I go on to Mr. Vaughn, to ask Mr. Manning whether or not 

there is rulemaking going on to clarify that child care centers can 

receive assistance in the event of disaster or, for that matter, that 

the kinds of places where kids hang out, like boys and girls clubs 

or even our own Head Start centers, would qualify to receive assistance in the wake of a disaster? 

Mr. MANNING. Madam Chairwoman, yes. Currently facilities that 

meet those descriptions that are private nonprofits or nongovernmental organizations are eligible for disaster assistance, and we 

are exploring how we may be able to extend assistance beyond 

those facilities. Where you have for-profit facilities, they are excluded, and we are looking at that currently, yes, ma’am. 

Ms. NORTON. Thank you, Mr. Manning. It is very important that 

we focus where the children are, in families or in these other facilities. 

Now, Mr. Vaughn, I was impressed by what you said in regard 

to the question I have asked because you mentioned the elderly 

and people with disabilities. I mean we have people with very diverse disabilities. Somebody who is completely blind who goes to 

work every day is very different from someone who has to stay at 

home because he is so hard of hearing that he does not and has 

nobody to go out with him or the elderly person I mentioned earlier. 

Ms. NORTON. Test the context in which disabled people live, are 

we able to deal with them in context, in the groups where they live 

or as individuals where they may live alone, Mr. Vaughn? 

18 

Mr. VAUGHN. Yes. In my written testimony to the Committee, we 

talk about the holistic planning that needs to occur at the national, 

local and State level, whether it be making sure at the local level 

that there is temporary housing to deal with the needs of families 

who get displaced or whatever. I think it gets back on a lot of these 

to me—and I think in our recommendation—that we need to get 

the availability of grants to get that kind of planning done. I expect 

that—I serve in, down in Florida where I live, on the local disability committee. One issue just came up the other day. The issues 

keep coming up. This had to do with the rising problem of children 

with autism and the impact on shelters. 

So I think everything gets to be very holistic, and we really believe that there has just got to be more effort, because I think what 

we have heard from all four of us, that a lot of it is not getting 

done in the local communities. Living in Florida like I do, on the 

west coast, we had four hurricanes 4 years ago in 1 year. So you 

had better be looking after your own needs. But it has got to be 

a holistic approach to the functional needs of everybody. As a blind 

person, I am fortunate that my wife is sighted, but in a hurricane, 

I could become where I am having to fend for myself. 

Ms. NORTON. Thank you, Mr. Vaughn. Mr. Riggen, the Red 

Cross, of course, has for decades had to deal with families, children. This is nothing new for you. Would you tell us about your experience and what you think—how people are handling their context? 

Mr. RIGGEN. I want to thank the Chairwoman for this question 

because I think this really gets to the crux of the issue we are talking about today. The family structure in a shelter is very important, and I will start with the shelters. Part of the recommendations that we worked with the Commission on and what we are 

starting to develop now is to ensure that families are held together 

in shelters very closely. We are making sure the children are both 

protected and the family structure remains resilient after a disaster which is extremely important. 

Ms. NORTON. Did you find in Katrina that sometimes the parents, because there were so many people, you know, were made to 

sleep on cots here and the children on cots someplace else in the 

children’s section or something of that kind? 

Mr. RIGGEN. It is an extreme case, especially in large disasters 

or large shelters. It is extremely challenging throughout a day 

when the resources are coming into the shelter. Where the parents 

have to leave the shelter to get resources and services, the children 

do get cordoned off sometimes and that is what we are trying to 

avoid. We want to get the family structure back. And worst-case 

scenarios, we don’t want shelters to split up based on need. We 

don’t want one part of the family to go to a special needs shelter 

and one part in a general population shelter. We want the family 

to stay intact. To have each type of shelter be able to absorb that 

population is extremely critical. 

The other piece on remaining in the family is the pictures we 

have over here to the right from American Samoa, and this is our 

partnership with Save the Children on the ground there. There is 

some great work on working with children. What you don’t see is 

the casework that happens in the villages. This is because we have 

19 

to go to the family, and every family is different. Disabilities can 

take all forms. They can be cognitive, mental, physical. The issues 

of the elderly in that family could be different. The family size can 

vary. The individual casework, sending a worker, a volunteer to sit 

down with a family and having them listen to the story, what are 

your needs, how can we best meet those needs? If we can keep a 

family in their home, that sends them forward on a recovery much 

quicker than having them have to move to a shelter weeks later. 

So the casework piece is extremely important, and the transition 

of that casework to long-term case management is also extremely 

critical and we look forward to moving forward on that. 

Ms. NORTON. That is really interesting. The notion of stay in 

place if you can is a really interesting notion. 

Mr. Diaz-Balart. 

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Thank you very much, Madam Chairwoman. 

Before I start, I would also be remiss if I did not recognize also the 

great job that my colleague from Florida, Representative Brown, 

has worked on these issues. She is a tireless advocate for Florida, 

for her district but also for children. I think I would be remiss if 

I didn’t mention that. Also, I thought Mr. Vaughn made a very interesting point and I apologize because I am probably going to 

butcher it. So I am going to paraphrase it. Mr. Vaughn, you basically stated that when you plan and you do a better job with people 

with disabilities, you help everybody because everybody benefits, 

everybody does well, everybody is planned for better. 

I have a couple questions for Mr. Manning. The integrated planning system has been pretty widely criticized by this Committee, 

as you know, and the emergency management community as well 

as being too complicated, labor-intensive, just difficult to implement at the State and local levels. Is that going to be replaced? Are 

you looking at that scenario, your scenario-based system with an 

all hazards type approach as opposed to what we have now? Any 

idea what the status is on that? 

Mr. MANNING. The integrated planning system is under review. 

It is being reviewed. The review is being led by the national security staff and the disaster readiness group, of which FEMA and the 

Department of Homeland Security hold a number of chairs. The 

emergency management community has had a tradition of doing all 

hazards based planning where we do a base plus annex planning. 

We do a base plan for those things that cross-cut all types of disasters and specific annexes to deal with the incident-specific issues. 

That is one of the more prominent options that are back on the 

table for our future planning system. There isn’t a firm timeline for 

the completion of that, but it is very actively being looked at. 

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Thank you. I mentioned in my opening statement that the post-Katrina Act explicitly requires FEMA to coordinate with the National Council on Disabilities on all aspects of the 

national preparedness system. How will you ensure that FEMA implements this obviously very important requirement and actively 

coordinates with the NCD and the planning and preparation for 

disasters, which I think we have heard is not quite there yet. 

Mr. MANNING. Yes, sir. We do have a very close working relationship with the National Council on Disabilities. 

Ms. NORTON. Speak up, Mr. Manning, please. 

20 

Mr. MANNING. I am sorry. I will move closer. As we come into 

the review of the national response framework, which we will be 

beginning shortly, there will be a disability community as well as 

all of the—people representing all factions of our society and levels 

of government will be integrally involved in how we conduct that 

review. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Ms. NORTON. Thank you, Mr. Diaz-Balart. I would like to ask 

Chairman Oberstar if he has any questions at this time. 

Mr. OBERSTAR. No questions, Madam Chair. I thought you put 

your finger on the issue very well right at the outset of the questioning. I also want to join with Mr. Diaz-Balart for complimenting 

our colleague, Ms. Brown, for being such an advocate on behalf of 

children and for the initiative Mr. Shriver put forth. Mr. Cao as 

well has spoken to me many times about the need to address these 

issues from his own experience in New Orleans. But I think, 

Madam Chair, that, you know, we have the FEMA authorization 

bill draft in Committee. We have had—you have had numerous 

hearings on the subject, a great deal of discussion about it, and I 

think we ought to just put some language rather than all these 

things that the Commission has recommended can be done, if you 

look at the forward, disaster management recovery, mental health, 

child physical health and trauma and so on all, of those can be 

done by executive order. 

Do you now how long it takes for executive orders to make their 

way through? Do you know how long it takes to go through the 

Federal Register process and the mounds of documentation that 

they take and the months of publication of advanced notice of proposed, notice of proposed rulemaking, proposed rulemaking, final 

rulemaking. That could be years. I think we ought to just put some 

directive language in our bill in consultation with the minority 

members, the Republican Members of the Committee and take 

these well-thought-out recommendations in policy statement and 

direct FEMA to move on them. 

I don’t think we can wait. I don’t think the children can wait. I 

don’t think you, as you rightly pointed out, older persons, persons 

older than children, persons with other disabilities. You touched 

my heart so deeply with the story about your daughter. The center 

that I talked about, the Range Center, has numerous Down syndrome children who are being wonderfully cared for. We don’t get 

hurricanes in northern Minnesota, but we do get blizzards and 

whiteouts. 

And if one of those should strike and people should be locked in 

there, as happens, we have a similar situation only it will be a hell 

of a lot colder than during a hurricane. So we have an opportunity 

here, and I think we ought to just move ahead with this and do 

just do it by legislation. 

Ms. NORTON. The Chairman’s impatience is well placed, it seems 

to me, in light of the Committee’s report and the testimony we 

have heard today. This Subcommittee will work quickly, Mr. Chairman, in light of what you have said. Mr. Cao, have you any questions for the panel? 

Mr. CAO. I do, Madam Chair. Thank you very much. First of all, 

on behalf of my constituents in Orleans and Jefferson parishes, I 

would like to extend my appreciation of your work and the Ranking 

21 

Member’s work in holding this very important hearing. And I 

would like to thank again your sustained attention as demonstrated by this series of hearings related to disaster response 

and recovery, especially what happened in my district during Hurricane Katrina. 

Madam Chair, you are absolutely right. One of the greatest tragedies of Hurricane Katrina was the needless suffering of children, 

the disabled and those with special needs. I have heard of terrible 

stories from my constituents about their experiences during Hurricane Katrina, and let me just tell you a couple here. An elderly 

woman who was in my home area of New Orleans was unable to 

evacuate. It wasn’t until days later that she was discovered dead 

in her home. 

In another instance, emergency response officials rescued an elderly man and transported him to a make-shift evacuation center 

where he died while waiting for medical professionals to treat his 

diabetes. Those are just a couple of stories that basically explain 

some of the many problems that we had in regards to preparation, 

and eventually also in the recovery process. My question is to Mr. 

Manning. One of the biggest problems that I have seen so far deals 

with the questions of recovery, especially in the area of helping 

those who are mentally ill, those who are disabled, and as some of 

the information I have read today that right after Katrina, 1,100 

schools were closed, and they were not open sufficiently quick 

enough in order to address the needs of children. 

What plans does FEMA have in place in regards to recovery to 

quickly allow children to get back in schools, to allow medical facilities to help treat the disabled, the mentally ill, those who are in 

tremendous need? 

Mr. MANNING. Thank you, Mr. Cao. One of the things we have 

learned through our past disasters is where we have shortfalls in 

our plans, and getting schools reopened to get a sense of normalcy 

in the community, get the students back where they can learn, 

where they have their peer support groups is absolutely critical. 

We were—while certainly nowhere near the magnitude fortunately 

of what your constituents went through in Louisiana—within a 

week in American Samoa, we were able to get all but one or two 

of the schools reopened, and we were able to get arrangements 

made for the students of those schools to attend others in the short 

term. We have made the restoration of essential services, including 

schools, one of the highest priorities in our stabilization of an incident as we transition from lifesaving to life-sustaining operations. 

We will continue to examine closely how we do, how well we do, 

how well our partnership with the local and State governments and 

the nonprofit and nongovernmental organizations as we come together as a team to respond to disasters where we can be better 

and modify our plans, institute additional training and ensure that 

the needs of our most vulnerable citizens are met as quickly as possible. 

Mr. CAO. Thank you. Mr. Shriver, in your testimony, you stated 

the need for adequate child care facilities after a disaster. Actually, 

I experienced that difficulty myself. I remember driving all over the 

district, trying to find a place where I could have people care for 

my two daughters. It was a very difficult and very frustrating expeVerDate Aug 31 2005 10:02 Mar 09, 2010 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 P:\DOCS\52957 JASON
22 

rience. Can you provide or at least enlighten us with respect to how 

the lack of adequate child care facilities impede the recovery process of New Orleans? 

Mr. SHRIVER. Well, I think the statistics that were in the testimony speak to the dramatic impact and reduction of child care 

slots and child care facilities in New Orleans. I know that that is 

an ongoing issue, and I know it was an issue in Mississippi as well. 

I think the real question is a clarification of roles in what services 

are to be delivered for a recovery and who is supposed to deliver 

those. So if it is that child care facilities need to be rebuilt, is that 

FEMA’s responsibility, mental health services and case management services I think are all very critical components to a recovery 

not only in Louisiana but across the country. How many dollars 

should be put into those different tranches and who is responsible 

for implementing those? 

So you see not only in the Gulf Coast, but you see last year as 

well after Ike and Gustav that the issue of case management. Who 

is responsible for case management, what does case management 

mean? Is that FEMA’s responsibility and is finding a shelter, housing constitute successful closure of a case? Or do you need mental 

health services, do you need health care services, do you need child 

care services? I think that that is something that you in your oversight responsibilities as elected officials should really work hard 

with FEMA to clarify. I think to defend FEMA, they have not had 

great clarity on that in the past. I think Administrator Fugate has 

done a good job, trying to get children’s needs as part of the overall 

plan as compared to an addendum to a plan but I think that those 

issues of case management, is FEMA, do you want them doing case 

management work? 

Mr. CAO. Mr. Manning, can you provide a response to Mr. Shriver? 

Mr. MANNING. Certainly. Thank you. We are actively working 

with Health and Human Services to establish an interagency 

agreement that is going to resolve the issue of case management. 

By the end of the year, we expect that. Obviously that is not fast 

enough because disasters could happen at any moment. We need 

to be able to do that this afternoon. We have worked with HHS to 

establish some prescriptive mission assignments. We can do that 

today. We can deploy this quickly today. Mr. Shriver is correct in 

that we have not always been timely in that regard. 

In our dealing with HHS, we may focus in on the emergency 

medical piece to the exclusion of the other parts of the Department 

and the other needs of the community. We have recognized that. 

We have taken steps to account for that, and we have the ability 

to send case management and will if necessary send it in part of 

the immediate response package. 

Mr. CAO. Now in regards to child care facilities, as Mr. Shriver 

was pointing to, would it be the responsibility of FEMA to make 

sure that those facilities could be open? How do you come up with 

a plan, for example, to work out some of the issues in dealing with, 

for example, if the facility was insured under some private insurance plan? Have those details been worked out? 

Mr. MANNING. The responsibility for the restoration for the reopening of child care facilities is one that is shared by the commuVerDate Aug 31 2005 10:02 Mar 09, 2010 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 P:\DOCS\52957 JASON
23 

nity. FEMA’s role is one of supporting the Governors in support of 

local communities in response to a disaster. We can certainly and 

do provide planning guidance to communities to be able to expedite 

that. Through the delivery of services, disaster assistance can expedite that as well. Where a facility won’t have the means to re-establish themselves, we can assist in that as well. We do consider 

child care centers when operated by private nonprofits to be performing an essential government service, and we will work with 

them, and then going forward, look at rulemaking to clarify that 

as well. 

Mr. CAO. Thank you, Madam Chair. Those are all the questions 

I have. 

Ms. NORTON. Thank you, Mr. Cao. Mr. Cao is really pointing out 

the difference between—and I think Mr. Shriver’s comments go to 

this too—if they are already in a child care facility, then we need 

to make sure the child care facility knows what to do. But the need 

for child care facilities, if a family is fortunate enough to go back 

to work and there is no standing child care facility, whether it is 

the one she used before or not, then of course case management 

has fallen very short. Ms. Brown. 

Ms. BROWN. Thank you, Madam Chair. Let me just say that I 

think Katrina will go down in one of the worst disasters in the history of the United States. Not that it was one of the worst disasters, it was one of the worst responses. And of course, you saw a 

government that was incompetent. Thousands of people got killed. 

This should not have happened, and what lessons have we learned? 

But one of the things that was encouraging was how the communities came together and worked together. My community came together. Communities came together all over the country, and we 

sent 10 tractor trailers full of—you know, we called and said, What 

do you need? We need diapers, we need water. Whatever they 

needed we put it on those tractor trailers and we sent it to New 

Orleans and we had the State reps there that unloaded them and 

made sure it got out to the people. 

So there is a—you know the American people looked at it, and 

this came from all over the country. They said, you know what can 

we do? This could be us. So we have got to make sure. I have made 

it my business to go there at least twice a year and I am getting 

ready to go there again the first of November. I tell them, I am 

their Member at large. I want to come and see how we are working 

and what we are doing. 

So Mr. Shriver, can you give me your report? I know it is 

lengthy. But what recommendations, what should I be looking for 

when I go the first of November? 

Mr. SHRIVER. Specific to New Orleans or in general? 

Ms. BROWN. Well, you know in the broader picture. I come from 

Florida so we have it constantly. But I can tell you, it seems that 

maybe we are a little bit more prepared, maybe the government 

worked better with us as partners because it seemed that you know 

it wasn’t a one team one fight there in that whole region. 

Mr. SHRIVER. I think that clearly the relationship that FEMA 

has with its partners is much, much better today than it ever has 

been. And I think we got a real sense not only the National Commission, but my other job working for Save the Children, which 

24 

does respond to disasters have a much better partnership with 

FEMA than we have ever had. The door is open. The partnerships 

are much stronger than it ever has been and there is real change 

in the last 4 months since Administrator Fugate and Mr. Manning 

and their team came onboard, and it is also true with the Red 

Cross. There are much better partnership opportunities and much 

better responses than there ever were clearly under Katrina or has 

been in the past. 

I think you can continue to ask about the partnership opportunities and put pressure on all of us to work better together. I think 

you should ask in New Orleans about the case management issues 

that are happening in the Gulf Coast. I think you should ask about 

the case management response in Texas as a result of last year’s 

hurricanes. Are services being provided to families and kids that 

need those services? Was that done in a timely fashion? Mr. Manning talked about coming to grips with a comprehensive case management system set up by the end of this year. I think you should 

ask about that. I mean, I think that—you know after Ike and Gustav went through last year—and this was before the present administration was in there—there were months and months of delay 

for case management services being delivered. If that happened to 

my family, if that happened to your family, I think there would be 

a lot of hell to be paid. 

The bottom line is that unfortunately for too many families that 

are impacted by disasters, they are poor, in many cases minority, 

and they don’t have a mouthpiece to get their message out. So I 

think you could look and ask those questions about not only the 

case management after Katrina, which is ongoing, and the mental 

health needs of the kids that are still in the Gulf Coast is so profound, it is unbelievable. I will send you, Congresswoman, some of 

the statistics that are out there, and the lack of resources for mental health services for those kids. I think those are all questions 

you should be asking the Federal Government, if they are going to 

provide those services. 

Ms. BROWN. I do know that as far as for the veterans, I pushed 

from my other Committee on Veterans Affairs and we are going to 

rebuild the VA hospital right there in the center. So it is going to 

be kind of a medical center that will provide the services because 

I know that they have had no hospital. Their complete hospital was 

wiped out and the veterans facility was wiped out. But it will be 

the center and working with a group coordinating for the community. So there is progress, but we need to make sure that we continue the progress. 

Mr. SHRIVER. Well, I agree with you, Congresswoman. I think as 

Mr. Diaz-Balart said in the beginning of his comments and 

throughout his comments, that there is still a lot of work that still 

needs to be done—— 

Ms. BROWN. No question. 

Mr. SHRIVER. —I think we should be asking the administration 

one of the lead recommendations that I spoke about and that is in 

the report is having folks that understand children’s needs be part 

of the Domestic Policy Council and the National Security Council, 

and we have talked to those folks and they will tell you the needs 

of kids do not come to the forefront. I have talked to Members of 

25 

Congress who have told me that after Katrina, there was a lot of 

focus on housing and on levees and rebuilding those and the infrastructure, which is all critical but we forget about human service 

needs and we forget about poor kids, and we forget about the mental health, the health services of those kids and we move on to the 

next disaster. It has almost been 5 years now and I think we need 

to ask this administration to really step in and address some of the 

glaring inadequacies in the planning for, responding to and recovery of disasters generally but in particular the one that is still 

going on in New Orleans, which is still a disaster. 

Ms. BROWN. As we sit here today and speak—I just returned 

from Haiti—but there is a tent city right there in New Orleans 

where families, children, are living under the bridge or something. 

So there is a lot of work that we realize we still have to do to support the families that are in those communities. 

Madam Chairwoman, I want to thank you again for holding this 

hearing. I am looking forward to thoroughly reviewing the report 

from the Commission. Thank you. 

Ms. NORTON. Thank you, Ms. Brown, for your leadership. 

Ms. Edwards. 

Ms. EDWARDS. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. I just have a 

couple of questions. When you think about the population, 25 percent children 18 and under, 20 percent of our population identified 

with disabilities at a minimum, about 20 percent elder population, 

when you start adding those numbers—although there is some 

overlap—it is our population. So I really do share the view, I think, 

expressed by each of you in different ways that when it comes to 

disaster management, we do need to look holistically because we 

are talking about the population, not a special population, not a 

segregated population but really all of the population that requires 

a certain set of needs. 

My question goes to a couple of things. One, I recall during 

Katrina—because I did much more work around issues of domestic 

violence—that many of our national domestic violence organizations were able to reach out to the Administration for Children and 

Families not through FEMA to provide relief and relocation services for mostly a population of women and children who had experienced domestic violence. One of the things that was happening in 

New Orleans is that those women and children who had to be evacuated from shelters were, in fact, moved to a place exactly where 

their abuser was. And when you get to issues around case management, there is a really clear need for case management because if 

you had a case manager who is looking holistically at the family 

and its needs, that kind of placement actually would not have happened. There was some additional work done through the Administration for Children and Families. It really was not FEMA-related 

when it came to relocation of some of that population. 

So I would just draw your attention to it. I also am really concerned on this issue of standards. I wonder if each of you might 

speak to that. The kind of standards for preparedness that might 

be necessary for child care providers but also long-term care providers, adult day care facilities. All of these sort of different kind— 

you know, day care arrangements for adults with special intellectual and physical challenges. Many of these kinds of institutions 

26 

are already regulated by the State. So how difficult would it be to 

encourage our States or facilitate our States’ ability to provide both 

tougher standards, but also the training and tools needed to participate effectively in disaster management efforts? 

So I wonder if you would speak to that. Then in some instances, 

I know in the State of Maryland, most child care is actually not 

provided in these more regulated child care facilities. It is homebased child care, even multiple children in home-based child care. 

So I would be concerned if we were only focused on ensuring the 

needs in that environment when we are missing the needs of a 

much bigger population for children. Mr. Manning and Mr. Shriver 

also. 

Mr. MANNING. Thank you, Congresswoman Edwards. Those are 

very important points. If I may, I will start with the second first. 

The same difficulties that we have in reaching individuals and trying to increase individual and family preparedness, community preparedness we would face, we do face in reaching the child care center that is based in the home, that is maybe a nanny share or simply the willingness of neighbors to help neighbors and bring their 

children into the home. There is not regulation, there is not grant 

guidance that we, at FEMA, can issue that will address that. What 

we can do is to continue to try to push on our individual and family 

preparedness initiatives in our partnerships with the team at State 

and local governments and private nonprofits throughout the community, throughout the country to try to reach those. At the same 

time, as we work with the established and regulated child care facilities, again, as you mention, they are regulated largely by State 

governments and in some cases municipal codes. It is not something that barring Federal legislation we can reach from FEMA. 

We have often success in implementing those types of programs 

through grant guidance but again, as there aren’t grant programs 

specifically designed for child care centers, that is a population that 

is missed. We plan to, and are currently incorporating the recommendations from the Commission and our partners that are 

going to our State and local partners, part of which will encourage 

the incorporation, as we have discussed, of the entire society into 

our planning. And this can be done as well. But we have seen 

through the tragedies of school violence over the last number of 

years, Columbine and Virginia Tech and others, that there has 

been a response by the secondary and higher education, high school 

facilities to do this planning, to do safety planning. They are required to. There are grants for it and they do it. The encouragement of child care facilities to do that same type of planning is a 

natural extension of that same school safety planning initiatives 

that we have had for our elementary, secondary and higher education facilities. I believe that we would have success encouraging 

that message as well. 

Mr. SHRIVER. In the State of Maryland, Congresswoman, in the 

last legislative session there was legislation introduced by Senator 

Frosh that was passed that set these basic requirements for the 

State of Maryland. They were supported by the Department of 

Human Resources and the Department of Education as low-cost or 

no-cost alternatives. These basic requirements—this is for child 

27 

care facilities—also reach into home-based care as well because, as 

you know, they are regulated by the State. 

They have less, obviously, kids in the home, but you can have 

those standards apply across the board. They have done it, I believe, in Maryland for senior centers as well. So they are low-cost 

or no-cost alternatives. You can tie Federal dollars, as I mentioned 

in my opening statements, to the child care development block 

grant and the entity that is getting CCDBG money to maintaining, 

or reaching Federal standards. 

Also, I would say this is not necessarily FEMA’s responsibility. 

The Administration for Children and Families and their child care 

bureau, you ought to have conversations with them. FEMA is part 

of the team, but again, it gets back to the clarification of roles. I 

don’t think they need to be driving that issue. But should ACF be 

requiring that? Should they be setting the standards? Should they 

be finding what those standards are and sending those across the 

country? The answer, I think, is yes. There was push-back because 

I have testified on behalf of the bill in Maryland, and there was 

some concern about cost. The bottom line on the fiscal note said 

there was no cost. Other States are doing this now, including Mississippi and Alabama, and they deal with both home-based and 

larger centers. That is why I specifically said child care facilities 

because it includes both the home-based as well as the centers that 

serve more kids. 

So I think you ought to bring in the Administration for Children 

and Families and ask them what they are going to do on this issue 

as well and whether they have standards that should be implemented across the country and push them to do that. 

Ms. NORTON. Thank you, Ms. Edwards. This is a question certainly for Mr. Shriver, who mentioned in his testimony but clearly 

as well for Mr. Manning, and Mr. Riggen and Mr. Vaughn, as well 

may have had some relevant experience here, to say the least. The 

nemesis, perhaps, of this Committee has been case management. 

Indeed, one of my questions to you, Mr. Manning, is how many people are still listed as in case management from Katrina on the gulf 

coast? This has been a very troublesome area for this Committee, 

which has had a number of hearings on the matter. 

Mr. MANNING. Madam Chairwoman, I apologize. I don’t have 

that information today, but I will provide it to you. 

Ms. NORTON. 30 days, Mr. Manning, if you could get us that information. 

Mr. MANNING. Sure. 

Ms. NORTON. You mentioned, Mr. Shriver, the notion of case 

management, the need for what you call holistic case management. 

We know from the hearings we have had that these families, already dislocated and displaced, have been compelled to go here and 

there for services, housing here, health care there, no transportation to get there or very scattered transportation. Yet, that is 

logistically very difficult, as we have seen, by the failure of both the 

States and FEMA in this regard. I wonder if you would indicate 

what you mean by holistic case management? What would it consist of? Who would be involved? Would it only be the government? 

Would it be nonprofits? How would you put together a case management system? Then Mr. Manning, how do you evaluate these 

28 

contractors who are parts of your case management system who 

often are for profit contractors, Mr. Shriver? 

Mr. SHRIVER. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. As you know, 

FEMA has entered into relationships with, I believe, four different 

approaches to case management. Within the interim report, which 

I am happy to send to you, we spell out what holistic comprehensive case management is. It includes health, mental health, nutrition, education, human service needs of kids and families. It does 

involve voluntary agencies that would provide case management 

services. You see different examples of it as a result of the hurricanes that have gone through the gulf coast over the last 4.5 years. 

I don’t want to go through the—— 

Ms. NORTON. Do you mean that these would be working together 

in a group—I mean, these services all exist in some form or fashion 

if people would only get to them. 

Mr. SHRIVER. That is correct. I think, again, what I would say 

is I think you in your oversight capacity ought to be asking FEMA 

and the Federal family or the Federal Government agencies that 

are working on case management what approach they are going to 

take that is comprehensive in nature and when are they going to 

make that decision by because I think it is just—— 

Ms. NORTON. Let me go to Mr. Manning on that. You correctly 

point out the government agency with responsibility here. Now, 

Mr. Manning, for the life of me we could never understand why 

FEMA didn’t say, okay, X, Y, Z and A, B and C, you are hereby 

constituting the case management group for the parish of X. Guess 

what, you are all in the same group, you are all under the same 

tent. You decide how and where to go. You go together. What keeps 

that from happening, Mr. Manning? What are you doing to allow 

that to happen so that we don’t have scattered services? Are you 

working with nonprofits in the same group as for-profits and in the 

same group as the agencies of the State and FEMA itself? How 

does that work? We are trying to picture in our mind after having 

been frustrated over and over again by the same complaints about 

here and there and how nonprofits couldn’t even get into the mix. 

I need to know what your vision is of case management as directed 

by FEMA. 

Mr. MANNING. Thank you, Madam Chair. As I mentioned earlier, 

we are entering into an interagency agreement with HHS with the 

ACF for exactly that. We are dissatisfied as well. We in the past 

have had an inconsistent approach. Clearly we share your frustration. The long-term solution and the reason it has planned to take 

until the end of the year is that we can do exactly as you are describing, incorporating fine methodology to incorporate all of the 

various private nonprofits, or NGOs and PNPs that involve—— 

Ms. NORTON. It is not rocket science, Mr. Manning. Just tell 

them, You are the designated group for the county that had just 

been under—we just don’t see why it is so difficult. And we are 

very concerned within 30 days to get at least some outline of how 

this would operate. We can’t tell when the next hurricane is coming. We think it is too late for us to have to ask that question. We 

are very fearful that we will be held just as responsible as the new 

administration. Just because we have been asking it forever doesn’t 

mean we will continue to tolerate what seems to us to be—maybe 

29 

I am making this overly simplistic. Let me ask Mr. Riggen. The 

Red Cross has been in this business longer than government. Mr. 

Riggen, what is the problem? What do you do when, after all, you 

go in fresh and new to a Committee. Yeah, you have Red Cross 

chapters there. Are you able to get at least the services you provide 

in the context you have in the community together under one umbrella to work together? You, of course, work with FEMA which 

may have, if anything, destabilized you or in the past may have 

done so. Could you tell us about your experience, bringing together 

the several services that you render as a part of Red Cross? 

Mr. RIGGEN. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. This is a great 

question. And to build on Congresswoman Edwards’ point on standards, we have really started to focus now on the recovery or the 

casework and case management standards. In the years after 

Katrina, there was a large focus on mass care, on the immediate 

evacuation needs, and on the sheltering needs. We are now getting 

to some of the real crux of casework and that ability of organizations to start to meet with families and not only identify the families themselves but to identify their needs and to share that information across agencies. One of the biggest tragedies is for families 

is to have to tell their stories 12 or 13 times, depending on who 

they are going to see. 

The Red Cross worked with other agencies after 9/11 to build a 

system called the Coordinated Assistance Network, which allows 

casework to flow between agencies so that if a client comes to the 

Red Cross, tells their story, expresses their needs, that case is able 

to be seen by other agencies and shared across the network so the 

family could then go to see that agency and receive services as 

well, and our caseworker can actively push the clients to those resources as they become available. 

The other thing that we have done at the Red Cross is we have 

changed our strategy about casework and we have become much 

more holistic on our initial push. Casework must happen in the initial week, not months. There has to be that ability to go door to 

door to talk to families in need, elderly who are homebound, people 

with disabilities who can’t get out of their homes or don’t have the 

transportation. We want to come to your front door, have that conversation to see what the needs are before the family starts to degrade, before the individual decompensates and needs additional 

assistance. How do we get those resources to show up on day 4, on 

day 5 and then transition that data and recovery information to 

the case management, whether they be Federal, local or State? We 

want to be able to provide that resource and be a holistic team to 

do that. So as part of that casework, what we have reinvented is 

not only the caseworker, but also the health worker, the mental 

health worker and bringing in the community alongside with all 

their additional resources that we can provide to a client in the 

weeks, not months, after a disaster. 

Ms. NORTON. And I don’t see the logistical problem. We live in 

the age of video conferences. I have had video conferences with 

residents from the District of Columbia in Federal prison, for God’s 

sake. So I really don’t see the issue here, which accounts for the 

concern. Mr. Manning, I hope you understand what is our concern. 

As we understand it, if you are a recognized—if you have been 

30 

dubbed and maybe there is a way to do this ahead of time or during the time, if there were an unexpected catastrophe, but you have 

the status of a government entity for purposes of reimbursement 

on some occasions. You, the Red Cross, our oldest such service organization. But as I understand it, Mr. Manning, other nonprofits 

or private entities which are well recognized and which some say 

provide better service in emergencies and nonemergencies than the 

government can are not recognized and, therefore, cannot be reimbursed. 

Do you have a process that will be used or is being used to select 

in advance or during emergencies nonprofits who could reach out 

to be helpful? For example, the American Red Cross has itself an 

agreement with Save the Children and Church of the Brethren. I 

don’t know if they get reimbursed. 

Let me ask you both: First, Mr. Manning. I am talking about reimbursement for folks trusted in the community. Even more so 

than having the HHS or some Federal Government entity which 

they may have never heard of come in. Under whatever rulemaking 

you are engaged in, will there be a way to formally designate more 

such entities who could be useful to the government and to the 

community in case of a disaster? 

Mr. MANNING. Madam Chair, as to the specifics of the rulemaking, we can get a report to you within 30 days. 

Ms. NORTON. Within 30 days, sir. This is very important to learn. 

We don’t have any druthers here. We have had heartbreaking testimony from religious organizations, for example, from Louisiana 

willing to offer services, some of whom have indeed offered services 

when FEMA and the State was not even present, for whom not a 

dime of reimbursement. They are good Christians or good—and 

most of the time, they were Episcopalians or Catholics who simply 

couldn’t help it. They simply came forward. We don’t want to at all 

relax government standards, and we want to make sure that you 

are not aiding people of your religious group only, church/state 

means everything to at least this Member and that separation 

must be obtained in the provision of services, as Catholic services, 

for example always recognizes. But we are concerned with those 

who can be most helpful, not those who had a government title necessarily who may be strangers in the community, be the entities 

that you can look to. What about this trilateral agreement, Mr. 

Riggen, with Save the Children and the Church of Brethren? That 

is an agreement with you, I take it. 

Mr. RIGGEN. It is a fantastic agreement, mostly around shelters. 

It is an opportunity for Save the Children to provide some resources. Some kids that provide a safe place for children in a shelter and those resources come into an environment and Church of 

the Brethren provides a workforce for us to be able to provide child 

care for families in shelters or other service delivery sites as they 

go seek assistance, as they spend time with a caseworker or case 

management to know what the next steps are. And that is a program that we do. 

Ms. NORTON. That operates as a part of the Red Cross services? 

Mr. RIGGEN. It does, absolutely. 

Ms. NORTON. So they would be designated to be reimbursed? 

31 

Mr. RIGGEN. Most of our services are not. We do not seek reimbursement from the Federal Government. They are done—and just 

to speak to the earlier point around the compassion and the generosity of the American public, the public has come forward in 

every disaster with immense generosity, and they continue to do 

so. Those funds come from private donations large and small, and 

we work with our partners to help them with cost, much like we 

do now in sheltering. 

If a local church wants to open their doors at shelters, we can 

seek to provide them the training and skill sets to do that, and we 

also help to recover their costs. 

Ms. NORTON. That is very important. I want to indicate, we are 

not trying to pay churches for what their religion tells them they 

should be doing anyway. My major concern is that FEMA has often 

contracted—here I am talking about people for whom you contract—has often contracted with for-profits before they would contract with non-profits who have reputations for service delivery. We 

couldn’t understand why a for-profit would be better equipped than 

a non-profit who may have served in the community for some time 

and perhaps be receiving grants from the State, why that wouldn’t 

be someone that would be considered for this service. 

Mr. Vaughn, you talked about the role of preparedness. You 

talked about warnings, education, transportation and sheltering 

services. You know when people hear us talk about that, Mr. Manning, at a hearing where FEMA appears, they may assume that 

this is what FEMA is supposed to do. Could we make clear what 

the role Federal here is, what the State role is? And I want to first 

go to Mr. Vaughn because he raises the question of the design of 

the warning and the education and the transportation, the sheltering services which would of course be particularly vital to for elderly and disabled people. What have you found with respect to 

those services, Mr. Vaughn, which move people around, which 

warn people who are disabled or elderly? And Mr. Manning, is it 

clear whose responsibility this is? Mr. Vaughn? 

Mr. VAUGHN. You know, what we have learned from our research 

again is that most communities, maybe 30 percent, are doing the 

planning they need. And I think a lot of this discussion that has 

been going on here with you all about case management, we, again, 

hear about that. People trying to get in touch with Social Security 

or whatever. I think the bigger concern is what happens if we have 

another disaster? A couple of us in this room have roots in Florida 

and you just know that someday that is going to happen. So I think 

we are not prepared locally, and I think people at the local level 

are looking to the Federal Government or to their State governments, yet they know they need to be doing it in the local community because when the problems hit, that is where the people expect the services to be. 

So that is why we see FEMA in this role where people look to 

them or look to the Federal Government. I guess when you are 

looking to the Federal Government, you are looking to FEMA in 

this whole concept that we were talking about of a coherent policy 

where all the different levels are talking and communicating with 

one another. Again, we think that we have got to get money down 

into the local communities through grants or whatever so that the 

32 

planning can happen. Because if not 5 years from now, we will be 

talking about who knows what disaster and saying, didn’t we learn 

from the lessons. 

Ms. NORTON. Well, Mr. Manning, I just want to alert you that 

one of the worst confusions to emerge from Katrina was who was 

responsible for doing what. Now it strikes me—and Mr. Shriver 

talks about working with the city council. It strikes me that a lot 

of this provisional transportation, Mr. Vaughn raises sheltering 

services. You know, FEMA is not supposed to fly in like Superman 

and set this up. I recognize you are new, but it does seem to us 

when we are talking about elderly people and children that FEMA 

stressed that what we are talking about, is not the case, mostly 

State responsibilities. 

Again, here goes the Chairman, a lot of this is written in regulations and the rest. But if it was so clear, how come it took us time 

to find out who should have gotten people on trains and buses out 

of New Orleans? It turned out to be a State responsibility. Because 

there was confusion, FEMA wasn’t sure what to do, whether they 

were overriding the Governor or the mayor. It was pitiful, frankly. 

My own notion was, you know what, if they don’t do it, jump in 

there. Guess what, that is what happened. Finally they sent the 

Coast Guard in and said, all hands on deck, but that was after considerable confusion. Now Mr. Vaughn, you raised the notion of a 

regional disability coordinator. Now there is, I take it, Mr. Manning, one disability coordinator? Boy, is that all we have got for the 

entire country, no regional coordinators? What do you think about 

that, Mr. Manning? Do we need somebody whose job—I am not 

suggesting the proliferation of new jobs in the Federal Government. 

But is there somebody who could take on that responsibility in the 

region? Or do you think the disability coordinator recently set up 

pursuant to statute is sufficient for the moment? 

Mr. MANNING. Madam Chair, first, we are examining how the regions are structured and what responsibilities devolve from Washington, from FEMA headquarters to the regions where the responsibilities lie and where the functions are best served. That examination is happening currently. But I should emphasize that as we 

have discussed today, the solution to this isn’t necessarily additional functions or additional personnel or additional plans or additional initiatives set aside to address the gaps. The solution, we believe, is eliminating gaps. It is taking care of all the Members of 

our community, all the Members of our society from the beginning, 

and how we conceive of our policy in the first place, how we write 

our plans in the first place, how we do our operational development 

in the first place. We see that as the solution. So while yes, ma’am, 

we are looking at how we are structured in the regions and how 

we would best serve the disability community throughout the country, we are at the same time trying to eliminate the need for special consideration in our planning and in our policies. 

Ms. NORTON. Well, thank you very much. Mr. Cao, do you have 

any further questions? 

Mr. CAO. No, I don’t, Madam Chair. 

Ms. NORTON. Thank you, Mr. Cao. Mr. Shriver, you have focused 

on children. We have all discussed the context in which children 

and people with disabilities are found. Is the implication of your reVerDate Aug 31 2005 10:02 Mar 09, 2010 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 P:\DOCS\52957 JASON
33 

port that there needs to be, quite apart from the disability coordinator, a separate focus on children or children and families? 

Mr. SHRIVER. I think the answer to that, Madam Chair, is what 

Mr. Manning just alluded to, which is that instead of having an 

extra senior level person or two people in FEMA be designated as 

the kids person or the disabilities person or potentially both, that 

what needs to happen is it needs to permeate the organization. The 

plans that go forth, the frameworks that are proposed across it, but 

what we don’t want is for kids to be an addendum because I have 

talked to countless emergency managers across the country, and 

they have these reports. 

By the time they get through the reports or the plans, they are 

exhausted. They don’t want to go to the addenda, and that is where 

kids and people with disabilities are often put, in the addendum. 

I think what Administrator Fugate has done and what Mr. Manning is talking about, which is the correct approach, is to get the 

special needs populations, including kids, to be written in throughout the plans and to be part of the entire agency so that you don’t 

have a one-off for kids or one-off for people with disabilities. So I 

think that that approach is the right approach. I think the administrator deserves credit for that, and I do think, Madam Chair, just 

to your question on case management—I know this isn’t exactly 

what you just asked—but I think it was strongly recommended 

that case management reside within HHS, and Congress, in its 

wisdom, gave the appropriations to FEMA to spearhead it. I would 

suggest that FEMA should not be in the business of delivering or 

being held responsible for case management. They are part of a 

team but that it really ought to go to the folks that have the experience, like the Administration for Children and Families that contracts with Catholic Charities. It is delivered by a nonprofit, but 

that that responsibility ought to be primarily with HHS instead of 

with FEMA, who has other mandates out there. 

I think Congress, frankly, made a mistake in shifting that responsibility. I don’t know whether FEMA agrees with that at this 

point but I think that they are part of that role, and they don’t 

have the expertise to be case managers. We ought to be giving it 

to an entity in the Federal Government that has the expertise, that 

focuses in on this, and have FEMA be part of that team rather 

than be the entity that makes those decisions. The horse may be 

out of the barn on that one. 

Ms. NORTON. There is something to what you are saying, Mr. 

Shriver. Out of FEMA, there are now certain housing functions 

that were so embedded in HUD that essentially HUD is responsible 

for them, but I can tell you that this Congress, if anything, out of 

FEMA consolidated all of it in the Department of Homeland Security, and it runs somewhat counter to your notion of trying to deal 

with these problems in case management to say that there is another whole Federal bureaucracy that needs to come over into 

FEMA. The question of priority when you are really a part of something else, not ongoing emergency management as opposed to saying you are part of a case management team because otherwise, we 

are going to be told that people with disabilities, we should hand 

that over to somebody I guess in HHS and people who deal with 

34 

nursing homes, given what happened to the people who were left 

there, we should give that over to them. 

We are going to, I think, go with a regional recommendation 

which is, we still do not see why a Federal Government laced together where people have relations across agency lines need only 

go across the street to find one another, why you can’t—and the 

agencies cannot, by statute, be instructed that in case of emergency, HHS, HUD, whoever else shall provide services and/or personnel who shall be part of case management which must be rendered someplace. If it is going to be rendered under somebody, it 

ought to be somebody who is expert in emergency management as 

somebody in the day care department of HHS may not be or somebody who does nursing homes may not be in terms of alacrity and 

rapidity of response. 

Ms. NORTON. FEMA has got to convince me that it must be dismembered in order for us to get people under the same umbrella, 

working on the same group of people. I still cannot understand why 

a simple decision in FEMA, why that was not done. I believe if 

FEMA had called the Secretaries of the various agencies, it would 

have been done. 

I detest government bureaucracy and love government and believe some of my colleagues want to take—we give them ammunition for wanting to take apart government precisely because we are 

not able to do commonsense things like get in the same room. So 

I can understand what Mr. Shriver means, and I know where the 

expertise lies, but I also know where the priority to deal with an 

emergency lies. And I know the next thing we would be criticized 

for doing is not rapidly responding from one source to one—to one 

emergency. 

So, you know, it could be six of one and half a dozen of another, 

but I believe that Congress has made that decision. 

We are going to leave this, Mr. Manning—I can tell you and you 

can see, people even want to take some of your service away. We 

are going to leave it to see if this administration can do better to 

serve under one umbrella all that people need. 

And you are there for 4 months. Count on us to have hearings 

within 4 months to see just how far you have gotten in carrying 

out or outlining what you are going to do. 

And I do want to announce—Mr. Riggen, did you have something 

to respond to that? You seemed to be asking for attention 

Mr. RIGGEN. No, ma’am. I am just in solid agreement with the 

role. I want to express that the voluntary agencies have moved forward on the case management in unison; and in part of the voluntary agencies active in disaster, the national organization has 

come together to create standards around case management and 

casework, and that allows us to share the data and to work collaboratively. 

So we are excited to see some progress towards the Federal case 

management, and hope that we ensure that they are both connected, that there is not a disparity between the voluntary agencies 

working and the government working, but they are connected and 

well integrated. 

Ms. NORTON. If necessary, you know every Federal agency is located in regions, the same region where FEMA is. All you have got 

35 

to do—you wouldn’t even have to detail. If it got bad enough, as 

in Katrina, you could detail somebody from another agency. I 

mean, these are such obvious things that is a presumption in their 

favor that the agency would have to overcome if it decided to do 

something else. 

Mr. Cao. 

Mr. CAO. Thank you so much, Madam Chair. And, Madam Chair, 

you just alluded to one of the problems that the President addressed during his visit to New Orleans this past week is the need 

for the different Federal agencies to be better coordinated. I note 

that he has tasked Secretary Napolitano on that task. 

Mr. Manning, could you provide us with a status or at least provide us with a written status in the next 2 weeks with respect to 

how this plan to better organize and to better coordinate these different Federal agencies is coming along? 

And my other question to you is, besides working with the different Federal agencies, do you have a plan in place in order to better coordinate organizations like that of Mr. Riggen, the Red Cross, 

as Madam Chair has pointed out to other nonprofit organizations, 

church organizations, to help in preparations and in recovery? 

Mr. MANNING. Thank you, Congressman Cao. I will answer your 

second question first, in that I do believe we do have a plan in 

place, and whether it is adequately understood and followed is 

probably the question; that we need to do a better job about involving our communities and our partners as we develop our procedures, as we implement our plans, as we respond to disasters. 

That is something we work on every day. We analyze our response to every exercise and every disaster and try to find where 

we didn’t do well enough and do better the next time. And as we 

revise the national response framework next year, towards the end 

of this year and into next, we will certainly and absolutely involve 

everybody across the response spectrum, across the entire team of 

emergency management. 

You have heard a number of times today, FEMA is not the team, 

it is part of the team. Our responsibility is one to bring people to 

the table, provide the tools and resources in order for them to perform their job where necessary, and where absolutely necessary, 

stand by and support of others. 

So the initiatives working better together with the interagency, 

with all of our Federal partners, that is one that has improved 

greatly in recent years and certainly in recent months through the 

Disaster Readiness Group, the DRG, the body that works together 

for disaster preparedness. 

And following up on your question—I am sorry, not your question—the question earlier about the integrated planning system, as 

we are revising that system, we are building a new planning system in consultation with the interagency. As opposed to FEMA or 

the Department of Homeland Security creating and developing and 

handing over a planning system for the entire Federal Government 

and our interagency partners to work together on, we are going to 

build that in collaboration in the beginning. So it will take into account the resource shortfalls of other agencies, and we can have 

true collaboration between Federal departments in response to disasters like you have seen in your community. 

36 

Mr. CAO. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Ms. NORTON. One final question. I am taking a page out of Mr. 

Shriver’s testimony as a kind of model that—and I need to know 

more about it, that he says is already in existence now. 

Now, this has to do only with children, but as a model for getting 

together the disparate agencies, Mr. Shriver says on page 4 that 

the Administrator, Mr. Fugate, has announced, quote, ′′the creation 

of a children’s working group.′′ There is a nice word, ′′working 

group.′′ If after every disaster you just had a working group of case 

management, you might have what we are thinking about. 

Now, maybe we are being too simple, so correct me if I am 

wrong. 

But anyway, let us look at what we have done with this children’s working group. It says, ′′which will serve as a centralized 

platform across all FEMA directorates to ensure that the unique 

needs of children are incorporated into all disaster plans. The 

working group is tasked not only with identifying and facilitating 

how best to integrate children into all FEMA planning efforts, but 

also with improving FEMA’s capacity to work collaboratively with 

its partners and other key nongovernmental stakeholders.′′ So it 

looks like there would be this working group that already understood what to do with children. 

The question is, can we have a working group in the disaster 

area which would simply pull in the same way that you appear to 

be doing with respect to thinking through children? Where is that? 

Does it have a chairman? Is it an internal group? How does it operate? 

Could we get a working group for each disaster in Florida where 

there is a next hurricane? In Louisiana or Mississippi, would that 

help if each agency was designated—each agency was tasked to 

designate a person in the region, and they already are sitting right 

there to work with the working—the FEMA working group? 

Mr. MANNING. Thank you, Madam Chair. I think the easy answer to the second half of your question is that I believe we have 

that in place through—— 

Ms. NORTON. Since when? 

Mr. MANNING. The planning bodies we have had in place for a 

number of years that have not had the attention, not had the focus 

necessary, but have been—— 

Ms. NORTON. So you are telling me that there is a working group 

for case management in Louisiana, in each parish already? 

Mr. MANNING. No, ma’am. 

What—what I am suggesting is that there was a body—there is 

a body that has been in place that we have given that mission. The 

regional interagency steering committees, the risk groups in each 

one of the FEMA regions, that have designees, that have representatives from all of the Federal interagency bodies within the region, 

as has been mentioned earlier. 

And we have been using them in Region 9, based in California, 

to do catastrophic disaster planning, to work closely with the community, because they live in the community and they are part of 

the community with another body. We pronounce all of our acronyms; the ESFs, the Emergency Support Function coordination 

groups, those are the elite agencies, and all of the Federal agencies 

37 

that are assigned to a particular function. So in the case of ESF 

6 and the mass care, there are bodies both within the Federal 

interagency led by FEMA here in Washington working in coordination with counterparts in—in the case of California FEMA Region 

9, the Federal Region 9, to do exactly as you described, to build—— 

Ms. NORTON. So in Region 9, where all the agencies are located 

just like they are in every region, there is already a case—if there 

were to be, in that case probably an earthquake, case managers 

would immediately be under the same umbrella and be working together based on this model? 

Mr. MANNING. The planning is around the response, the holistic 

response to the earthquake. The functions of case management 

under ESF 6 are assigned to Health and Human Services. That is 

the way that disasters are managed. FEMA assigns mission tasks, 

mission orders, to Federal agencies to coordinate the response to a 

particular function. 

In the case of—— 

Ms. NORTON. I am sorry. Is this preparedness or response or 

both? 

Mr. MANNING. This is in response. We plan in preparedness and 

then use the plans in the response phase, yes, ma’am. 

Ms. NORTON. So there would be case managers who would be 

pulled out in the event of an earthquake in California, are you saying? Or not? 

I am really only interested in the people level. What we have 

heard from FEMA for 5 or 6 years now is that there are elements 

of their bureaucracy that are already pulled together to do X, Y. 

Then real people come in and say, We have never saw them before. 

So I am asking about case management in particular. Mr. Shriver said that that was in disarray for children, and it turns out it 

was also in disarray for elderly people and anybody else who needed to be brought together. 

What I am asking is whether Region 9 is going to give us the 

makings of a case management umbrella for people on the ground 

in case of an earthquake, and whether that could be replicated in 

other regions across the country. 

Mr. MANNING. Madam Chair, I believe that that will be the case. 

We have written—we are writing prescriptive assignments. We 

are identifying a particular task with a particular team to go and 

perform, in the case of case management, that function. 

That—that initiative is happening here in Washington, not specific—that particular initiative, not specific to Region 9, but it is 

happening. So that wherever a disaster may occur, the Health and 

Human Services will—the Administration for family—for Children 

and Families will lead that mission and to the people, to the team, 

will deploy in the immediate hours of a disaster, yes, ma’am. 

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Manning, I am encouraged by what you say. 

I urge you to use Region 9 where you appear to already have begun 

work as a kind of pilot. 

I was a Federal Government official heading an agency at one 

time, and I found the agency in total and complete disarray. In 

putting it together, I did not say, Okay, I know what to do. And 

I thought I knew what to do; I had done something similar at the 

State level. 

38 

I said, Let’s do this. I said, We will do pilot projects. We are not 

omniscient; we will see if this works in a particular location. 

Since we are talking preparedness and not a disaster—of course, 

that would be—for example, if case managers were already understood to be who they were, where they would come from, if the 

agency had already designated people as case managers during the 

time, from the various agencies that would be involved, that is 

what I am talking about. 

As a result of—we chose, in this case, three sections of the country, and the successes there and some of the deficiencies taught us 

what to do. We were able to essentially reform the agency from the 

ground up based on experimentation within the agency, learning 

from our mistakes. 

And what I am afraid of is that we will be in a situation like 

FEMA was last year. There were ice storms, there were floods; so 

they had to kind of figure it out, all in a number of different emergencies at the same time. 

FEMA did a better job. But we do really still get a seat-of-yourpants rather than a nimble emergency response from FEMA. And 

part of it is that preparedness is a whole lot more than, you know, 

making sure that there is water on the ground, is making sure that 

there are people on the ground prepared to serve people, as Mr. 

Riggen says. 

One thing to look at is how would you get people door to door 

in an earthquake? Could you do it? As Mr. Riggen said, if you don’t 

do it in the first week, forget about it; they are going to try to make 

their way to a shelter. 

So we would like to see some kind of case in point in operation 

because of our exasperation from the community, from complaints 

from the community throughout the years on case management following Katrina. 

We use these hearings as assignments and as problem-solving 

missions. We do not gather information at hearings. We can read 

the report. We use it to cross-examine the government officials, to 

hear further from those in the private and nongovernment sector, 

and then to try to figure out how to actually get something done. 

And we measure ourselves and the agency by which—by the notion 

of whether out of the hearing has come concrete action that, at the 

end of the year, we can point to. And that is why FEMA received 

so much criticism before, because we saw it, Mr. Manning. We 

hadn’t accomplished very much, and we hadn’t gotten FEMA to accomplish more. 

We were very quick to commend FEMA for very significant improvement that was made and, frankly, not slow to criticize FEMA 

when people kept coming—from Mississippi and Louisiana, in particular—to complain particularly about case management. 

We had one of the worst hearings in my career in the Congress 

regarding people who were left in trailers for the longest time and 

regarding the most vulnerable people under Katrina. These were 

the people who lived alone, who were disabled, who were able to 

care for themselves when they were elderly; and FEMA told them 

their time was up. And they never had any place to go before and 

they didn’t have any place to go then. 

39 

And then FEMA said, But we are providing you with a place and 

FEMA was providing them with a place. And we had HUD before. 

HUD said, That’s right, FEMA’s right; we have got the place. 

And what was not in place was the case management, somebody 

who would take that person—not as a statistic, as somebody who 

is blind and lives alone and now is being told to go to some faroff county to live alone, but as somebody with a case manager who 

would have been willing to go to that adjoining county to live if set 

up with the proper case management. 

That is complicated work, but we are convinced it can be done; 

and it is a standard that we know your administration is committed to. 

May we thank each and every one of you for very useful testimony and we will hold all concerned, those from the private sector, 

accountable. And we know we have an administration that does 

want to improve in this regard. 

This hearing is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 4:31 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.] 

40 


Insert offset folio 7 here 52957.007
41 


Insert offset folio 8 here 52957.008
42 


Insert offset folio 9 here 52957.009
43 


Insert offset folio 10 here 52957.010
44 


Insert offset folio 11 here 52957.011
45 


Insert offset folio 12 here 52957.012
46 


Insert offset folio 13 here 52957.013
47 


Insert offset folio 14 here 52957.014
48 


Insert offset folio 15 here 52957.015
49 


Insert offset folio 16 here 52957.016
50 


Insert offset folio 17 here 52957.017
51 


Insert offset folio 18 here 52957.018
52 


Insert offset folio 19 here 52957.019
53 


Insert offset folio 20 here 52957.020
54 


Insert offset folio 21 here 52957.021
55 


Insert offset folio 22 here 52957.022
56 


Insert offset folio 23 here 52957.023
57 


Insert offset folio 24 here 52957.024
58 


Insert offset folio 25 here 52957.025
59 


Insert offset folio 26 here 52957.026
60 


Insert offset folio 27 here 52957.027
61 


Insert offset folio 80 here 52957.080
62 


Insert offset folio 81 here 52957.081
63 


Insert offset folio 82 here 52957.082
64 


Insert offset folio 83 here 52957.083
65 


Insert offset folio 84 here 52957.084
66 


Insert offset folio 85 here 52957.085
67 


Insert offset folio 86 here 52957.086
68 


Insert offset folio 87 here 52957.087
69 


Insert offset folio 88 here 52957.088
70 


Insert offset folio 89 here 52957.089
71 


Insert offset folio 28 here 52957.028
72 


Insert offset folio 29 here 52957.029
73 


Insert offset folio 30 here 52957.030
74 


Insert offset folio 31 here 52957.031
75 


Insert offset folio 32 here 52957.032
76 


Insert offset folio 33 here 52957.033
77 


Insert offset folio 34 here 52957.034
78 


Insert offset folio 35 here 52957.035
79 


Insert offset folio 36 here 52957.036
80 


Insert offset folio 37 here 52957.037
81 


Insert offset folio 38 here 52957.038
82 


Insert offset folio 39 here 52957.039
83 


Insert offset folio 40 here 52957.040
84 


Insert offset folio 41 here 52957.041
85 


Insert offset folio 42 here 52957.042
86 


Insert offset folio 43 here 52957.043
87 


Insert offset folio 44 here 52957.044
88 


Insert offset folio 45 here 52957.045
89 


Insert offset folio 46 here 52957.046
90 


Insert offset folio 47 here 52957.047
91 


Insert offset folio 48 here 52957.048
92 


Insert offset folio 49 here 52957.049
93 


Insert offset folio 50 here 52957.050
94 


Insert offset folio 51 here 52957.051
95 


Insert offset folio 52 here 52957.052
96 


Insert offset folio 53 here 52957.053
97 


Insert offset folio 54 here 52957.054
98 


Insert offset folio 55 here 52957.055
99 


Insert offset folio 56 here 52957.056
100 


Insert offset folio 57 here 52957.057
101 


Insert offset folio 58 here 52957.058
102 


Insert offset folio 59 here 52957.059
103 


Insert offset folio 60 here 52957.060
104 


Insert offset folio 61 here 52957.061
105 


Insert offset folio 62 here 52957.062
106 


Insert offset folio 63 here 52957.063
107 


Insert offset folio 64 here 52957.064
108 


Insert offset folio 65 here 52957.065
109 


Insert offset folio 66 here 52957.066
110 


Insert offset folio 67 here 52957.067
111 


Insert offset folio 68 here 52957.068
112 


Insert offset folio 69 here 52957.069
113 


Insert offset folio 70 here 52957.070
114 


Insert offset folio 71 here 52957.071
115 


Insert offset folio 72 here 52957.072
116 


Insert offset folio 73 here 52957.073
117 


Insert offset folio 74 here 52957.074
118 


Insert offset folio 75 here 52957.075
119 


Insert offset folio 76 here 52957.076
120 


Insert offset folio 77 here 52957.077
121 


Insert offset folio 78 here 52957.078
122 


Insert offset folio 79 here 52957.079
123 


Insert offset folio 90 here 52957.090
124 


Insert offset folio 91 here 52957.091
125 


Insert offset folio 92 here 52957.092
126 


Insert offset folio 93 here 52957.093
127 


Insert offset folio 94 here 52957.094
128 


Insert offset folio 95 here 52957.095
129 


Insert offset folio 96 here 52957.096
130 


Insert offset folio 97 here 52957.097
131 


Insert offset folio 98 here 52957.098
132 


Insert offset folio 99 here 52957.099
133 


Insert offset folio 100 here 52957.100
134 


Insert offset folio 101 here 52957.101
135 


Insert offset folio 102 here 52957.102
136 


Insert offset folio 103 here 52957.103
137 


Insert offset folio 104 here 52957.104
138 


Insert offset folio 105 here 52957.105
139 

Æ 


Insert offset folio 106 here 52957.106