Department of Homeland Security 

Office of Inspector General 

Opportunities to Improve FEMA’s 
 


Public Assistance Appeals Process
 
 

OIG-11-49 March 2011 
Office ofInspector General 

U.S. Department of Homeland Security 

Washington, DC 25028 

Homeland 

Security MAR 2 2011 

Preface 

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Office ofInspector General (DIG) was 

established by the Homeland Security Act of2002 (Public Law 107-296) by amendment 

to the Inspector General Act of1978. This is one of a series of audit, inspection, and 

special reports published as part of our oversight responsibilities to promote economy, 

effectiveness, and efficiency within the department. 

This report addresses the strengths and weaknesses ofthe Federal Emergency Management 

Agency's Public Assistance appeals process. We contracted with the independent public 

accounting firm of Foxx & Company to perform the audit. The contract required that Foxx 

& Company perform its audit according to generally accepted government auditing 

standards. 

Foxx & Company is responsible for the attached auditor's report dated, February 3, 2010, 

and the conclusions expressed in the report. 

The recommendations herein have been developed with the best knowledge available to 

our contractor. We trust that this report will result in more effective, efficient, and 

economical operations. We express our appreciation to all who contributed to the 

preparation ofthis report. 

Matt adacki 

Assistant Inspector General 

Office of Emergency Management Oversight 
February 3, 2011 

Mr. Matt Jadacki 

Assistant Inspector General for Emergency Management Oversight 

Office of Inspector General 

Department of Homeland Security 

245 Murray Drive, SW, Building 410 

Washington, DC 20528 

Dear Mr. Jadacki: 

Foxx & Company performed an audit of the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s 

(FEMA) Public Assistance appeals process. The audit was performed according to 

Task Order No. TPDFIGBPA070007, Task Order No. 0001, dated September 28, 2009. 

This report presents the results of the audit and includes recommendations to improve 

FEMA’s timeliness in processing appeals, appeal decision reporting, and service to 

Public Assistance applicants. 

Our audit was conducted according to applicable Government Auditing Standards, July 

2007 revision. The audit was a performance audit as defined by Chapter 1 of the 

Standards, and included a review and report of program activities with a compliance 

element. We did not perform a financial audit, the purpose of which would be to render 

an opinion on the agency’s financial statements. 

We appreciate the opportunity to have conducted this audit. Should you have any 

questions, or if we can be of any further assistance, please call me at (513) 639-8843. 

Sincerely, 

Foxx & Company 

Martin W. O’Neill 

Partner 
Table of Contents/Abbreviations 

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


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

Results of Audit..........................................................................................................................4
 


Processing Delays ..................................................................................................................4
 
 

Recommendations..................................................................................................................8
 
 

Management Comments and Contractor Analysis ................................................................8 
 


Second-Level Appeals Tracking and Reporting ..................................................................10 
 


Recommendations................................................................................................................12
 
 

Management Comments and Contractor Analysis ..............................................................12 
 


Opportunities to Better Serve PA Applicants ......................................................................13 
 


Recommendations................................................................................................................16
 
 

Management Comments and Contractor Analysis ..............................................................16 
 


Appendixes 

Appendix A: Purpose, Scope, and Methodology .................................................................18 
 


Appendix B: Management Comments on the Draft Report .................................................20 
 


Appendix C: Report Distribution.........................................................................................25 
 


Abbreviations 

CFR Code of Federal Regulations 
 


DHS Department of Homeland Security 
 


FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency 
 


FY fiscal year 
 


OIG Office of Inspector General 
 


PA Public Assistance 
 


USC United States Code 
 


Opportunities to Improve FEMA’s Public Assistance Appeals Process 
OIG
 
 

Department of Homeland Security 

Office of Inspector General 

Executive Summary 

Improvements are needed in the Federal Emergency Management 

Agency’s process for resolving Public Assistance Program appeals. 

The Public Assistance Program provides assistance for emergency 

work and permanent work after a presidentially declared disaster. 

Project worksheets provide the basis for awarding grants and 

document the location, damage description, scope of work, and cost 

estimates for each project. Local governments applying for grant 

funds can appeal Federal Emergency Management Agency 

decisions concerning project eligibility or ineligible costs. The 

appeal process provides an opportunity for applicants to have 

eligibility and funding issues resolved. 

Although delays occurred at all levels, the delays within 

headquarters were the most significant. As a result of the delays, 

appeals remained open for long periods and issues concerning 

project eligibility and costs remained unresolved. 

The agency’s tracking system did not include the time regional 

staff took to review and forward second-level appeals to 

headquarters; only the headquarters time was reported. As a result, 

the tracking system understated the time required to resolve 

second-level level appeals. The regional time averaged about 110 

days for second-level appeals. 

Also, the agency did not have an effective process for providing 

feedback on appeals. It was difficult for states to provide 

applicants information on the status of open appeals. In addition, 

although applicants can view past second appeal decisions online, 

the online system has not been updated with case information since 

October 2009. 

We are making seven recommendations to improve the agency’s 

timeliness in processing appeals, appeal decision reporting, and 

service to Public Assistance applicants. The agency’s response to 

our recommendations is summarized and evaluated in the body of 

this report and included in its entirety as appendix B. 

Opportunities to Improve FEMA’s Public Assistance Appeals Process 

Page 1 
Background 

Under the Stafford Act (42 USC 5121 et seq.), a Governor may 

request declaration of a major disaster when effective response and 

recovery are beyond the capabilities of the state and affected local 

governments. The Stafford Act defines the Federal Emergency 

Management Agency’s (FEMA’s) role during a declared disaster. 

One of the grant programs available to assist response and 

recovery is the Public Assistance (PA) grant program. Under the 

PA program, FEMA provides grants to state and local government 

agencies, authorized tribal organizations, and specific types of 

nonprofit organizations to help them respond to and recover from a 

presidentially declared disaster. The PA program provides 

assistance for emergency work (such as debris removal) and 

permanent work (such as repairing and replacing damaged 

buildings, utilities, roads, and bridges). Project worksheets provide 

the basis for awarding grants and document the location, damage 

description, scope of work, and cost estimates for each project. 

The PA program is a supplemental assistance grant program 

through which FEMA reimburses applicants for eligible disasterrelated expenses. The program does not fund the full cost of 

recovery. The PA program provides grants, at a federal cost share 

of not less than 75%, for eligible projects. States and applicants 

bear the non-federal share of eligible project costs and the cost of 

any work that is not eligible under the Stafford Act and FEMA’s 

regulations. 

Federal, state, and local officials each play a significant role in 

administering the PA funding process. FEMA manages the 

program, approves grants, and provides technical assistance to 

states and applicants. The state is the grantee and the local 

government or equivalent entity is the subgrantee or applicant that 

receives the funding. The states educate potential applicants, work 

with FEMA to manage the program, and implement and monitor 

grants awarded under the program. Applicants are responsible for 

identifying damages, submitting PA requests, and completing 

recovery efforts approved under the program. 

Applicants for grant funds can appeal FEMA decisions concerning 

project eligibility or costs. The appeals process provides an 

opportunity for applicants to have eligibility and funding issues 

resolved. Appeals of FEMA decisions can be filed at any time 

during the recovery process, including during project closeout. 

Opportunities to Improve FEMA’s Public Assistance Appeals Process 
 

Page 2 
 
 

There are two levels of appeal. If FEMA denies a project decision, 

the applicant can file a first-level appeal. An applicant has 60 days 

to file a written appeal with supporting documentation to the state. 

The state then has 60 days to review the appeal and forward it to 

the FEMA regional office. The Regional Administrator must 

provide a written decision to the state within 90 days of the firstlevel appeal. 

If the first-level appeal is denied, the applicant and state each have 

another 60 days to process a second-level appeal. The regional 

office reviews the second-level appeal and forwards it to 

headquarters, where a decision is required within 90 days of receipt. 

The process and time limits for appealing funding decisions are 

established in Title 44 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 

§ 206.206. Figure 1 describes the appeals process. 

Figure1. FEMA’s Public Assistance Appeals Process 

FEMA makes 

project 

decision 

Applicant 

accepts 

decision 

State reviews the 

appeal and forward a 

recommendation to 

FEMA within 60 Days 

FEMA regional 

administrator reviews 

applicant appeal and 

state recommendation 

and makes a decision 

within 90 days 

Additional 

Information is 

gathered from 

applicant if 

needed 

Applicant 

Applicant 

Applicant 

Applicant 

FEMA regional 

administrator 

approves 

applicant’s 

appeal 

Applicant may 

file second 

appeal to state 

within 60 days 

State reviews the 

appeal and forwards 

a recommendation 

to the FEMA region 

within 60 days 

FEMA headquarters 

reviews applicant 

appeal and state 

recommendation and 

makes a final 

decision within 90 

days 

Additional 

Information is 

gathered from 

applicant if 

needed 

Additional 

Information is 

gathered from 

applicant if 

needed 

Additional 

Information is 

gathered from 

applicant if 

needed 

Yes 

Yes 

No 

Applicant files 

appeal to state 

within 60 days 

No 

No Appeal 

No further 

appeal 

Opportunities to Improve FEMA’s Public Assistance Appeals Process 
 


Page 3
 
 
Results of Audit 
 

To provide applicants timely appeal decisions, FEMA needs to improve its 

processing procedures, database tracking system, and status feedback process. 

These areas for improvement are discussed in the following sections. 

Processing Delays 

Delays occurred at all processing levels: applicant, state, FEMA regional, 

and FEMA headquarters. As a result of the delays, appeals remained open 

for long periods and issues concerning project eligibility and costs 

remained unresolved. 

Applicant and State Delays 

Summary data on the time it took applicants to submit appeals 

were not maintained. Our sample of 30 first-level appeal case files 

showed that applicants submitted 83% of the appeals within the 

required 60-day period. However, when the appeal was not 

submitted on time, FEMA procedures allowed the region to 

determine whether the applicant’s appeal would still be accepted. 

Regions were inconsistent in denying late appeals. Some officials 

were more concerned about the merits of the appeal rather than 

time and made decisions on a case-by-case basis. 

State officials are required to submit applicant appeals to FEMA 

within 60 days of receiving an appeal from an applicant. However, 

the officials said there have been periods when workload or other 

priorities prevented timely action on appeals. None of the five 

states we visited kept summary data on compliance. Our review of 

30 first-level appeal cases showed that states forwarded 70% of the 

appeals to FEMA within 60 days. 

State interactions with FEMA regions were inconsistent and 

contributed to appeals-processing delays. For example, upon 

receiving the applicant’s appeal letter, states sometimes provided a 

copy to the region. This practice alerted FEMA that an appeal was 

being reviewed at the state level and provided an opportunity for 

follow-up if the 60-day period was approaching. Other states did 

not follow this practice. Also, some states did not submit appeals 

timely because some regional officials were willing to process late 

requests. 

Opportunities to Improve FEMA’s Public Assistance Appeals Process 
 

Page 4 
 
FEMA Regional Delays 

Delays existed in processing first-level appeals in the three regions 

sampled. The regions took more than 90 days to make decisions 

on 17 (57%) of the 30 appeal cases. In addition, data provided by 

the three regions showed that a wide range of processing times 

occurred on first-level appeals (see table 1). 

Table1. FEMA Regional Office Processing Time 

First-Level Appeals Processed 

October 2008 through February 2010 

Region 

Average 

Processing 

Days 

Completed 

in 90 Days 

A 73 85% 

B 132 39% 

C 145 27% 

Staffing methods used by the regions accounted for some of the 

time variances. One region did not assign staff just to resolve 

appeals. Program specialists had competing job priorities, 

including deployments to active disasters and project closeout 

duties. A second region used staff specifically assigned to evaluate 

appeals. Another region also used specifically assigned staff at 

one of its two recovery offices. The assigned staff (FEMA staff or 

contractors) maintained more subject matter expertise and focused 

on processing appeals. According to FEMA officials, regions that 

used assigned staff were more likely to process appeals in a timely 

manner. 

FEMA Headquarters Delays 

Headquarters officials said that second-level appeal decisions 

generally exceeded the established regulatory timeframes. As 

shown in table 2, the average number of days for second-level 

appeal processing has consistently exceeded the 90-day 

requirement.1

 For example, during fiscal years (FYs) 2009 and 

2010, the average processing times were 194 and 227 days, 

respectively. During the 2-year period, headquarters issued 178 

second-level appeal decisions, 16 of which took more than a year 

to process. 

1

 The averages shown in table 2 were calculated after the agency’s tracking system errors were corrected. 

See the finding later in this report concerning FEMA’s second-level appeal tracking system. 

Opportunities to Improve FEMA’s Public Assistance Appeals Process 

Page 5 
 

 

Table 2. Average Processing Time for Second-Level Appeals 

Fiscal 

Year 

Average 

Number 

of Days 

2003 163 

2004 139 

2005 137 

2006 172 

2007 223 

2008 180 

2009 194 

2010 * 227 

* FY 2010 from October 2009 through February 2010 

Source: FEMA Headquarters PA appeal tracker reports on issued 

decisions 

Our sample of 40 second-level appeal cases at headquarters 

illustrated that the structure of the PA approval process and the 

complexities of the appeals process contributed to the delays. 

FEMA officials agreed with this observation. After the PA 

program officials prepared and approved draft appeal decisions, 

the cases were sent to the Office of Chief Counsel for review and 

approval. After approval by the Office of Chief Counsel, the 

appeal cases were sent to the Disaster Assistance Directorate front 

office for final review and approval. If any clarification or 

additional support was needed, the cases were returned to the 

various headquarters offices. FEMA officials said that the 

respective reviewing officials were not always available to 

complete reviews in a timely manner because of their other duties. 

FEMA management has not made second-level appeal processing 

a high priority. Various offices involved in the process were not 

given guidelines to complete work within a specific timeframe. 

Also, no overall goals were established to reduce appeal backlog. 

When priorities were established, positive results occurred. For 

example, in February 2010, FEMA headquarters had 63 active 

second-level appeals in process. Four of these appeals had been 

waiting for a decision for more than a year. When FEMA made 

appeals a priority, the backlog of pending appeal cases was quickly 

reduced to 27 cases. 

Opportunities to Improve FEMA’s Public Assistance Appeals Process 

Page 6 
Regions and headquarters track first- and second-level appeals, 

respectively. FEMA does not have a single appeals-tracking 

system to highlight problem cases. A reliable tracking system is 

needed to ensure that appeals are processed in a timely manner. 

Without such a system, cases could be misplaced for long periods, 

adding to the already lengthy appeals-processing time. In one 

region, records showed that a state mistakenly sent 25 first- and 

second-level appeals to the regional office rather than the local 

recovery office. Delays occurred until the recovery office detected 

the problem and started processing the appeals. Records from 

other regional offices showed that six second-level appeal cases 

were misplaced from 10 to 33 months before they were located and 

normal processing began. 

The PA appeal process can take longer if the Regional 

Administrator or FEMA headquarters officials request additional 

information or technical advice on an appeal in order to reach a 

decision. Requests for additional documentation or information do 

not count against FEMA’s region or headquarter processing time 

standards. The time that passes for applicants to respond is not 

tracked by FEMA. FEMA officials said that such requests were 

rare and records are not kept on the frequency of requests or 

response times. According to FEMA officials, requests for 

additional documentation or information resulting in delays are 

rare and more likely to occur at FEMA headquarters than in the 

regions. FEMA does not keep records on the number of requests 

or the time period for the delays that occur from the additional 

requests. As a result, this causes delays in the process but they are 

not recorded. 

In December 2009, the Department of Homeland Security Office 

of Inspector General (DHS/OIG) reported2

 that FEMA did not 

have an agency-wide system for tracking appeals from submission 

dates to final determinations. In response, FEMA agreed to design 

an integrated appeals-tracking system. The new system will serve 

the needs of PA staff in the regions and headquarters. At the time 

of our review, the system was not in place, and FEMA officials 

told us it was considered a long-term goal. 

Conclusion 

Delays in processing appeals impact the applicant, the state, and 

FEMA operations. Until an appeal is decided, applicants have to 

2 Assessment of FEMA’s Public Assistance Program Policies and Procedures (OIG-10-26, December 

2009). 

Opportunities to Improve FEMA’s Public Assistance Appeals Process 

Page 7 
obtain other sources of funds to complete projects or pay 

contractors. Delays increase state and FEMA administrative costs 

of monitoring appeals and responding to inquiries concerning the 

status of appeals. 

Recommendations 

We recommend that the Associate Administrator, Response and 

Recovery: 

Recommendation #1: Develop and implement procedures that— 

�	 

�	 

�	 

Require states to notify the appropriate FEMA region when 

an applicant submits an appeal, 

Require regions to follow up with the states on individual 

appeals that have not been forwarded to the region within 

the required timeframes, and 

Provide adequate staffing to expedite the resolution of 

appeals so that the mandated timeframes are met. 

Recommendation #2: Analyze the headquarters’ second-level 

appeals process and identify opportunities for improved 

effectiveness, such as establishing backlog reduction goals and 

standards for key steps in the process. 

Recommendation #3: Establish realistic, achievable milestones to 

expedite FEMA-wide plans to develop and implement an 

integrated agency-wide appeals tracking system that will provide 

more visibility over the entire appeals process. 

Management Comments and Contractor Analysis 

FEMA did not concur with the first two parts of recommendation 

#1. However, FEMA did concur on the third part of the 

recommendation. 

With respect to parts one and two of recommendation #1, FEMA 

said that the regulations do not provide a basis to require states to 

notify regional offices in advance of submitting appeals received 

from applicants to the regional office. FEMA said that the states 

and regions have and will continue to coordinate closely on Public 

Assistance issues, including appeals. FEMA also said that it is the 

state’s responsibility, as a grantee, to forward an appeal to a FEMA 

regional office within the regulatory timeframe. 

Opportunities to Improve FEMA’s Public Assistance Appeals Process 

Page 8 
We agree that FEMA attempts to work closely with the state 

grantees on Public Assistance issues. However, because our audit 

disclosed that 30% of the appeals received by the state from 

applicants were not forwarded to the regional office within the 60­

day requirement, we believe the states should be required to notify 

the regional office when an appeal is received. We further believe 

that the regional offices should follow-up on appeals that have not 

been forwarded to the region within the required timeframe. 

With respect to part three of recommendation #1, FEMA said that, 

in addition to its permanent Public Assistance staff at headquarters 

and regional offices, FEMA procured technical assistance contracts 

in 2010 that are available to the regions and headquarters for 

support in preparing first and second appeal responses. FEMA 

said the contractors will help ensure that responses are prepared 

efficiently and completed and within the regulatory timeframes. 

Final decisions on appeals will be made by FEMA and not by 

contractors. 

FEMA partially concurred with recommendation #2. FEMA said 

that by improving the second-level appeals review and concurrence 

process (through staffing additions, contracts, and improved 

tracking systems), the Public Assistance Division reduced the 

appeal backlog of 69 in 2009 to 21 by the end of 2010. FEMA’s 

actions to reduce the backlog have been effective. However, the 

effort must continue or the backlog will likely increase again. In 

this regard, we believe that FEMA should institutionalize the 

emphasis on backlog reduction by setting goals and standards for 

key steps in the process. 

FEMA acknowledges that strong internal coordination is required 

to meet the regulatory timeframes for appeal responses, and will 

continue to identify ways to streamline and improve the 

concurrence process and to establish timeframes for each step of 

the process. However, FEMA did not concur with the 

recommendation to establish separate standards or timeframes for 

individual steps in the process. FEMA said the agency was 

currently performing a Bottom Up Review of the Public Assistance 

program and will fully consider recommendations to improve 

program processes, including second-level appeals. Because 

several FEMA officials with various other job responsibilities are 

involved in the second appeal decision process, we believe that 

separate standards or timeframes would help ensure that everyone 

is held accountable for timely processing action. 

Opportunities to Improve FEMA’s Public Assistance Appeals Process 

Page 9 
 

FEMA also partially concurred with recommendation #3. FEMA 

said it is transitioning its current internal tracking software 

(WebCIMS) to the DHS approved Intranet Quorum 3 (IQ) 

tracking software. According to FEMA, the IQ will manage 

agency-wide workflow and allow users to create, review or concur 

with memos or documents. Public Assistance headquarters will 

transition processing of second-level appeals as the Agency 

migrates to the new system. 

As a long-term goal, FEMA is considering the development of an 

appeals tracking component within the Emergency Management 

Mission Integrated Environment (EMMIE) database that would 

provide applicants, states, and regions the capability to track the 

status of submitted appeals. 

The procurement of technical support contractors to expedite 

responses to appeals, the identification of ways to streamline and 

improve the appeals process including the establishment of 

timeframes for each step in the process, and efforts to improve 

appeals tracking are positive steps toward improving the timeliness 

of the appeals process. 

However, with respect to parts ones and two of recommendation 

#1, we continue to believe that FEMA should require the states to 

notify the appropriate FEMA region when an applicant submits an 

appeal. We also believe that the regions should follow up with the 

states on individual appeals that have not been forwarded to the 

region within the required 60 day timeframe. 

Within 90-days, the Associate Administrator, Response and 

Recovery, needs to outline specific corrective actions, with 

supporting documentation, requiring the states’ to notify the 

appropriate FEMA region when appeals are received from 

applicants and requiring the region to follow up when delays occur 

at the state-level. The Administrator’s actions need to develop a 

plan to ensure that the states provide appeals received from 

applicants to the regions within the required 60-day timeline. 

Second-Level Appeals Tracking and Reporting 

The tracking system used to monitor second-level appeals was inaccurate. 

It did not include the time regional staff takes to forward second-level 

appeal cases to headquarters and used incorrect formulas to calculate 

processing times. As a result, the actual time elapsed in the second-level 

appeals process was understated. 

Opportunities to Improve FEMA’s Public Assistance Appeals Process 

Page 10 
Regional Office Second-Level Appeal Processing 

According to 44 CFR 206.206, FEMA headquarters is required to 

provide a decision within 90 days of receipt of an appeal. FEMA’s 

procedures called for the 90-day response time to start when the 

second-level appeal is received in headquarters and entered into 

the database. Based on our discussions with regional and 

headquarters officials, the start of the 90-day period can be 

interpreted in different ways. Some officials said the regulations 

do not require the time spent by the region to process second-level 

appeals to be included in the overall time. Other officials believe 

that because all delays affect the applicant, the second-level 

appeals-processing time should start when the FEMA region 

receives the request. 

Our review of 30 second-level appeals cases completed during FYs 

2009 and 2010 showed that it took an average of about 110 days 

from the time regions received the appeal to the time headquarters 

received it. The delay occurred because headquarters did not 

provide guidance to regional offices on the timeframes expected to 

prepare the second-level appeal package. Guidance was also not 

provided on the extent of review effort expected at the regional 

level. These days were not considered part of the 90-day 

requirement within FEMA’s tracking system. As a result, the 90­

day required time period was effectively extended to 200 days. 

Incorrect Calculation of Processing Times 

In March 2010, we identified that the second-level appeals tracking 

system was reporting incorrect data to FEMA officials. Our 

review showed that errors were made during the calculation of how 

long it took to process second-level appeals. 

From October 1, 2008, through February 2010, FEMA recorded 

178 decisions. Our analysis of the timeframes for these decisions 

showed that in 129 cases (approximately 70%), the processing 

times were overstated by an average of more than 200 days. We 

provided this information to headquarters officials. They 

concluded that undetected inaccuracies occurred during a software 

conversion. As a result, incorrect formulas were used to calculate 

how long it took to process some of the second-level appeals. 

FEMA changed the formulas, and subsequent reports were 

accurate. The corrected reports were used to compare second-level 

appeals processing delays. 

Opportunities to Improve FEMA’s Public Assistance Appeals Process 

Page 11 
 

Conclusion 

The tracking system understated the processing time because it did 

not track the time regional staff took to forward second-level 

appeal cases to headquarters. In addition, the processing time 

reported in the tracking system for second-level appeals included 

incorrect formulas, which made the report inaccurate. As a result, 

the processing times reported in the database tracking system did 

not provide a reliable source of information to FEMA officials and 

other interested parties concerning compliance with the required 

90-day processing timelines. 

Recommendations 

We recommend that the Associate Administrator, Response and 

Recovery: 

Recommendation #4: Establish time standards for the regional 

work performed on second-level appeals and include this time in 

the 90-day period that FEMA headquarters has to issue a final 

decision on a second-level appeal. 

Recommendation #5: Establish procedures and appropriate 

controls to ensure that the second-level appeals data tracking 

system is reporting accurate data. 

Management Comments and Contractor Analysis 

FEMA partially concurred with recommendation #4. FEMA 

interprets 44 CFR §206.206(c)(3), consistent with Section 423 of 

the Stafford Act, to mean that when the Assistant Administrator 

receives the second-level appeal he/she has 90 days in which to 

render a decision regarding that appeal. Second-level appeals often 

identify new issues that were not raised in the first appeal, and 

may include documentation to support those new arguments. The 

regions provide the initial review of second-level appeals and 

supporting documentation and provide a recommendation in the 

Regional Administrator's Memorandum to the Assistant 

Administrator. FEMA said it does not plan to revise timeframes 

in the appeals process beyond what is currently expressed in the 

Stafford Act and appeals regulation. 

FEMA said it will continue to actively identify ways to 

streamline the appeals review process, including reducing the 

time that regions review and transmit second appeals to 

headquarters. For example, FEMA is working to establish an 

Opportunities to Improve FEMA’s Public Assistance Appeals Process 

Page 12 
 

 

electronic file sharing system that will allow regions to transmit 

appeal documents electronically. 

Because all delays affect the applicant, we believe FEMA’s 

interpretation of when the 90-day requirement for second-level 

decisions should start is too narrow. FEMA’s interpretation would 

not include the average of 110 days that it took for the regions to 

forward a second-level appeal to headquarters. The interpretation 

effectively increases the 90-day limit to about 200 days. The 

Associate Administrator, Response and Recovery, needs to 

reconsider the exclusion of regional processing time from the 

required second-level response time. Within 90 days, the 

Associate Administrator needs to outline specific actions that will 

decrease the time taken for processing and responding to secondlevel appeals and develop a plan to ensure that the corrective 

actions are implemented as intended. 

FEMA concurred with recommendation #5. FEMA established a 

new internal appeals tracking system in January 2010. The 

tracking system requires Headquarters PA Division and all 

Regions to submit monthly reports that include a list of first and 

second appeals, the issue and amount disputed, status of appeal 

reviews, and final decisions. This tracking system helps ensure 

accurate reporting on second appeals. 

The establishment of a new internal appeals tracking system in 

January 2010 that requires monthly reports will help ensure that 

accurate reporting on second appeals occurs. In addition, the 

electronic transmission of second-level appeal documents from the 

regions to headquarters will be a positive step in improving the 

timeliness of second-level appeal processing. 

Within 90 days, the Associate Administrator, Response and 

Recovery, needs to provide a plan to ensure that the 

implementation of the proposed actions proceed as intended. 

Opportunities to Better Serve PA Applicants 

FEMA needs an effective process for providing feedback on the status of 

appeals to applicants. Applicants said it was difficult to follow the status 

of their appeals, and in some cases they have been unable to obtain their 

status. For several years, FEMA used its website to provide applicants 

and program officials with information on second-level appeal decisions. 

However, FEMA stopped entering new decision information into the site 

in October 2009. As a result, applicants, as well as state and FEMA 

Opportunities to Improve FEMA’s Public Assistance Appeals Process 

Page 13 
officials, did not have accurate information on the status of appeals or 

decisions. 

In compliance with the Government Performance and Results Act, the 

goal of FEMA’s PA program is to provide and deliver public assistance 

efficiently, effectively, and consistently with increased customer 

satisfaction. The agency’s strategic plan commits to provide timely 

disaster assistance to communities. In accordance with 44 CFR § 206.206, 

applicants have an opportunity to request reconsideration of decisions 

regarding funding. Officials said that applicants who file an appeal are to 

be treated fairly and receive accurate and timely information on the status 

of appeals. 

Status of Appeals 

Applicants who filed appeals were critical of FEMA delays and 

had difficulty determining the status of the appeals or the reasons 

for delays. Applicants told us that FEMA’s appeals process was 

not customer friendly. Under the existing appeal structure, the 

state was expected to follow up to resolve applicant inquiries. 

Applicants complained that meaningful feedback was not provided 

because state and FEMA points of contact were frequently not 

familiar with the appeal or not available to help. Delays also 

occurred when new staff members were assigned to review a case. 

The new reviewers required extra time to understand the issues of 

the appeal or sometimes disagreed with the previous reviewer’s 

interpretation of eligibility. 

FEMA has not provided appeal decisions within the timeframes 

required by regulations. Applicants and state officials said the 

appeals process is unfair because applicants are expected to submit 

their appeal actions within regulatory timeframes while FEMA 

takes longer than the required timeframes to make a decision. In 

addition, FEMA does not provide applicants sufficient feedback on 

the status of the appeals. 

At the time of our audit, there was no process in place for 

applicants, states, and FEMA officials to share information on the 

status of appeals. FEMA has plans to develop an agency-wide 

tracking system. However, current plans do not include providing 

applicants and state officials with access to the system. In the 

meantime, applicants and state officials suggested that joint 

meetings to discuss appeals issues would be helpful. The officials 

added that having all parties understand the issues throughout the 

process should help clarify issues, avoid time lost to request and 

review additional documentation, establish a climate for better 

Opportunities to Improve FEMA’s Public Assistance Appeals Process 

Page 14 
feedback, and reduce delays. 

Long delays and not knowing the status of an appeal have created 

financial problems and impacted applicant operations. In one case, 

an applicant could not close a project because an appeal was still 

pending. The applicant could not sell property and use the 

proceeds to help finance a school system. Another applicant had to 

establish a reserve fund to cover the potential loss of funds if 

FEMA denied the appeal. Other applicants waiting for appeal 

decisions said that they might have to borrow funds to pay 

contractors who provided a service such as debris removal. 

Permanent work (rebuilding hospitals, schools, sewer lines, etc.) 

could be delayed indefinitely until a decision is made on an appeal. 

Applicants who filed appeals also incurred costs of in-house staff 

to manage and follow up on the status of appeals. When long 

delays occurred, the applicants did not recover the extra 

administrative costs from FEMA. Also, some applicants told us 

they used consultants to manage their appeals. Long delays, 

coupled with consulting charges, reduce the benefit of the appeal 

even if the applicant wins the appeal. 

Use of Website 

For several years, FEMA entered second-level appeals information 

into its website. According to FEMA officials, the site provided 

applicants with a source for reviewing the eligibility criteria used 

to arrive at appeal decisions. Having access to documents, such as 

decision letters and case analyses on prior appeal decisions, helped 

applicants decide whether to proceed with an appeal or to prepare a 

better documented appeal package. This information also provided 

guidance to help state and FEMA officials make more accurate and 

consistent appeal decisions. 

FEMA stopped entering new decision information on its secondlevel appeal decisions to its website in October 2009. Officials 

told us that a software-related problem resulted in additional 

appeals information not being posted to the site. At the time of our 

audit, the problem still needed to be corrected. 

FEMA officials are aware that the website does not include current 

data on second-level appeals. Although the decision-related 

documents are being saved, the resources have not been allocated 

to input the data and to ensure that the site reflects complete and 

current data. 

Opportunities to Improve FEMA’s Public Assistance Appeals Process 

Page 15 
Conclusion 

Because the appeals process does not facilitate interaction with 

FEMA applicants, it is difficult for applicants to follow the status 

of their appeals. In some cases, applicants have been unable to 

obtain any status. Furthermore, delays in decisions have resulted 

in additional costs to the applicants, extended financial uncertainty 

concerning project funding, and affected applicant operations. The 

lack of accurate and timely information on the FEMA website 

prevented applicants and state and FEMA officials from having a 

valuable information resource concerning second- level appeal 

decisions. 

Recommendations 

We recommend that the Associate Administrator, Response and 

Recovery: 

Recommendation #6: Develop and implement procedures that— 

�	 

�	 

Establish communication channels to allow PA applicants 

and state officials to interact with FEMA during the appeals 

process concerning the status of appeals, and 

Authorize applicants’ and state officials’ access to the 

tracking system when it is developed. 

Recommendation #7: Provide adequate resources to resolve the 

website software problem and update the site to include all secondlevel appeal decisions. 

Management Comments and Contractor Analysis 

FEMA partially concurred with both parts of recommendation #6. 

FEMA said communication channels already exist between states 

and the FEMA regions. Although FEMA is committed to 

continuing to build and strengthen its relationship with states and 

applicants, FEMA does not agree that it should set up lines of 

communications directly with applicants. FEMA said this 

responsibility belongs to the state as the grant administrator. 

However, our audit showed that applicants were not provided 

sufficient feedback on the status of their appeals. Instead of 

communicating directly with the applicant, we believe that FEMA 

should implement a process whereby FEMA, State and applicant 

officials meet to discuss appeal issues. This interactive process 

Opportunities to Improve FEMA’s Public Assistance Appeals Process 

Page 16 
 

should enhance better feedback, help reduce appeal processing 

delays, and establish an open channel for communications 

concerning appeals issues. 

FEMA said it is considering the development of an appeals 

tracking system in the electronic tracking system that is used to 

track Public Assistance Program projects from implementation 

to closeout. The inclusion of an appeals tracking system in 

FEMA’s Public Assistance tracking system would allow 

regional offices, the states and applicants the ability to track the 

progress of first- and second-level appeals. 

FEMA concurred with recommendation #7. FEMA acknowledged 

that the online appeals database experienced delays in posting 

second-level appeal decision letters and analyses. FEMA said it is 

working diligently to update FEMA.gov, including the Public 

Assistance portion of the website. The result will be a userfriendly, easy to navigate site for the State and applicants to access 

current and past appeal decisions. FEMA will post all past appeal 

decisions after the FEMA.gov website is updated. 

The comments by FEMA are responsive to recommendations #6 

and #7. If properly implemented, the actions identified should 

address the conditions identified during the audit. Within 90 days, 

the Associate Administrator, Response and Recovery, needs to 

provide a plan to ensure that the implementation of the proposed 

actions proceed as intended. 

Opportunities to Improve FEMA’s Public Assistance Appeals Process 
 

Page 17 
 
Appendix A 

Purpose, Scope, and Methodology 

Foxx & Company audited FEMA’s Public Assistance appeals 

process. The overall audit objectives were to determine whether 

the agency was processing and reporting appeals in a timely 

manner and how to improve service to the PA applicants. The 

specific audit objectives were to— 

1.	 Evaluate the causes of applicant appeals, 

2.	 Determine whether FEMA appeal determinations comply 

with PA regulations and guidelines and are completed in a 

timely manner, 

3.	 Identify the number of cases where FEMA requested 

additional documentation and the time it took to receive it, 

4.	 Determine whether the process is efficient, 

5.	 Determine how appeals are tracked in the regions, and 

6.	 Identify what is delaying processing of appeals and what 

improvements FEMA can make to the current process. 

There are first-level and second-level appeals. Foxx & Company 

selected three FEMA regions that accounted for more than 80% of 

the second-level appeals processed at FEMA headquarters during 

FYs 2009 and 2010.3

 Because the regions do not maintain 

summary data on first-level appeal decisions, we used the same 

regions for our selection of first-level appeals to review. We 

selected 30 first-level appeal cases (10 from each region) where the 

Regional Administrator issued a decision. In two regions, we 

identified two states from each region that processed the majority 

of appeal cases and selected five appeal cases from each state. In 

the third region, the majority of the appeal cases were processed by 

one state; therefore, 10 appeal cases were selected from that state. 

We selected 30 second-level appeal cases (10 from each region 

visited) where FEMA headquarters issued a decision. We also 

selected 10 second-level appeal cases at FEMA headquarters that 

were in process during the audit period. Generally, appeal cases 

with larger disputed dollar amounts, longer processing times, and a 

mix of denials and approvals were selected. Foxx & Company’s 

methodology included interviews with officials at FEMA 

headquarters in Washington, DC, and FEMA regional offices in 

Atlanta, Georgia; Denton, Texas; and Oakland, California. In the 

FEMA regions under review, we interviewed state officials 

involved in the PA appeals process in California, Florida, 

3

 The cutoff for FY 2010 was February 2010. This period represented the most current data available at the 

time we started our audit. 

Opportunities to Improve FEMA’s Public Assistance Appeals Process 

Page 18 
Appendix A 

Purpose, Scope, and Methodology 

Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas. From each of these states, we 

also interviewed two applicants who had requested appeals after 

being denied PA funding. 

We examined FEMA policies and procedures, federal laws and 

regulations, and published reports that provided guidance on the 

PA appeals process. We obtained first-level appeal data from the 

three FEMA regions and FEMA headquarters second-level appeal 

data from the PA appeals database and the PA appeals tracker 

report. The audit field work was completed in August 2010. 

We conducted this performance audit pursuant to the Inspector 

General Act of 1978, as amended, and according to Government 

Auditing Standards, July 2007 Revision. The standards require 

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

evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our findings and 

conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that the 

evidence obtained supports the findings and conclusions based on 

our audit objectives. 

Opportunities to Improve FEMA’s Public Assistance Appeals Process 
 

Page 19 
 
Opportunities to Improve FEMA’s Public Assistance Appeals Process 
 


Page 20
 
 

LoS. l).tp~r."'fDI of Ilomc-bnd S«urily

:!ODe Sln"fl. S\\

\\NI"~_,[X. 20412

Malllad3cki

Assislant Inspccwr Gcncral

Ofl1ce of Emergency Managcment Oversight

Ofl1cc of Inspector General

U.S. Department of HOlllcJ:ll1d Sccurity

Washington. DC 20528

Re: FBlIIA's Rcsponse to DIG Draft Report: Oppor/llllitif:.f 10 III/prot'e FEMA '.f Pllblir

Aui.fUlIlce A'Jpeah PrtKe.u (09-215-EMO-FEMA)

Dear Mr. Jadacki:

TIle Depanmellt of Homeland Security's Fcdcml Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)

appreciates the opponunity to review and rc.<;pond 10 lhe Department of Homcl;md Securily

(DHS) Office of Inspeclor Gencml (DIG) repon ··Opp0r/lmitit·s to Improt'e FEMA's Public

,1s.\-isltl/lce AplJI!(Ifs PrQC/:ss (OIG Projeci No. 09-215-EMO-FEMA):' FEMA is actively

resolving Ihe issues idcnlificd in Ihe repon,

TIle OIG report analyl.es thc Public Assistance (PA) Program appeals process, The repon focuses on

whcther the Agency processes ;llld reports <lppcals in a timely l1l<lnner. The repon also includes

recommeodations to improvc timeliness in processing ;lppcals. lracking ;ll1d reponing of upPC;lls. and

service to PA applicallls,

The DIG report illdic;llcs thai delays in processing appeal!' impacl the applicanl.lhe SlatC. and FEMA

operations. The DIG repOrt <llso contcnds lhal, unlil an ;lppcal is decided. applicanls have to obtain olher

funding sources to complctc projcCls or pay contactors. In addition, lhe OIG report suggests lhal delays

in the proc~s.~ing of appeals increase State and FEMA ;ldminislrative COSIS of moniloring appeals and

responding 10 inquirics concerning the stalus of appeals.

It is imponam to kcep in mind thallhc PA Program provides supplemental assistance 10 eligible

applicanl~ for Iheir disaster-relatcd cxpcn~s. Further. as pan of the PA Program. the Stale is the grantee

for all funds under the PA progr.llll and administers the funding to applicants. 111e Stille cstilblishcs

communication procedures for providing feedbuck 10 its ;lpplic;lI\t!> regarding the status of PA projects a;;

well as the St;ltu~ of appcab..

FEMA's objective is to respond 10 all apl>cab within the 9().day regulatory timc fmllle.

However. Ihe Agency is also cOlllmitted 10 making delemlin3lions based on a thorough and fair

review of all of the information presented mlhe appcal while ensuring consistenl ;lpplic3Iion of

Appendix B 

Management Comments on the Draft Report 
FEMA's authority under the Stafford Act and implementing regulations. Appeals often consist

ofhundreds ofpages of documentation and often raise new and challenging policy issues, which

require full consideration.

FEMA has worked diligently for several years to significantly improve the PA appeals process

by (1) hiring additional staff; (2) procuring appeals support contracts; (3) improving the appeals

review and concurrence process; and (4) improving the internal appeals tracking system between

the Regions and Headquarters PA Division.

Additionally, FEMA is currently performing a Bottom Up Review (BUR) ofthe PA program to provide

a comprehensive assessment to determine ifthe program fulfills its statutory mission in the most

efficient and effective manner. The BUR will also identify changes needed to streamline the program

and improve program delivery to its customers. The PA appeals process is part ofthe ongoing BUR and

FEMA will fully consider any recommended changes to improve and streamline the appeals process.

FEMA provides responses to the OIG's recommendations in the following pages.

Processing Delays

Recommendation #1:

• Develop and implement procedures that:

• Require states to notify the appropriate FEMA region when an applicant submits an

appeal.

FEMA does not concur with this recommendation. Regulations (44 CFR §206.206(c), Appeals, Time

Limits) already require a State to forward an applicant's formal written appeal to the appropriate

Regional Administrator within 60-days ofits receipt ofthe appeal. The regulations do not provide a

basis to require States to notify Regional offices in advance ofsubmitting the appeal itself However,

States and Regions coordinate closely on PA issues including appeals, and will continue to do so.

• Require regions to follow up with the states on individual appeals that have not been

forwarded to the region within the required timeframes.

FEMA does not concur with this recommendation. As the Grantee, it is the State's responsibility to

forward an appeal to a FEMA Regional office within the regulatory timeframe. However, as stated

above, FEMA supports and encourages States and Regions to coordinate on all PA issues, including

appeals.

• Provide adequate staffing to expedite the resolution of appeals so that the mandated

timeframes are met.

FEMA concurs with this recommendation. FEMA continues to recruit and hire permanent PA staff at

Headquarters and at Regional offices. Additionally, FEMA procured technical assistance contracts in

Appendix B 

Management Comments on the Draft Report 

Opportunities to Improve FEMA’s Public Assistance Appeals Process 
 


Page 21
 
 
2010 that were available to the Regions and Headquarters for support in preparing first and second

appeal responses. The contractors are qualified to employ technical and programmatic expertise to

ensure that responses are technically sound and consistent with the laws, regulations, and policies that

govern the PA Program. This will help ensure that responses are prepared efficiently and completed

within regulatory timeframes. It is important to note, however, that all final decisions are made by

FEMA and not by contractors.

Recommendation #2:

• Analyze the headquarters' second-level appeals process and identify opportunities for

improved effectiveness, such as establishing backlog reduction goals and standards for

key steps in the process.

FEMA partially concurs with this recommendation. FEMA has reduced the second appeal backlog that

accwnulated due to an increase in the number ofsecond appeals. In 2009 there was a backlog of69

second-level appeals. By improving the second-level appeals review and concurrence process (through

staffing additions, contracts, and improved tracking systems), the PA Division reduced the appeal

backlog to 21 by the end of20IO.

FEMA acknowledges that strong internal coordination is required to meet the regulatory timeframes for

appeal responses, and will continue to identify ways to streamline and improve the concurrence process

and to establish timeframes for each step ofthe process. FEMA does not concur with the

recommendation to establish separate standards or timeframes for individual steps in the process.

In addition, as stated above, FEMA is currently performing a Bottom Up Review (BUR) ofthe PA

program and will fully consider recommendations to improve program processes, including second-level

appeals.

Recommendation #3:

• Establish realistic, achievable milestones to expedite FEMA-wide plans to develop and

implement an integrated agency-wide appeals tracking system that will provide more

visibility over the entire appeals process.

FEMA partially concurs with this recommendation. FEMA is transitioning its current internal

tracking software (WebCIMS) to the DHS approved Intranet Quorum 3 (IQ) tracking software.

IQ will manage agency-wide workflow and allow users to create, review or concur with memos

or documents. PA Headquarters will transition processing ofsecond-level appeals as the

Agency migrates to the new system. As a long-term goal, FEMA is considering the development

ofan appeals tracking component within the Emergency Management Mission Integrated

Environment (EMMIE) database that would provide applicants, states, and regions the capability

to track the status ofsubmitted appeals. These represent FEMA's short-term and long-term

objectives to improve PA appeals tracking through Agency systems.

Appendix B 

Management Comments on the Draft Report 

Opportunities to Improve FEMA’s Public Assistance Appeals Process 
 


Page 22
 
 
Second-Level Appeals Tracking and Reporting

Recommendation #4:

• Establish time standards for the regional work performed on second-level appeals and

include this time in the 90-day period that FEMA headquarters has to issue a fmal

decision on a second-level appeal.

FEMA partially concurs with this recommendation. FEMA interprets 44 CFR §206.206(c)(3),

consistent with Section 423 ofthe Stafford Act, to mean that when the Assistant Administrator

receives the second-level appeal he/she has 90 days in which to render a decision regarding that

appeal. Second-level appeals often identify new issues that were not raised in the first appeal,

and may include documentation to support those new arguments. The Regions provide the initial

review ofsecond-level appeals and supporting documentation and provide a recommendation in

the Regional Administrator's Memorandum to the Assistant Administrator. FEMA does not plan

to revise timeframes in the appeals process beyond what is currently expressed in the Stafford

Act and appeals regulation. However, FEMA will continue to actively identify ways to

streamline the appeals review process, including reducing the time that Regions review and

transmit second appeals to headquarters. For example, FEMA is working to establish an

electronic file sharing system that will allow Regions to transmit appeal documents

electronically.

Recommendation #5:

• Establish procedures and appropriate controls to ensure that the second-level appeals

data tracking system is reporting accurate data.

FEMA concurs with this recommendation. FEMA established a new internal appeals tracking system in

January 2010. The tracking system requires Headquarters PA Division and all Regions to submit

monthly reports that include a list offirst and second appeals, the issue and amount disputed, status of

appeal reviews, and final decisions. This tracking system helps ensure accurate reporting on second

appeals.

Opportunities to Better Serve PA Applicants

Recommendation #6:

Develop and implement procedures that:- Establish communication channels to allow PA

applicants and state officials to interact with FEMA during the appeals process concerning the

status of appeals.

FEMA partially concurs with this recommendation. FEMA continues its commitment to build and

strengthen its relationship with States and applicants, and understands the importance of good

communication among all stakeholders. Communication channels already exist between States and

Regions. However, FEMA does not agree that it should set up lines of communications directly with

Appendix B 

Management Comments on the Draft Report 

Opportunities to Improve FEMA’s Public Assistance Appeals Process 
 


Page 23
 
 
applicants. The State is the grant administrator for all funds under the PA program and provides

technical advice and support to applicants. The State PA Representative is the applicant's designated

point of contact to obtain FEMA assistance, and the State establishes its own protocol for providing

feedback to applicants on the status of appcals.

• Authorize applicants' and state officials' access to the tracking system when it is

developed.

FEMA partially concurs with Ihis recommendation. Authorized FEMA and State PA Representatives

can access EMMIE. EMMIE is FEMA's ck:ctronic tracking system used to track the progress of PA

Project Worksheet (PW) from project implementation to closeout. FEMA is considering the

development of an appeals tracking system in EMMIE to allow Regional Offices, the State and

applicants the ability to track the progress of first- and second-level appeals. However, FEMA does not

plan to provide access to the Agency's inlemal tracking systems, as they contain pre-decisional

infonnation. FEMA remains commilled to responding to appeals within the specified timeframes to the

greatest extent possible. FEMA Regions maintain close coordination and communication with Stutes on

PA issues, including appeals, and will continue to do so.

Recommendation #7:

• Provide adequate resources to resolve the website sortware problem and update the site

to include all second-level appeal decisions.

FEMA concurs with this recommendation. FEMA acknowledges that the online appeals database

experienced delays in posting second-level ;lppeal decision letters and analyses. FEMA is working

diligently to update FEMA.gov, including the PA portion of the website. The result will be a userfriendly, easy to navigate site for the Sialc and applicants to access current and past appeal decisions.

FEMA will post all past appeal decisions after the FEMA.gov website is updated.

Once again, thank you for the opportunity to comment on the draft report. The Department of

Homeland S<.."Curity and the Federal Emergency Management Agency look forward to working

with you on future homeland security and emergency management engagements.

M-J:- <; .;>'~ fW-....-

David Kaufman

Director

Office of Policy and Program Analysis

Appendix B 

Management Comments on the Draft Report 

Opportunities to Improve FEMA’s Public Assistance Appeals Process 
 


Page 24
 
 
Appendix C 

Report Distribution 

Department of Homeland Security 

Secretary 

Deputy Secretary 

Chief of Staff 

Deputy Chief of Staff 

General Counsel 

Executive Secretariat 

Director, GAO/OIG Liaison Office 

Assistant Secretary for Office of Policy 

Assistant Secretary for Office of Public Affairs 

Assistant Secretary for Office of Legislative Affairs 

Under Secretary, Management 

Federal Emergency Management Agency 

Administrator 

Chief of Staff 

Associate Administrator, Response and Recovery 

Deputy Associate Administrator, Response and Recovery 

Chief Financial Officer 

Director, Office of Management 

FEMA Audit Liaison (Project Number 09-215-EMO-FEMA) 

Office of Management and Budget 

Chief, Homeland Security Branch 

DHS OIG Budget Examiner 

Congress 

Congressional Oversight and Appropriations Committees, as appropriate 

Opportunities to Improve FEMA’s Public Assistance Appeals Process 
 


Page 25
 
 
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND COPIES 

To obtain additional copies of this report, please call the Office of Inspector General (OIG) at (202) 254-4100, 

fax your request to (202) 254-4305, or visit the OIG web site at www.dhs.gov/oig. 

OIG HOTLINE 

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

misconduct relative to department programs or operations: 

• Call our Hotline at 1-800-323-8603; 

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

• Email us at DHSOIGHOTLINE@dhs.gov; or 

• Write to us at: 

DHS Office of Inspector General/MAIL STOP 2600, 

Attention: Office of Investigations - Hotline, 

245 Murray Drive, SW, Building 410, 

Washington, DC 20528. 

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