Emergency Management: Preliminary Observations on FEMA's Community Preparedness Programs Related to the National Preparedness System
Published: 2009-10-01T00:00:00

Fast Facts:

Highlights:
section_title: Why GAO Did This Study
paragraphs: By preparing their families and property before an event, individuals can reduce a disaster's impact on them and their need for first responder assistance, particularly in the first 72 hours following a disaster. By law, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), located in the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), is to develop a national preparedness system (NPS)--FEMA includes community preparedness programs as part of the NPS. FEMA's budget to operate these programs made up less than one half of 1 percent of its $7.9 billion budget for fiscal year 2009. These programs include the Citizen Corps program and its partner programs, such as Fire Corps, and rely on volunteers to coordinate efforts and assist first responders in local communities. DHS's Ready Campaign promotes preparedness through mass media. This testimony provides preliminary observations on (1) challenges FEMA faces in measuring the performance of Citizen Corps, its partner programs, and the Ready Campaign and (2) actions FEMA has taken to develop a strategy to encompass how Citizen Corps, its partner programs, and the Ready Campaign operate within the context of the NPS. This testimony is based on work conducted from February 2008 to October 2009. GAO analyzed documents, such as FEMA's strategic plan, and compared reported performance data with observations from 12 site visits, selected primarily based on the frequency of natural disasters. The results are not projectable, but provide local insights.
section_title: What GAO Found
paragraphs: FEMA faces challenges measuring performance for Citizen Corps, partner programs, and the Ready Campaign because it does not have a process to verify that data for its principal performance measure--the registered number of established volunteer organizations across the country--are accurate and the Ready Campaign is not positioned to control the distribution of its message or measure whether its message is changing individuals' behavior. FEMA faces challenges ensuring that the information needed to measure the number of established, active volunteer units is accurate. For example, officials representing 17 councils GAO contacted during its site visits stated that 12 were active and 5 were not. FEMA officials said that the new online registration process FEMA plans to adopt in 2010 will result in some programs being removed from FEMA's registries. They said that FEMA expects to use the new process to collect more comprehensive data on membership and council activities. FEMA counts requests for literature, Web site hits, and the number of television or radio announcements made to gauge performance for the Ready Campaign, but FEMA does not control when its message is viewed because it relies on donated media, such as air time for television and radio announcements. Because changes in behavior can result from a variety of factors, including other campaigns, it is difficult to measure the campaign's effect on changes in individuals' behavior. FEMA's challenges measuring the performance of community preparedness programs is compounded by the fact that it has not developed a strategy to encompass how Citizen Corps, its partner programs, and the Ready Campaign are to operate within the context of the NPS. In April 2009, GAO reported that FEMA's National Preparedness Directorate (NPD), which is responsible for community preparedness, had not developed a strategic plan. GAO reported that instead of a strategic plan, NPD officials stated that they used a draft annual operating plan and Post-Katrina Act provisions to guide NPD's efforts. However, the plan's objectives do not include key elements of a strategy, such as how NPD will measure its progress meeting goals and objectives or the potential costs and types of resources and investments needed. GAO recommended that NPD develop a strategic plan to implement the NPS that contains these key elements. FEMA concurred with GAO's recommendation and told GAO that it is taking actions to strengthen strategic planning. FEMA officials stated that they are reviewing implementation plans and policy documents, such as the National Preparedness Guidelines, and that community preparedness is a key element being considered in this process. FEMA has not set a date for completion of the National Preparedness System strategy, and the extent to which Citizen Corps, its partner programs, or the Ready Campaign will be included in the final strategy is not clear. GAO will continue to assess FEMA's efforts related to community preparedness programs as part of its ongoing work. FEMA provided technical comments on a draft of this testimony, which GAO incorporated as appropriate.

section_title: Letter
paragraphs: By preparing their families and  property before an event,  individuals can reduce a disaster’s  impact on them and their need for  first responder assistance,  particularly in the first 72 hours  following a disaster. By law, the  Federal Emergency Management  Agency (FEMA), located in the  Department of Homeland Security  (DHS), is to develop a national  preparedness system (NPS)— FEMA includes community  preparedness programs as part of  the NPS. FEMA’s budget to operate  these  programs made up less than  one half of 1 percent of its $7.9  billion budget for fiscal year 2009.   These programs include the Citizen  Corps program and its partner  programs, such as Fire Corps, and  rely on volunteers to coordinate  efforts and assist first responders  in local communities. DHS’s Ready  Campaign promotes preparedness  through mass media. This  testimony provides preliminary  observations on (1) challenges  FEMA faces in measuring the  performance of Citizen Corps, its  partner programs, and the Ready  Campaign and (2) actions FEMA  has taken to develop a strategy to  encompass how Citizen Corps, its  partner programs, and the Ready  Campaign operate within the  context of the NPS. This testimony  is based on work conducted from  February 2008 to October 2009.  GAO analyzed documents, such as  FEMA’s strategic plan, and  compared reported performance  data with observations from 12 site  visits, selected primarily based on  the frequency of natural disasters.  The results are not projectable, but  provide local insights.
FEMA faces challenges measuring performance for Citizen Corps, partner  programs, and the Ready Campaign because it does not have a process to  verify that data for its principal performance measure—the registered number  of established volunteer organizations across the country—are accurate and  the Ready Campaign is not positioned to control the distribution of its  message or measure whether its message is changing individuals’ behavior.  FEMA faces challenges ensuring that the information needed to measure the  number of established, active volunteer units is accurate. For example,  officials representing 17 councils GAO contacted during its site visits stated  that 12 were active and 5 were not. FEMA officials said that the new online  registration process FEMA plans to adopt in 2010 will result in some programs  being removed from FEMA’s registries. They said that FEMA expects to use  the new process to collect more comprehensive data on membership and  council activities. FEMA counts requests for literature, Web site hits, and the  number of television or radio announcements made to gauge performance for  the Ready Campaign, but FEMA does not control when its message is viewed  because it relies on donated media, such as air time for television and radio  announcements. Because changes in behavior can result from a variety of  factors, including other campaigns, it is difficult to measure the campaign’s  effect on changes in individuals’ behavior.
FEMA’s challenges measuring the performance of community preparedness  programs is compounded by the fact that it has not developed a strategy to  encompass how Citizen Corps, its partner programs, and the Ready Campaign  are to operate within the context of the NPS. In April 2009, GAO reported that  FEMA’s National Preparedness Directorate (NPD), which is responsible for  community preparedness, had not developed a strategic plan. GAO reported  that instead of a strategic plan, NPD officials stated that they used a draft  annual operating plan and Post-Katrina Act provisions to guide NPD’s efforts.   However, the plan’s objectives do not include key elements of a strategy, such  as how NPD will measure its progress meeting goals and objectives or the  potential costs and types of resources and investments needed. GAO  recommended that NPD develop a strategic plan to implement the NPS that  contains these key elements. FEMA concurred with GAO’s recommendation  and told GAO that it is taking actions to strengthen strategic planning. FEMA  officials stated that they are reviewing implementation plans and policy  documents, such as the National Preparedness Guidelines, and that  community preparedness is a key element being considered in this process.  FEMA has not set a date for completion of the National Preparedness System  strategy, and the extent to which Citizen Corps, its partner programs, or the  Ready Campaign will be included in the final strategy is not clear. GAO will  continue to assess FEMA’s efforts related to community preparedness  programs as part of its ongoing work. FEMA provided technical comments on  a draft of this testimony, which GAO incorporated as appropriate.
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee:  Thank you for the opportunity to participate in today’s hearing to discuss  federal efforts to encourage community involvement in preparing for all- hazard emergencies. The public plays an important role in national  emergency preparedness. By preparing their families and property before  an event, individuals can often reduce a disaster’s impact on them and  their need for first responder assistance, particularly in the first 72 hours  following a disaster. For example, having at least a 72 hour supply of food  and drinking water on hand can both sustain the individual and family in a  disaster’s aftermath and reduce the immediate demands for food and  water delivered by first responders whose priority may be search and  rescue. They can also potentially support first responders as trained  volunteers, since the average person will likely be the first on the scene of  a disaster. However, research shows that Americans could be better  prepared for disasters, particularly based on two key indicators—the  degree to which people report having disaster supplies set aside and have  a household emergency plan. According to the Citizen Corps national  survey for 2007, about half (53 percent) of U.S. households had disaster  supplies in their homes, and 42 percent reported having a household  emergency plan. More than half (57 percent) of the 2007 survey  respondents said that they expected to rely on emergency responders in  the first 72 hours following a disaster. The Federal Emergency  Management Agency (FEMA) Administrator and leaders in the emergency  management community are encouraging citizens to take actions to  become more involved in preparing themselves and their communities, not  only to mitigate the effects of a disaster, but to decrease their reliance on  the federal government for goods and services during a catastrophic event  and allow governments at all levels to target resources where they are  most needed.
FEMA encourages public preparedness through the Community  Preparedness Division’s Citizen Corps program, which is designed to bring  together government and community leaders to involve citizens in all- hazards emergency preparedness and resilience, and the Ready Campaign,  which makes literature and mass media content available to spread the  preparedness message to individuals, families, and businesses. Citizen  Corps is designed to promote the collaboration between local government  and community leaders via local Citizen Corps councils.  Individual  councils are to promote preparedness activities and to encourage  volunteering with federally sponsored programs that support first  responders, referred to as Citizen Corps partner programs. Citizen Corps  promotes five partner programs, two of which are supported by FEMA— the Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) and Fire Corps. The  operating budgets for community preparedness programs currently  represent less than one-half of 1 percent of FEMA’s total budget. In fiscal  year 2009, FEMA’s overall budget was about $7.9 billion, of which about  $5.8 million was dedicated to operating community preparedness  programs and $2.1 million was for the Ready Campaign.
FEMA’s national program office officials encourage state, local, regional  and tribal governments and private and nonprofit community-based  organizations to establish and sustain local Citizen Corps councils and  partner programs, partly through federal funding for local efforts. Local  Citizen Corps councils, CERTs, and Fire Corps all are considered “grass  roots” organizations that use volunteers to operate programs in their  respective communities. Citizen Corps councils and CERT programs are  registered via the Internet and are potentially eligible to apply for federal  grant funding through the state to support their program. According to  Department of Homeland Security (DHS) data, approximately $269 million  in FEMA homeland security grants (including grants for Citizen Corps  councils, CERT, and Fire Corps) were awarded for community  preparedness projects from fiscal years 2004 through 2008. In fiscal year  2008, funding for community preparedness grants represented about 1.9  percent of the total FEMA grant funding. Specifically, in fiscal year 2008,  approximately $56 million went to community preparedness projects, out  of more than $3 billion awarded in DHS grants to strengthen prevention,  protection, response, and recovery capabilities at all levels of government.  Appendix I provides additional information on DHS grants awarded for  community preparedness purposes from fiscal year 2004 through fiscal  year 2008.
In April 2009 we issued a report that discussed, among other things, the  national preparedness system—a continuous cycle of (1) establishing  policy and doctrine, (2) planning and allocating resources, (3) conducting  training and exercises to gather lessons learned, and (4) assessing and  reporting on the training and exercises to evaluate preparedness, including  identifying any gaps in capabilities. Assessments and reports resulting  from the national preparedness system are to be used to inform decision  makers on what improvements are needed and how to target finite  resources to improve preparedness for disasters. Our report recognized  that developing and integrating the elements of the national preparedness  system is a challenge for FEMA, and more specifically the National  Preparedness Directorate (NPD), the FEMA component responsible for  carrying out the key elements of the national preparedness system, in  coordination with other federal, state, local, tribal, nonprofit, and private  sector organizations. We reported that the size and complexity of the  nation’s preparedness activities and the number of organizations  involved—both public and private—pose a significant challenge to FEMA  as it leads the nation’s efforts to develop and sustain a national  preparedness system. We further stated that, to develop an effective  system, FEMA is to coordinate and partner with a broad range of  stakeholders. As part of the nation’s preparedness system, the status of  citizen and community preparedness can affect the demands on first  responders in the immediate aftermath of a disaster.
As requested, today I will discuss our preliminary observations on (1)  what challenges, if any, FEMA faces in measuring the performance of  Citizen Corps, its partner programs, and the Ready Campaign and (2) what  actions, if any, FEMA has taken to develop a strategy to encompass how  Citizen Corps, its partner programs, and the Ready Campaign are to  operate within the context of the national preparedness system. My  comments are based on our ongoing review of Citizen Corps, its partner  programs, and the Ready Campaign requested by the Chairman of the  Committee on Homeland Security, the Chairwoman of its Subcommittee  on Transportation Security and Infrastructure Protection, and the  Chairman of this Subcommittee. The final results of this review will be  issued in a report later this year.
To address our objectives, we reviewed documentation, such as FEMA’s  strategic plan for 2008-2013, and interviewed officials at DHS’s  headquarters in Washington, D.C., and at 12 selected locations in five  states—California, Florida, Nevada, Oklahoma, and Texas. We selected  these states based on the frequency of declared natural disasters. In total,  we conducted 41 interviews covering 53 organizations in the five states.  The results from our interviews are not generalizable; however, they  provide insights into the operations of local Citizen Corps and partner  programs as well as their efforts to use Ready Campaign material to  promote individual preparedness. We also analyzed FEMA’s strategic plan  and NPD’s 2009 Operating Plan and compared these documents with  criteria in our past work that discusses the six characteristics of an  effective national strategy. In addition we reviewed and analyzed data on  the number of registered Citizen Corps and its partner programs to  determine how FEMA measures the performance of its programs and  compared FEMA’s data with the results of our work in the five states with  criteria discussing best practices for performance measurement.  Furthermore, we obtained and analyzed data on homeland security grants  awarded from fiscal years 2004 through 2008. To determine the reliability  of DHS grant data and data on the activities of FEMA Citizen Corps and  partner programs, we interviewed DHS officials about their procedures for  ensuring the accuracy of performance data and compared DHS’s  processes for compiling data on local community preparedness units with  our past work on agency performance measurement. With regard to the  Ready Campaign’s tracking survey and data on donated media, we  reviewed documents and interviewed Ready Campaign officials and Ad  Council officials to discuss their process for ensuring data accuracy. We  determined that these data were reliable for the purposes of this review.
We are conducting this performance audit from February 2008 through  October 2009 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing  standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to  obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for  our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe  that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings  and conclusions based on our audit objectives.
In summary, FEMA faces challenges measuring performance for Citizen  Corps, partner programs, and the Ready Campaign because (1) it relies on  states to verify that data for its principal performance measure—the  registered number of established volunteer organizations across the  country—are accurate and does not have a process for monitoring state  validation efforts and (2) although the Ready Campaign controls the  content of its message, it is not positioned to control the distribution of its  message or measure whether its message is changing the behavior of  individuals. FEMA officials said that FEMA expects to use a new, 2010  registration process to collect more comprehensive data on membership  and council activities. Among other things, FEMA counts requests for  literature, Web site hits, and the number of television announcements  made to gauge performance for the Ready Campaign, but FEMA does not  control when its message is viewed in various media because it relies on  donated media, such as time to air television and radio announcements.   Because changes in individuals’ behavior can be the result of a variety of  factors, including preparedness campaigns sponsored by other  organizations, it is difficult to measure the Ready Campaign’s effect on  changes in individuals’ preparedness behavior. FEMA’s challenges in  measuring the performance of citizen preparedness programs are  compounded by the fact that it has not developed a strategy to encompass  how Citizen Corps, its partner programs, and the Ready Campaign are to  operate within the context of the national preparedness system. In April  2009, we recommended that NPD develop a strategic plan to implement  the national preparedness system that contains such key elements as  goals, objectives, and how progress in achieving them will be measured.  FEMA agreed and reported that it is taking actions to strengthen strategic  planning. FEMA stated that it is reviewing implementation plans and  policy documents, such as the National Preparedness Guidelines, and  that community preparedness is a key element being considered in this  process. FEMA has not yet set a date for completion of the national  preparedness system strategy, and the extent to which Citizen Corps, its  partner programs, or the Ready Campaign will be included when the  strategy is complete is not clear. We will continue to assess FEMA’s efforts  to measure the performance of the community preparedness programs  and develop a strategy for integrating them into the national preparedness  system as part of our ongoing work.
FEMA provided technical comments on a draft of this testimony, which we  discussed with FEMA officials and incorporated as appropriate.
subsections: section_title: Background
paragraphs: The Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act of 2006 (Post- Katrina Act) required that FEMA establish the national preparedness  system to ensure that the nation has the ability to prepare for and respond  to disasters of all types, whether natural or man-made, including terrorist  attacks. The Community Preparedness Division is responsible for leading  activities related to community preparedness, including management of  the Citizen Corps program. According to fiscal year 2008 Homeland  Security Grant Guidance, the program is to bring together community and  government leaders, including first responders, nonprofit organizations,  and other community stakeholders. Serving as a Citizen Corps council,  government and nongovernment stakeholders are to collaborate in  involving community members in emergency preparedness, planning,  mitigation, response, and recovery. Councils and partner programs  register online to be included in the national program registries. The  Division also supports the efforts of non-DHS federal “partner programs,”  such as the Medical Reserve Corps, that promote preparedness and the  use of volunteers to support first responders. The CERT program’s  mission is to educate and train people in basic disaster preparedness and  response skills, such as fire safety, light search and rescue, and disaster  medical operations, using a nationally developed, standardized training  curriculum. Trained individuals can be recruited to participate on  neighborhood, business, or government teams to assist first responders.  The mission of the Fire Corps program is to increase the capacity of fire  and emergency medical service departments through the use of volunteers  in nonoperational roles and activities, including administrative, public  outreach, fire safety, and emergency preparedness education.
FEMA also is responsible for a related program, the Ready Campaign,  which works in partnership with the Ad Council, an organization that  creates public service messages, with the goals of raising public awareness  regarding the need for emergency preparedness, motivating individuals to  take steps toward preparedness, and ultimately increasing the level of  national preparedness. The program makes preparedness information  available to the public through its English and Spanish Web sites  (www.ready.gov and www.listo.gov), through printed material that can be  ordered from the program or via toll-free phone lines, and through public  service announcements (PSA). The Ready Campaign message calls for  individuals, families, and businesses to (1) get emergency supply kits, (2)  make emergency plans, and (3) stay informed about emergencies and  appropriate responses to those emergencies.
subsections: section_title: FEMA Faces Challenges Measuring Performance of Citizen Corps Programs and the Ready Campaign
paragraphs: FEMA faces challenges in measuring the performance of local community  preparedness efforts because it lacks accurate information on those  efforts. FEMA is also confronted with challenges in measuring  performance for the Ready Campaign because the Ready Campaign is not  positioned to control the placement of its preparedness messages or  measure whether its message is changing the behavior of individuals.
subsections: section_title: FEMA Faces Challenges Measuring Performance of Community Preparedness Efforts Because It Lacks Accurate Information on Local Programs
paragraphs: According to FEMA officials, FEMA promotes citizen preparedness and  volunteerism by encouraging collaboration and the creation of community  Citizen Corps, CERT, and Fire Corps programs. FEMA includes the  number of Citizen Corps councils, CERTs, and Fire Corps established  across the country as its principal performance measure. However, FEMA  faces challenges ensuring that the information needed to measure the  number of established, active units is accurate. In our past work we  reported on the importance of ensuring that program data are of sufficient  quality to document performance and support decision making. Although  not a measure under the Government Performance Result Act, FEMA  programs report the number of local units registered as a principal  performance measure; however, our work showed that the number of  active units reported may differ from the number that actually exist. For  example, as of September 2009:    Citizen Corps reported having 2,409 registered Citizen Corps councils  nationwide that encompass jurisdictions where approximately 79 percent  of the U.S. population resides. However, 12 of the 17 registered councils  we contacted during our site visits were active and 5 were not.
The CERT program reported having 3,354 registered CERTs. Of the 12  registered CERTs we visited, 11 were actively engaged in CERT activities,  such as drills, exercises, and emergency preparedness outreach, or had  been deployed to assist in an emergency or disaster situation, although 1  had members that had not been trained. One registered CERT was no  longer active.
State officials in two of the four states also said that the data on number of  registered programs might not be accurate. One state official responsible  for the Citizen Corps council and CERT programs in the state estimated  that as little as 20 percent of the registered councils were active, and the  state subsequently removed more than half of its 40 councils from the  national Web site. Officials in the other state said that the national  database is not accurate and they have begun to send e-mails to or call  local councils to verify the accuracy of registrations in their state. These  officials said that they plan to follow up with those councils that do not  respond, but they were not yet certain what they planned to do if the  councils were no longer active. These results raise questions about the  accuracy of FEMA’s data on the number of councils across the nation, and  the accuracy of FEMA’s measure that registered councils cover 79 percent  of the population nationwide.
Some change in the number of active local programs can be expected,  based on factors including changes in government leadership, voluntary  participation by civic leaders, and financial support. FEMA officials told us  that the Homeland Security Grant Program guidance designates state  officials as responsible for approving initial council and CERT  registrations and ensure that the data are updated as needed. According to  FEMA officials, however, in practice this may not occur. Community  Preparedness Division officials said that they do not monitor whether  states are regularly updating local unit registration information.
FEMA officials said that FEMA plans to adopt a new online registration  process for Citizen Corps councils and CERTs in 2010, which will likely  result in some programs being removed from FEMA’s registries. They said  that FEMA expects to use the new registration process to collect more  comprehensive data on membership and council activities. According to  FEMA officials, updating initial registration information will continue to  be the responsibility of state officials. The Citizen Corps Director noted  that the Citizen Corps program does not have the ability to require all local  units to update information, particularly councils or CERTS that receive  no federal funding. According to the Fire Corps program Acting Director, a  state advocacy program initiated in 2007 may help identify inactive  programs as well as promote the Fire Corps program. As of September  2009, there were 53 advocates in 31 states. We will continue to assess this  issue as part of our ongoing work.
section_title: The Ready Campaign Faces Challenges Measuring Performance Because It Is Not Positioned to Control the Distribution of Its Preparedness Messages and Measure Whether Its Message Effects Individual Behavior
paragraphs: Currently, the Ready Campaign measures its performance based on  measures such as materials distributed or PSAs shown. For example,  according to a DHS official, in fiscal year 2008, the Ready Campaign had    more than 99 million “hits” on its Web site,    more than 12 million pieces of Ready Campaign literature requested or  43,660 calls to the toll-free call numbers.
The Ready Campaign relies on these measures because it faces two  different challenges determining whether its efforts are influencing  individuals to be more prepared. First, the Ready Campaign is not  positioned to control the when or where its preparedness message is  viewed.  Second, the Ready Campaign is not positioned to measure  whether its message is changing the behavior of individuals.
With regard to the Ready Campaign’s ability to control the distribution of its  message, our prior work has shown that agencies whose programs rely on  others to deliver services face challenges in targeting and measuring results  in meeting ultimate goals, and when this occurs, agencies can use  intermediate measures to gauge program activities. However, according to  FEMA’s Acting Director for the Ready Campaign, funds are not available for  the Ready Campaign to purchase radio and television time to air its PSAs;  rather, the Ready Campaign relies on donations of various sources of media.  As a result, the Ready Campaign does not control what, when, or where  Ready Campaign materials are placed when the media is donated. For  example, what PSA is shown and the slots (e.g., a specific channel at a  specific time) that are donated by television, radio, and other media  companies are not under the Ready Campaign’s control, and these are not  always prime viewing or listening spots. Based on Ad Council data, the  Ready Campaign’s PSAs in 2008 were aired about 5 percent or less of the  time by English and Spanish television stations during prime time (8:00 pm  to 10:59 p.m.), and about 25 percent of the PSAs were aired from 1:00 a.m. to  4:00 a.m. Similarly, about 47 percent of English radio and about 27 percent  of Spanish radio spots were aired from midnight to 6:00 a.m. FEMA officials  said that with the release of its September 2009 PSAs, they expect increased  placement during hours where there are more viewers and listeners.
Just as the Ready Campaign has no control over the time PSAs are aired, it  does not control the type of media (e.g., radio and television) donated.  Based on Ad Council data on the dollar value of media donated to show  Ready Campaign materials (the value of the donated media is generally  based on what it would cost the Ready Campaign if the media space were  purchased), much of the value from donated media is based on space  donated in the yellow pages. Figure 1 shows the value of various types of  media donated to the Ready Campaign to distribute its message during 2008.
The Ready Campaign also faces a challenge determining the extent to  which it contributes to individuals taking action to become more  prepared—the program’s goal. Measuring the Ready Campaign’s progress  toward its goal is problematic because it can be difficult to isolate the  specific effect of exposure to Ready Campaign materials on an individual’s  level of emergency preparedness. Research indicates that there may be a  number of factors that are involved in an individual taking action to  become prepared, such as his or her beliefs as to vulnerability to disaster,  geographic location, or income. A basic question in establishing whether  the Ready Campaign is changing behavior is, first, determining the extent  to which the Ready Campaign’s message has been received by the general  population. The Ad Council conducts an annual survey to determine public  awareness of the Ready Campaign, among other things. For example, in  the Ad Council’s 2008 survey:    When asked if they had heard of a Web site called Ready.gov that  provides information about steps to take to prepare in the event of a  natural disaster or terrorist attack, 21 percent of those surveyed said  that they were aware of the Ready.gov Web site.
When asked a similar question about television, radio, and print PSAs,  37 percent of those surveyed said that they have seen or heard at least  one Ready Campaign PSA.
Another factor is isolating the Ready Campaign’s message from other  preparedness messages that individuals might have received. The Ad  Council’s 2008 survey found that 30 percent of those surveyed identified  the American Red Cross as the primary source of emergency preparedness  information; 11 percent identified the Ad Council.
While the Ad Council survey may give a general indication as to the  population’s familiarity with the Ready Campaign, it does not provide a  measure of preparedness actions taken based on the Ready Campaign’s  promotion, that is, a clear link from the program to achieving program  goals. The Ad Council reported that those who were aware of Ready  Campaign’s advertising were significantly more likely to say that they had  taken steps to prepare for disaster, but acknowledged that the Ready  Campaign could not claim full credit for the differences. Further, as the  2009 Citizen Corps survey showed, the degree to which individuals are  prepared may be less than indicated because preparedness drops  substantially when more detailed questions about supplies are asked. We  will continue to assess FEMA’s efforts to measure the performance of the  Ready Campaign as part of our ongoing work.
section_title: FEMA Has Not Developed a Strategy Encompassing How Citizen Corps, Its Partner Programs, and the Ready Campaign Are to Operate within the Context of the National Preparedness System
paragraphs: While DHS’s and FEMA’s strategic plans have incorporated efforts to  promote community preparedness, FEMA has not developed a strategy  encompassing how Citizen Corps, its partner programs, and the Ready  Campaign are to operate within the context of the national preparedness  system. An objective in DHS’s Strategic Plan for 2008-2013 to “Ensure  Preparedness” envisions empowering Americans to take individual and  community actions before and after disasters strike. Similarly, FEMA’s  Strategic Plan for 2008-2013 envisions a strategy to “Lead the Nation’s  efforts for greater personal and community responsibility for preparedness  through public education and awareness, and community engagement and  planning, including outreach to vulnerable populations.” FEMA’s Strategic  Plan delegates to the agency’s components the responsibility for developing  their own strategic plans, which are to include goals, objectives, and  strategies. FEMA’s Strategic Plan states that the components’ strategic plans  are to focus on identifying outcomes and measuring performance.
NPD has not clearly articulated goals for FEMA’s community  preparedness programs or a strategy to show how Citizen Corps, its  partner programs, and the Ready Campaign are to achieve those goals  within the context of the national preparedness system. In our past work,  we reported that desirable characteristics of an effective national strategy  include articulating the strategy’s purpose and goals; followed by  subordinate objectives and specific activities to achieve results; and  defining organizational roles, responsibilities, and coordination, including  a discussion of resources needed to reach strategy goals. In April 2009,  we reported that NPD had not developed a strategic plan that defines  program roles and responsibilities, integration and coordination  processes, and goals and performance measures for its programs. We  reported that instead of a strategic plan, NPD officials stated that they  used a draft annual operating plan and Post-Katrina Act provisions to  guide NPD’s efforts. The draft operating plan identifies NPD goals and  NPD subcomponents responsible for carrying out segments of the  operating plan, including eight objectives identified for the Division under  NPD’s goal to “enhance the preparedness of individuals, families, and  special needs populations through awareness planning and training.”  NPD’s objectives for meeting this goal do not describe desired outcomes.
For example, one of NPD’s objectives for the Community Preparedness  Division is to increase “the number of functions that CERTs will be able to  perform effectively during emergency response,” but the plan does not  describe how many and what type of functions CERTs currently perform,  what additional functions they could perform, and what it means to be  effective. NPD’s draft operating plan also does not include other key  elements of an effective national strategy, such as how it will measure  progress in meeting its goals and objectives; the roles and responsibilities  of those who will be implementing specific programs within the  Community Preparedness Division, such as Citizen Corps or Fire Corps; or  potential costs and types of resources and investments needed to meet  goals and objectives needed to implement civilian preparedness  programs. As a result, NPD is unable to provide a picture of priorities or  how adjustments might be made in view of resource constraints.
In our April 2009 report we recommended that NPD take a more strategic  approach to implementing the national preparedness system to include the  development of a strategic plan that contains such key elements as goals,  objectives, and how progress in achieving them will be measured. DHS  concurred with our recommendation and, in commenting on our report,  stated that it reported making progress in this area and is continuing to  work to fully implement the recommendation. NPD officials stated in  September 2009 that DHS, FEMA, and NPD, in coordination with national  security staff, were discussing Homeland Security Presidential Directive 8  (National Preparedness), including the development of a preparedness  strategy and an implementation strategy. They said that community and  individual preparedness were key elements of those discussions. However,  NPD officials did not state when the strategy will be completed; thus, it is  not clear to what extent it will integrate Citizen Corps, its partner  programs, and the Ready Campaign. NPD officials stated that work is  under way on revising the target capabilities, which are to include specific  outcomes, measures, and resources. NPD officials said that the draft for  public comment is expected to be issued in fiscal year 2010.
The Ready Campaign is also working to enhance its strategic direction.  According to the FEMA Director of External Affairs, the Ready  Campaign’s strategy is being revised to reflect the transition of the  program from DHS’s Office of Public Affairs to FEMA’s Office of External  Affairs, and the new FEMA Director’s approach to preparedness. Program  officials said that the Ready Campaign will have increased access to staff  and resources and is to be guided by a FEMA-wide strategic plan for  external communications.  As of September 2009 the plan was still being  developed and no date has been set for completion. We will continue to  monitor this issue as well FEMA’s effort to develop a strategy  encompassing how Citizen Corps and its partner programs are to operate  within the context of the national preparedness system.
Mr. Chairman, this completes my prepared statement. I would be happy to  respond to any questions you or other members of the subommittee may  have.
section_title: Contacts and Acknowledgments
paragraphs: For further information about this testimony, please contact William O.  Jenkins, Jr., Director, Homeland Security and Justice Issues, at (202) 512- 8777 or JenkinsWO@gao.gov. Contact points for our offices of  Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last page  of this testimony. Major contributors to this testimony included John  Mortin, Assistant Director, and Monica Kelly, Analyst-in-Charge. Carla  Brown, Qahira El’Amin, Lara Kaskie, Amanda Miller, Cristina Ruggiero- Mendoza, and Janet Temko made significant contributions to the work.
section_title: Appendix I: Homeland Security Grant Funding for Community Preparedness, 2004 through 2008
paragraphs: Department of Homeland Security support for local community  preparedness activities is provided through homeland security grants,  specifically the Citizen Corps grant program, but community preparedness  activities are also eligible for support under other homeland security  grants. Citizen Corps grants are awarded to states based on a formula of  0.75 percent of the total amount available to each state (including the  District of Columbia and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico) and 0.25  percent of the total amount available for each U.S. territory, with the  balance of funding being distributed on a population basis.
For other DHS homeland security grants, a state prepares a request for  funding, which can include support for the state’s community  preparedness efforts, as allowed under the guidance for a particular grant.  For example, the 2009 Homeland Security Grant Guidance lists  “Conducting public education and outreach campaigns, including  promoting individual, family and business emergency preparedness” as an  allowable cost for state homeland security grants. Grant funding can be  used to support Citizen Corps, Citizen Corps partner programs, or other  state community preparedness priorities. The Federal Emergency  Management Agency’s (FEMA) grant reporting database does not  categorize grants in a way that allows identification of the amount of  funding going to a particular community preparedness program.
Table 1 summarizes the approximately $269 million in DHS grants that  were identified by grantees as supporting community preparedness  projects from fiscal years 2004 through 2008. The amount is an  approximation because of limitations in identifying grants for such  projects. Our selection of projects for inclusion relied on grantees  identifying their projects under one of three predefined project types that  FEMA officials said are relevant for community preparedness or were  projects funded with a Citizen Corps program grant. Not all grantees may  have used these descriptions. We worked with grant officials to identify  the most appropriate grant selection criteria.