Assistance Available under Major Disaster Declarations A major disaster declaration makes available a w ide range of federal assistance programs for individuals and public infrastructure, including funds for both emergency and longer-term repairs. Not all programs are activated for every disaster. The determination of w hich programs are authorized is based on the types of assistance specified in the governor’s request and the needs identified during assessments of the affected area to determine the extent of the disaster. State and local governments are primarily responsible for preparing for and responding to natural and manmade disasters. However, if these governments need assistance, the federal government can provide critical support. The Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, as amended (Stafford Act) outlines the process state and local governments can use to obtain federal support under the act in response to a disaster. First, a governor must submit a request to the President to declare a major disaster or emergency. Once the declaration is granted, the state becomes eligible for various types of assistance from FEMA, such as personnel, funding, and technical assistance, among others (see sidebar). The Department of Homeland Security, of which FEMA is a component, developed the National Response Framework in 2008 to define the roles of federal, state, and local governments; the private sector; and voluntary organizations, such as the American Red Cross (Red Cross) and faith- based organizations, in response to all types of incidents, including disasters. The framework is designed around the principle that response efforts must adapt to meet evolving requirements resulting from changes in disaster size, scope, and complexity. Under the framework, state and local agencies are primarily responsible for response and recovery activities in their locations, including those involving health and safety. For example, state and local agencies are responsible for carrying out evacuations and administering shelters, when necessary, for those affected by a disaster. When an incident occurs that exceeds or is expected to exceed state or local resources, the federal government may use the National Response Framework to organize the federal response by involving all necessary department and agency capabilities and ensuring coordination with response partners. In the case of a federally declared disaster under the Stafford Act, FEMA has primary responsibility for coordinating the federal response, and it targets the level of federal support to the needs specified by states’ requests for assistance. FEMA works with Red Cross and a number of federal agencies— including the Department of Health and Human Services and the Department of Agriculture—as well as voluntary organizations to provide support in the area of mass care, which includes such services as sheltering, reunification of families, and counseling. In addition, FEMA coordinates with voluntary organizations to ensure immediate needs that are beyond the scope of traditional mass care services are addressed. For example, this may include providing replacement mobility or communication aids to individuals with disabilities. While the nature and complexity of a disaster and state requests for assistance determine the extent of support FEMA provides under the Stafford Act, agency staff are often deployed to the sites of major disasters to assist state and local emergency managers with response and recovery activities. The first FEMA team to deploy is called the Incident Management Assistance Team (IMAT). When the President declares a major disaster, the IMAT, made up of FEMA emergency management staff in areas such as operations, logistics, planning, and finance and administration, travels to the site of the disaster within 12 hours. The IMAT helps identify what federal support may be required and may support first responders in providing shelter (including for individuals with access and functional needs), emergency food, and supplies, as well as in restoring government services. FEMA staff deployed to disasters work alongside state counterparts and voluntary organizations at a centralized location, called the joint field office, to facilitate coordination of disaster response and recovery efforts. Staffing at the joint field office depends on the requirements of the disaster but may include the following FEMA offices. Individual Assistance: Staff from this office are generally responsible for providing survivors with information about who may be eligible for assistance and help them complete the application materials. Staff may provide this information at survivors’ homes or temporary residences as part of Disaster Survivor Assistance Teams or at Disaster Recovery Centers, which are readily accessible facilities or mobile offices where disaster survivors can go for information about FEMA financial assistance programs. One set of staff—Voluntary Agency Liaisons—gathers information about the capacity of voluntary organizations to provide assistance to all disaster survivors, including individuals with access and functional needs, and coordinate the activities of the organizations and FEMA. Office of Disability Integration and Coordination (ODIC): Staff may be deployed from FEMA headquarters or regional offices as part of the Disability Integration Cadre and may include positions such as American Sign Language interpreters. Staff are deployed to provide assistance to federal, state, and local emergency managers on physical, programmatic, and communication accessibility issues. For example, staff may provide guidance and technical assistance to Individual Assistance staff to ensure that Disaster Recovery Centers are physically accessible and provide disaster-related information, such as requirements about qualifying for FEMA financial assistance, in accessible formats, such as sign language interpretation. Office of External Affairs (External Affairs): These staff are generally responsible for working with state and local staff, such as those from emergency management departments, to communicate disaster-related information. For example, they may provide guidance on how to apply for FEMA Individual Assistance in the languages spoken within the affected area. In addition to onsite disaster response and recovery, staff in FEMA’s 10 regional offices conduct ongoing efforts to support individuals with access and functional needs that may be affected in future disasters. Regional Administrators in each of the regional offices report directly to the FEMA Administrator and are responsible for the day-to-day management and administration of regional activities and staff. FEMA has assigned one staff person at each of the regional offices to focus on disability integration. Disability integration includes integrating recommended practices and applicable requirements related to individuals with disabilities—such as requirements that may apply under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 or the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), both as amended—into all aspects of emergency preparedness and disaster response, recovery, and mitigation. Staff do this by promoting inclusive practices in FEMA regional activities and through outreach to local emergency managers. Inclusive practices are efforts to ensure people with disabilities have equal opportunities to participate in, and receive the benefits of, emergency programs and services. Such practices could include involving people with disabilities in emergency evacuation planning, ensuring that shelters are physically accessible, and providing guidance on post-evacuation residency for individuals with disabilities. Regional disability integration staff are also generally expected to track information about service and support shortfalls and about the demographics in each of the FEMA regions, such as local and state statistics on individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing, to help keep track of what FEMA should be prepared to address in the event of a disaster. In addition, FEMA coordinates closely with voluntary organizations to increase their capacity. Voluntary Agency Liaisons working in the regional offices are tasked with building relationships among federal and state governments and voluntary organizations, including national, state, and local voluntary organizations active in disaster. As a part of these efforts, they may also work with local organizations such as schools or churches that are not typically involved in disaster assistance but that may provide spontaneous services in response to disasters (see fig. 2). The Post-Katrina Act set forth specific provisions requiring FEMA to take actions to improve disaster assistance for individuals with access and functional needs. Several of the provisions identify activities related to individuals with disabilities, individuals with limited English proficiency, and children. These provisions include, among others: Disability Coordinator (§ 611): The FEMA Administrator is required to appoint a Disability Coordinator to help ensure that the needs of individuals with disabilities are being properly addressed in emergency preparedness and disaster relief. The Disability Coordinator is charged with consulting with government agencies, such as the National Council on Disability, and organizations that represent the interests and rights of individuals with disabilities, regarding their needs. Other responsibilities of the Disability Coordinator include ensuring coordination and dissemination of best practices; developing training materials for emergency managers; promoting accessibility of phone hotlines, websites, and video broadcasts regarding emergency information; and providing guidance and implementing policies to ensure the rights of individuals with disabilities regarding post-evacuation residency are respected. Accommodations Guidelines for People with Disabilities (§ 689(a)): The FEMA Administrator is required, in coordination with the Disability Coordinator and other government entities, including the National Council on Disability, to develop guidelines to accommodate individuals with disabilities regarding (1) the accessibility of, and communications and programs in, shelters, recovery centers, and other facilities; and (2) devices used in disaster operations, including first aid stations, mass feeding areas, portable payphone stations, portable toilets, and temporary housing. Disaster-Related Information Services (§ 689e): The FEMA Administrator is required, in coordination with state and local governments, to identify population groups with limited English proficiency and take them into account when planning for a major disaster. The Administrator must ensure that information is made available in formats that can be understood by individuals with limited English proficiency and with disabilities. The Administrator is required to develop and maintain an informational clearinghouse of model language assistance programs and best practices for state and local governments in providing services related to a major disaster. Child Reunification (§ 689b(b)): The FEMA Administrator is required to establish, in coordination with the Attorney General, the National Emergency Child Locator Center within the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, and establish procedures to make all relevant information available to the Child Locator Center in a timely manner to facilitate reunification of children and families who have been displaced as a result of a major disaster. Since the Post-Katrina Act was enacted, FEMA has promoted inclusive practices for assisting disaster survivors with disabilities in several ways. To comply with the Post-Katrina Act requirement to appoint a Disability Coordinator, FEMA created the Office of Disability Integration and Coordination (ODIC) in 2010 to increase attention to disaster assistance that considers the needs of people with disabilities across FEMA and among groups responding to disasters, such as state and local emergency managers. ODIC officials said that while the role of the Disability Coordinator under the Post-Katrina Act is to ensure that the needs of individuals with disabilities are properly addressed in disaster relief, FEMA has no enforcement authority with state and local agencies. Therefore, they said that ODIC and disability integration staff in FEMA’s regional offices focus on providing guidance to and developing relationships with other FEMA divisions, such as Individual Assistance; other federal agencies; state and local governments; and public, private, and faith-based voluntary organizations. FEMA’s guidance and relationships are focused on building greater awareness of what is required to adequately serve people with disabilities impacted by disasters, such as requirements that may apply under the ADA. As of August 2016, ODIC reported approximately 85 disability integration staff in headquarters and the regions and anticipated increasing the staff to 285 by calendar year 2018 (see fig. 3). Disability integration staff we spoke with in FEMA headquarters and in five of the six regional offices where the selected disasters occurred said they work with staff in other FEMA divisions, such as Individual Assistance, to ensure that FEMA programs and facilities are accessible to individuals with disabilities and to develop guidance for state and local emergency managers. For example, ODIC officials told us they helped FEMA’s Individual Assistance division develop guidance in 2010 for state and local emergency managers and shelter operators, Guidance on Planning for Integration of Functional Needs Support Services in General Population Shelters. This document includes, for example, guidance on equipping shelters with durable medical supplies, communication devices, and assistive technology, such as wheelchairs, accessible cots, hearing aids, teletypewriter phones, and screen readers. ODIC officials said they have contributed to several other key documents, including the National Response Framework and its Mass Evacuation Incident Annex, to help integrate the needs of people with disabilities in emergency management. ODIC officials said they also worked closely with FEMA’s Exercise Branch to plan and participate in emergency preparation exercises. For example, during FEMA’s most recent exercise, a disability integration representative was tasked with assessing how well exercise participants across the agency integrated disability-related considerations in their response efforts. In the five disasters we reviewed at which disability integration staff were deployed, these staff helped assess potential Disaster Recovery Center locations to ensure they were accessible to individuals with disabilities. This included the physical accessibility of parking lots, entrances, water fountains, and bathrooms, as well as equipping these centers with items to ensure communication accessibility, such as assistive listening devices, documents in braille, and tablet computers that connected to remote American Sign Language translation services. Disability integration staff we spoke with also reported taking a number of steps to engage external stakeholders, including those representing localities, states, other federal agencies, and voluntary organizations, on strategies to assist people with disabilities impacted by disasters. For example: FEMA disability integration staff in California said they worked with state officials, along with other FEMA staff, to provide training to local disability partners on the role of long-term recovery groups and identified grant opportunities for these partners to strengthen their ability to provide recovery support services following disasters. According to ODIC officials, it is standard practice for disability integration staff to create strategies for each disaster to which they deploy to guide their activities, including their coordination with state and local stakeholders. ODIC chairs the Interagency Coordinating Council on Emergency Preparedness and Individuals with Disabilities (council), which was created in 2004 specifically to strengthen emergency preparedness for individuals with disabilities. The council’s membership represents 25 federal agencies and, according to ODIC officials discusses, among other topics, how interagency partners can engage in preparing for, responding to, recovering from, and mitigating all hazards inclusive of people with disabilities and others with access and functional needs. For example, ODIC officials said that one council meeting included a discussion about integrating the needs of people with disabilities into an active shooter training curriculum. ODIC facilitated the development of memorandums of agreement between FEMA and several nongovernmental stakeholders to better support these organizations’ efforts to assist disaster survivors with disabilities. For example, FEMA and one national disability advocacy organization agreed to participate in disaster exercises together and share best practices for delivering services to people with disabilities. Despite the progress made by FEMA to promote practices to address the needs of individuals with disabilities, these efforts may be hindered because, according to ODIC officials, there is no established procedure for involving ODIC in certain efforts related to regional disability integration staff. ODIC officials said that FEMA’s Regional Administrators—not ODIC—determine the reporting chain for these staff, and regions vary in the extent to which they consult with ODIC on disability integration issues. We identified three areas where FEMA’s lack of established procedures for involving ODIC may result in challenges pursuing common goals and effectively sharing and leveraging information to achieve those goals: Role of regional disability integration staff. According to ODIC officials, FEMA’s disability integration efforts are focused on supporting access to disaster-related facilities, programs, and communication for individuals with disabilities. However, ODIC officials told us that some Regional Administrators do not involve ODIC when determining the duties of regional disability integration staff and may not assign these staff to certain key duties. For example, disability integration staff in some regions may be assigned to focus on recovery activities, such as working with community partners to ensure that individuals with disabilities are included in local long-term recovery group efforts. However, according to ODIC, these staff may have little involvement in promoting public communication that is accessible to individuals with disabilities following disasters. In addition, ODIC officials said that regions do not consistently include a position for disability integration staff on their IMATs, which are the first FEMA teams to deploy to disaster sites. ODIC officials said that regional IMATs that do not include this position may not have adequate knowledge about guidelines for accessibility for emergency alerts, evacuation processes, and shelters, hindering the ability to plan for the needs of the whole community at the onset of FEMA’s disaster response. Moreover, according to ODIC officials, disability integration staff have misunderstood their roles and responsibilities during disasters. ODIC officials said they have clarified these roles and responsibilities through a FEMA guidance document they issued in December 2016, which they said may help resolve these misunderstandings. Performance goals for regional disability integration staff. ODIC officials said they provided suggested performance goals for regional disability integration staff to these staff’s supervisors in the regions, which included goals related to community engagement, information collection, and coordination with ODIC. ODIC officials told us that FEMA’s Deputy Administrator and Chief of Staff directed Regional Administrators to include ODIC when setting performance goals and conducting assessments of regional disability integration staff. Nevertheless, according to ODIC officials, there are no established procedures for how Regional Administrators are to involve ODIC, and while some regions engage ODIC in this performance management role, others do not. As a result, ODIC may be unaware of regional disability integration staff who are not performing well and may need additional guidance, thereby decreasing the effectiveness of disaster services for people with disabilities. Communication among disability integration staff. ODIC hosts weekly phone calls with regional disability integration staff to build cohesion and discuss promising practices and progress on challenges. However, ODIC officials reported that in the first 6 months of 2016, 2 of the 10 regions repeatedly missed weekly calls with ODIC. In addition, 2 other regions were not represented on the calls for a majority of that time because they did not have disability integration staff. ODIC officials in headquarters said they do not directly oversee disability integration staff in the regions so they cannot require these staff to participate in the weekly calls. Additionally, they said regions with vacancies for key disability integration positions may not have other staff with the expertise to coordinate disability integration activities and report these activities at weekly ODIC meetings. As a result of this inconsistent communication, ODIC officials may not receive information on disability integration activities from all regions, which may affect their ability to oversee and assess these activities. Additionally, regional disability integration staff who do not consistently participate in these calls may lose opportunities to gain important information from each other and from ODIC to use in their disaster assistance efforts. ODIC officials and stakeholders shared several examples of the effect of the lack of procedures for involving ODIC in regional disability integration activities on FEMA’s ability to provide informative, responsive support to stakeholders and to leverage existing relationships with partners. For example, ODIC officials said that at times they were unaware that regional disability integration staff were invited to represent FEMA at national conferences, despite reminders that such invitations were required to be cleared through ODIC. Officials said they later learned that these staff provided inaccurate information to state and local emergency managers. Emergency managers with inaccurate information may be less effective at integrating the needs of people with disabilities in their disaster preparedness efforts. Our prior work on other aspects of FEMA’s coordination between headquarters and regional offices has identified similar challenges, including limitations in FEMA’s ability to coordinate monitoring activities for certain grant programs and cohesively manage its regional contracting workforce. Internal control standards state that, in establishing an organizational structure, agencies should consider how their components interact and define reporting lines that allow the components to communicate information necessary to fulfill their respective responsibilities. Local agencies and voluntary organizations involved in the six disasters we reviewed served central roles in responding to the needs of residents impacted by the disasters, including people with disabilities. For example: Communicating information. In South Carolina, local officials and FEMA disability integration staff said they both provided American Sign Language interpreters to communicate disaster-related information to people who are deaf or hard of hearing. Local officials in California similarly said they made these services available. In California, local officials in one county told us they maintained a list of elderly residents receiving in-home health support services and called every person on the list during the September 2015 wildfires to see if they needed assistance evacuating their homes. Providing shelter. Local officials and representatives of voluntary organizations we spoke with said they provided or supported shelters for those affected by the disasters, including those with disabilities. In the three disaster areas we visited, local officials and representatives of voluntary organizations said shelter facilities were generally compliant with ADA requirements or met other accessibility guidelines, as applicable. Assisting with daily living activities. According to representatives of voluntary organizations, local officials, and FEMA regional staff in the three disaster areas we visited, voluntary organizations helped individuals with disabilities maintain independence with their daily living activities, such as by replacing durable medical equipment that was lost or damaged. For example, local officials and FEMA regional staff in Texas said that voluntary organizations helped provide individuals with oxygen tanks, wheelchairs, walkers, motorized scooters, communication devices, glasses, and accommodated their needs for personal assistance services. State officials in the three disaster areas we visited said they supported local and voluntary organizations’ response efforts with strategic initiatives designed to address the needs of individuals with disabilities. For example, state officials from Texas told us that the state established a Disability Task Force on Emergency Management. Convened in 2011, the Task Force helped produce guidance to assist local emergency managers and shelter planners in understanding certain requirements and best practices for assisting disaster survivors with disabilities. The guidance includes tips on interacting with and assisting people who use service dogs, canes, crutches, wheelchairs, or have mental illnesses. In recognition of the central role that localities, voluntary organizations, and states serve in disaster assistance activities, FEMA has developed guidance and training to increase their awareness of requirements and best practices for including individuals with disabilities in emergency planning. Specifically, ODIC officials said that in 2013 FEMA began offering a key course—Integrating Access and Functional Needs into Emergency Planning—to state and local emergency managers and other stakeholders. Participants can take the 2-day course free-of-charge at FEMA’s Emergency Management Institute in Maryland or, as FEMA resources allow, from FEMA instructors from ODIC who travel to locations across the country to deliver the course. The course includes substantial information on incorporating the needs of people with disabilities in emergency planning, including information that could have helped address certain challenges we heard about from local officials. For instance, during the September 2015 wildfires in California, local officials said that staffing constraints and a lack of onsite clinical expertise prompted them to redirect individuals with disabilities from general population shelters to hospitals or other facilities where officials felt they could be more safely accommodated. One module of FEMA’s training addresses the importance of accommodating individuals with disabilities in general population shelters unless they have acute medical needs. Similarly, disability advocates caution against redirecting individuals with disabilities to medical facilities for shelter during disasters as this practice can have negative impacts on these individuals’ personal independence. In another example, local officials in one Texas county described challenges communicating with the deaf population following the 2015 flooding and noted a recent effort to add video capabilities to their 9-1-1 system to reach such populations. FEMA’s training also covers practical tips on how to ensure access to communication about disaster assistance, including through video relay services. ODIC officials said that all state and local emergency managers, public health officials, community leaders, and other stakeholders would benefit from the training, but officials do not have specific goals or milestones in place for the number who receive it. ODIC officials estimated that at least 843 federal, state, and local emergency managers participated in the training from June 2013 through July 2016. However, given the number of local officials who play a role in disaster response, many state and local emergency managers have yet to take the training. Officials said they have not gathered information about how many additional emergency managers and other local officials could benefit from this training and have not set goals for future participation. Further, ODIC faces challenges in satisfying current requests for training, according to officials. Some state and local officials have not taken the course because of the cost of traveling to Maryland to access it in person and have requested the training be offered locally. As of July 2016, course instructors from ODIC have delivered the training locally in 22 states and in the District of Columbia. However, ODIC officials reported that many of these states have requested additional training in other locations within the state and ODIC has been unable to fulfill these requests. ODIC officials said they have limited travel funding to deliver the training onsite for all who request it and that FEMA cannot legally accept funding from states for travel expenses for its employees to conduct the course. ODIC officials also said they rely on a small pool of staff— including the ODIC director—to teach the course. ODIC staff said they recently began to consider alternative training delivery methods, such as a virtual course to supplement the in-person course in Maryland. However, they have not evaluated such alternatives and, as yet have no specific plans to offer the course using an alternative method. We have previously reported that agencies should consider learning that provides trainees with the flexibility to choose among different training delivery methods (such as web-based and instructor-led) while leveraging resources in the most efficient way possible. We also previously recommended that FEMA establish and use goals, milestones, and performance measures to monitor the performance of its programs designed to help state and local stakeholders determine their readiness to respond to disasters. Leading practices identified in the Program Management Institute’s The Standard for Program Management call for agencies to develop meaningful measures to monitor program performance and to track the accomplishment of the program’s goals and objectives. Without collecting information about the potential pool of participants, identifying goals for the number of state and local officials who receive the training, and providing the training in the alternative formats needed to meet the goals, ODIC may be missing opportunities to ensure its training reaches a sufficiently wide audience. Further, state and local officials who have a central role in assisting people with disabilities impacted by disasters may lack awareness of how to adequately serve this population. FEMA provides information on its programs to individuals with limited English proficiency through written and oral translations in other languages and through additional resources, such as a coordinator and support team focused on limited English proficiency. As a general approach, FEMA officials said they identify languages spoken in each state through data from the Census Bureau. FEMA’s External Affairs staff maintain these data to use when an area is impacted by a disaster. FEMA officials said that these data represent an initial language assessment to determine the language needs of the affected population. After a disaster is declared, officials said they continue to refine their understanding of the language needs in the area by collecting additional demographic information from state and local officials, volunteer organizations, and disaster survivors. For example, the Census data that FEMA used in 2015 indicated that 170 languages were spoken in Texas. Following that state’s flooding, FEMA officials said they reached out to officials in the most affected areas and identified Spanish and Vietnamese as the languages that were most commonly spoken in the area. FEMA maintains many previously-translated documents in commonly encountered languages in an agency library that it can readily access when disaster occurs. According to the plan that summarizes how FEMA ensures disaster assistance communications are accessible to those with limited English proficiency, the online library contains news releases, flyers, and other written information in more than 20 languages that FEMA produced following Hurricane Sandy in 2011 (see sidebar). Such translated documents may include Individual Assistance program brochures explaining the registration process and correspondence about the status of individual applications, disaster preparedness and recovery activities, and press releases with pertinent disaster-related information. In all five disasters we reviewed at which FEMA provided Individual Assistance, officials told us FEMA provided printed materials, such as those about FEMA financial assistance, in multiple languages at locations such as the Disaster Recovery Centers. The results of the language assessment process also help inform FEMA decisions about the number of staff proficient in multiple languages to deploy to the disaster-affected location. FEMA deploys these staff to explain the benefits and registration process for FEMA programs to individuals who are not proficient in English. External Affairs can also deploy members of a support team to assist regional office staff with new strategies to reach limited English proficiency populations affected by a disaster and can initiate contracts for additional translation services. For example, during the 2015 wildfires in California, External Affairs both deployed a support team member and contracted with a translation service to assist with media communications to Spanish speakers. To identify survivors’ preferred languages, staff can use aids produced by FEMA and the Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties (another component of the Department of Homeland Security), such as language identification guides (see fig. 4). If staff proficient in a specific language are not available at Disaster Recovery Centers, individual survivors can call FEMA’s helpline, which provides translation services. The toll-free number is posted online and on FEMA documents. These translation services are offered through FEMA’s National Processing Service Centers. According to FEMA’s Draft Language Access Plan, FEMA can provide disaster assistance information in more than 50 languages. FEMA publicizes these services through flyers, news releases, outreach to the community, and other promotion efforts. In addition, throughout a disaster, staff from these service centers and External Affairs continuously share information on the language needs of a location, officials said, and may adjust their resources based on changes in language requests. In four of the five disasters we reviewed where FEMA provided Individual Assistance, FEMA deployed bilingual staff to work in Disaster Recovery Centers, as part of Disaster Survivor Assistance Teams, or as Voluntary Agency Liaisons. For example, following the 2015 flooding in Oklahoma, officials told us that while visiting a community that primarily speaks Spanish, Disaster Survivor Assistance Team members proficient in Spanish were able to communicate information about FEMA assistance to survivors. However, state officials in Texas told us that while FEMA provided some bilingual staff following the 2015 Memorial Day flooding, those resources were inadequate in some areas, such as along the Texas border. As a result, the officials said that voluntary organizations assisting in the recovery provided translation services to fill this gap. According to regional FEMA officials, FEMA deployed 30 Spanish interpreters to Disaster Recovery Centers and Disaster Survivor Assistance Teams in Texas following the 2015 flooding. They also noted that while FEMA initially could not provide sufficient resources to fulfill requests for these personnel, additional bilingual staff were deployed within 3 weeks of the disaster declaration. Individuals affected by the flooding were able to apply for FEMA assistance until approximately 4 months after the date of declaration. FEMA also engages in activities during non-disaster times to ensure access to disaster-related information for individuals with limited English proficiency. For example, FEMA officials said External Affairs has established two positions to work with stakeholders before a disaster occurs: a Limited English Proficiency coordinator and a media relations specialist. The coordinator is responsible for ensuring access to FEMA program information for individuals with limited English proficiency, such as by ensuring that FEMA’s website includes translated information. The coordinator also conducts strategic planning and leverages relationships with national and local organizations to broaden FEMA’s reach into communities with limited English proficiency. The media relations specialist focuses specifically on building relationships with Spanish- speaking media. In addition, FEMA offers training to FEMA staff and state and local emergency managers that includes elements intended to ensure access to information for individuals with limited English proficiency. FEMA requires all of its employees to complete civil rights training, which includes a module on the federal laws that prohibit discrimination and require meaningful access to services for this population, how to identify language needs, available multilingual FEMA resources, and different strategies for conducting outreach in communities. FEMA also developed a series of trainings designed for state and local officials—which is offered in a variety of formats, including at FEMA’s Emergency Management Institute and online—on effective approaches to disseminating information publicly following disasters. For example, objectives of one course include identifying critical audiences and learning to recognize the functional needs and challenges of different audiences. FEMA officials noted that all of these efforts, including the language assessment, translated materials, oral interpretation services, and trainings, represent FEMA’s efforts to share best practices with state and local emergency managers on providing services to individuals with limited English proficiency, to comply with the Post-Katrina Act. Rather than maintaining an informational clearinghouse in the form of a central website or database that may become quickly outdated, officials told us that these efforts allow them to tailor FEMA assistance for disaster survivors to the unique resources available and needs of each location affected by a disaster. State, local, or voluntary organizations in all six disasters we reviewed disseminated information on evacuations and shelters using a range of communication methods and translation services to assist individuals with limited English proficiency in accessing resources. For example, officials said that local agencies communicated through hotlines and reverse 9-1- 1 calls to relay evacuation and shelter information to the general public. As described in the National Response Framework, state and local agencies are generally responsible for distributing health and safety information—including information related to evacuations and shelters. We found that state emergency planning documentation for all six disasters we reviewed assigned responsibility to state and local agencies for disseminating this type of information. To provide access to such information specifically to individuals with limited English proficiency, state, local, or voluntary organizations in five of the six disasters we reviewed reported providing a range of translation services. State or local agencies in two of the disasters had bilingual staff members available, and state or voluntary organizations in three other disasters provided access to interpreters by phone. In three of the six disasters, state or local agencies relied on support from voluntary organizations to provide interpreters for those who were not English proficient. For example, during the 2015 snowstorms in Massachusetts, state officials said that a voluntary organization’s call center provided information, such as shelter locations, in multiple languages. State and local officials in two disasters relied on local churches to provide information to their members or other Spanish-speaking residents. For example, officials in Oklahoma said they relied on churches in a large Spanish-speaking community in Oklahoma City to spread information on recovery resources following flooding in 2015. State and local agencies can also leverage FEMA resources to translate or distribute recovery information. According to FEMA officials, state and local emergency managers can obtain the results of FEMA’s language assessments, which include information about populations with limited English proficiency, to better target resources to needs. In addition, FEMA officials said they fulfilled requests from California officials to translate state documents into Spanish following the 2015 wildfires. Similarly, following the 2015 flooding in South Carolina, state officials said they requested help from FEMA to print information about registering for FEMA assistance in English and Spanish on fans, which were then distributed to flood victims in churches (see fig. 5). In addition to these efforts to reach individuals with limited English proficiency during disasters, local officials in two of the disasters we reviewed said limited resources prevented them from translating disaster information into other languages. To address this problem, local officials may seek assistance from external resources. For example, local officials in Texas said that although emergency communications are not currently translated into other languages, they are considering partnering with private organizations to facilitate translations when needed. According to FEMA’s Draft Language Access Plan and External Affairs officials, FEMA can also provide support in the form of translating disaster materials into the languages spoken by those affected by disasters. FEMA has worked to develop resources to reunite children separated from their families during disasters, but it has not had to activate them in an actual disaster since they were developed. Following the need for reuniting children with their families and for other assistance for children highlighted during Hurricane Katrina, the Post-Katrina Act required that FEMA establish the National Emergency Child Locator Center, a child reunification call center operated by the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC). The first step in establishing this center was to enhance information- sharing during federally declared disasters, which FEMA officials said they did with NCMEC, Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, and Red Cross through a memorandum of understanding signed in 2007. Following a disaster declaration, FEMA may request that NCMEC activate the National Emergency Child Locator Center and then refer child-specific inquiries to NCMEC. NCMEC uses a call center as part of its day-to-day operations, but following a disaster, it can increase staffing to meet anticipated call volume. Following a disaster, call center staff would work with law enforcement, NCMEC staff, counterparts at FEMA, and Red Cross to learn the ground-level context of a disaster to more effectively field calls. NCMEC also maintains the Unaccompanied Minors Registry, a national repository for information about children who may be separated from their families as a result of a disaster. The first of its kind, the registry would allow entities such as law enforcement, medical facilities, shelter operators, and individuals to submit reports about children that are displaced due to a disaster. It was designed with a web-based portal that could allow for one-way communication from these external sources. Law enforcement and NCMEC staff could use the information submitted to the registry to reunite families by cross- referencing it against any information they may have collected through other means. According to FEMA officials and emergency managers, no disasters have required national child reunification support since Hurricane Katrina, where an estimated 5,000 children were reported to be separated from their families and guardians during the storm. As a result, FEMA has not called upon NCMEC to activate the National Emergency Child Locator Center. Nevertheless, FEMA continues to work with NCMEC and other partners on maintaining reunification resources. For example, in 2015 FEMA renewed an agreement it has with NCMEC to provide funding for deploying NCMEC personnel onsite following disasters. In addition, FEMA addressed child reunification during its 2016 Cascadia Rising training exercise, and FEMA participants assembled a child reunification task force. One challenge members of that task force identified during the exercise was related to communicating with children and parents with auditory or visual impairments. Since the enactment of the Post-Katrina Act, FEMA has worked with governmental and non-governmental entities more generally to address the needs of families with children who are affected by disasters. In 2007, FEMA joined other federal agencies and voluntary organizations, such as the Red Cross, in the establishment of the National Commission on Children in Disasters. Established by the Kids in Disasters Well-being, Safety, and Health Act of 2007, the group worked to identify gaps in policy for disaster assistance for children, and it issued reports in 2009 and 2010 that recommended changes to close those gaps, such as improving the capacity to provide child care services in the immediate aftermath of a disaster. In 2009, FEMA established a working group on children in disasters to engage representatives of multiple FEMA divisions in addressing the recommendations. The official leading the working group was appointed in 2015 to be the National Advisor on Children and Disasters. The responsibility of this advisor is to coordinate efforts and implement resources across FEMA and externally. FEMA and NCMEC also co-led the effort to issue a report in 2013 as guidance for post- disaster reunification. A primary goal of the report was to support reunification processes and procedures by identifying the roles and responsibilities of governments and voluntary organizations, among other stakeholders. It was designed as a guidance tool to assist these stakeholders in developing reunification plans that are inclusive, such as considering the needs of children who are nonverbal or who have disabilities. FEMA officials from two of the six disasters we reviewed described other assistance provided to children. Following the California wildfires, FEMA worked with school districts in the affected areas to bus students temporarily living outside their communities, in shelters or temporary housing, to their regular schools. Following the mudslide in Washington, the state provided similar assistance for students and teachers separated from their schools by the mudslide area by opening up an alternative access route. In addition, FEMA provided individual families with reimbursements for the extra cost of child care resulting from the extended commuting time required by the detour. Staff from another federal agency involved in disaster recovery, the Department of Health and Human Services’ Administration for Children and Families, initiated a task force designed to provide mental and emotional health resources for area children affected by the mudslide. For example, the organizations involved in the task force funded a full-time counselor at an area school. FEMA has taken steps since Hurricane Katrina to promote inclusive emergency management practices through its Office of Disability Integration and Coordination (ODIC). However, this progress may be hampered because FEMA lacks procedures to help ensure regions consistently involve ODIC in their disability integration activities and because of ODIC’s limited approach to delivering critical disability integration training. The lack of established procedures for involving ODIC in the disability integration activities of the regional staff has resulted in misunderstood roles, a lack of awareness about potentially underperforming staff, and inconsistent communication between the regions and headquarters. In addition, the limited training delivery methods ODIC uses for its key disability integration course, as well as ODIC’s lack of understanding about the pool of potential participants, may mean a substantial number of state and local emergency managers do not receive it. Both the use of regional disability integration staff and the training serve as important methods of communicating with state and local emergency managers to provide them with knowledge and tools to best support individuals with disabilities during a disaster. Without improvements in these areas, FEMA may be missing opportunities to help these emergency managers better meet the needs of individuals with disabilities affected by disasters. 1. To better ensure FEMA’s regional activities effectively support individuals with disabilities, the Secretary of Homeland Security should direct the FEMA Administrator to take steps to establish written procedures for how regions should involve the Office of Disability Integration and Coordination in clarifying disability integration staff’s roles, evaluating staff performance, and setting expectations for how staff communicate with headquarters and the regions. 2. To better position FEMA to expand access to key training on incorporating access and functional needs into emergency planning for state, local, and voluntary organization emergency management officials, the Secretary of Homeland Security should direct the FEMA Administrator to evaluate alternative cost-effective methods for delivering its course on access and functional needs, such as via virtual classes. 3. To help ensure its key training on incorporating access and functional needs into emergency planning reaches a sufficiently wide audience, the Secretary should direct the FEMA Administrator to collect information about the potential pool of participants, set general goals for the number of state and local emergency managers that will take this course, and implement the delivery methods needed to meet these goals. We provided a draft of this report to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), for review and comment. Officials provided written comments, which are reproduced in appendix II and described below, as well as technical comments, which we incorporated in the report as appropriate. FEMA agreed with all three of our recommendations and outlined steps it plans to take to implement them. Regarding our first recommendation to establish written procedures to clarify the role of regional disability integration staff, officials noted FEMA’s plans to convene a working group to identify effective communication channels and foster collaborative relationships among ODIC, Regional Administrators, and regional disability integration staff. More specifically, FEMA expects the workgroup to build on the directive issued in December 2016 and establish written procedures on (1) the roles and responsibilities of regional disability integration staff; (2) developing performance goals to assess their performance; and (3) opening clearer communication channels among these staff, Regional Administrators, and disability integration staff in headquarters. We applaud FEMA’s effort to clarify the roles and responsibilities of regional disability integration staff in its recently issued directive. We believe that FEMA’s proposed plan to further encourage collaboration through the issuance of instructions for implementing the directive will help to better ensure support for and inclusion of individuals with disabilities affected by disasters across all FEMA regions. Regarding our second and third recommendations related to the delivery method and participants for FEMA’s key course on integrating access and functional needs into emergency planning, FEMA officials said they plan to explore additional delivery methods through various means, including through participant feedback. Additionally, they plan to develop a baseline of the number of emergency managers taking the course, including identifying specific numbers for the target audience by state and establishing a reasonable metric for the annual delivery of the course. FEMA officials stated that these metrics will also help inform FEMA leadership on the potential need to develop alternative delivery methods. We encourage FEMA to pursue these efforts and continue to believe that such efforts, if implemented, will provide a greater number of state and local emergency managers and others with the knowledge and tools to best support people with disabilities before, during, and after disasters. We are sending copies of this report to the appropriate congressional committees, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and other interested parties. In addition, the report is available at no charge on the GAO website at http://www.gao.gov. If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please contact me at (202) 512-7215 or brownke@gao.gov. Contact points for our Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last page of this report. GAO staff who made key contributions to this report are listed in appendix III. In addition to the contact named above, Sara Schibanoff Kelly (Assistant Director), Sara Pelton (Analyst-in-Charge), Aimee Elivert, and Lauren Friedman made key contributions to this report. Also contributing to this report were Susan Aschoff, Jessica Botsford, Sarah Cornetto, Lauren Gilbertson, Kristen Jones, Jean McSween, Mimi Nguyen, Debra Prescott, Almeta Spencer, and Erica Varner. Emergency Communications: Effectiveness of the Post-Katrina Interagency Coordination Group Could Be Enhanced. GAO-16-681. Washington, D.C.: July 14, 2016. Disaster Recovery: FEMA Needs to Assess Its Effectiveness in Implementing the National Disaster Recovery Framework. GAO-16-476. Washington, D.C.: May 26, 2016. Disaster Response: FEMA Has Made Progress Implementing Key Programs, but Opportunities for Improvement Exist. GAO-16-87. Washington, D.C.: February 5, 2016. Federal Emergency Management Agency: Strengthening Regional Coordination Could Enhance Preparedness Efforts. GAO-16-38. Washington, D.C.: February 4, 2016. Emergency Management: FEMA Has Made Progress since Hurricanes Katrina and Sandy, but Challenges Remain. GAO-16-90T. Washington, D.C.: October 22, 2015. Disaster Contracting: FEMA Needs to Cohesively Manage Its Workforce and Fully Address Post-Katrina Reforms. GAO-15-783. Washington, D.C.: September 29, 2015. Emergency Management: FEMA Collaborates Effectively with Logistics Partners but Could Strengthen Implementation of Its Capabilities Assessment Tool. GAO-15-781. Washington, D.C.: September 10, 2015. American Red Cross: Disaster Assistance Would Benefit from Oversight through Regular Federal Evaluation. GAO-15-565. Washington, D.C.: September 9, 2015. Emergency Preparedness: Opportunities Exist to Strengthen Interagency Assessments and Accountability for Closing Capability Gaps. GAO-15-20. Washington, D.C.: December 4, 2014. Actions Taken to Implement the Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act of 2006, GAO-09-59R. Washington, D.C.: November 21, 2008. National Disaster Response: FEMA Should Take Action to Improve Capacity and Coordination between Government and Voluntary Sectors. GAO-08-369. Washington, D.C.: February 27, 2008.

Summary: In 2005, individuals with disabilities, individuals with limited English proficiency, and families with children were disproportionately affected by Hurricane Katrina. For example, some of those who had to abandon their wheelchairs could not evacuate because they were unable to wait in long lines for evacuation buses. The Post-Katrina Act required FEMA and other entities to take certain actions to assist these individuals, such as through the establishment of a Disability Coordinator within FEMA. GAO was asked to examine implementation of the Post-Katrina Act. This report assesses the extent to which FEMA and other entities provide disaster services to individuals with disabilities, individuals with limited English proficiency, and children in need of family reunification. GAO examined federal, state, and local disaster assistance efforts for six major disasters that occurred from March 2014 through October 2015, where federal response and recovery efforts included assistance to the three target groups and that varied in location and type of disaster. GAO interviewed relevant officials, visited three of the six sites, and analyzed emergency operations plans and disaster summary reports. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has taken steps to improve its disaster services for people with disabilities and its support to other entities, such as state and local governments. FEMA established the Office of Disability Integration and Coordination (ODIC) following enactment of the Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act of 2006 (Post-Katrina Act) to lead the agency's efforts to promote inclusiveness in disaster planning, response, and recovery. However, there is no established procedure for FEMA Regional Administrators, who oversee disability integration staff in the regions, to involve ODIC in the activities of these staff. As a result, regions vary in the extent to which they consult with ODIC, which has led to a lack of clarity in regional disability integration staff roles, a lack of awareness of potentially underperforming staff, and inconsistent communication between the regions and headquarters. Federal internal control standards state that organizational structures should allow the organization's components to communicate information necessary to fulfill their respective responsibilities. Communication gaps between ODIC and the regions may prevent regional disability integration staff from effectively supporting state and local governments in meeting the needs of individuals with disabilities affected by disasters. ODIC also has not established goals for how many state and local emergency managers should take its key training on integrating the needs of individuals with disabilities into disaster planning. Nor has ODIC evaluated alternative methods to deliver the training more broadly, such as virtually in addition to classroom training. As a result, state and local emergency managers may be ill-prepared to provide effective disaster services to those with disabilities. FEMA and other entities assist individuals with limited English proficiency by translating information on disaster assistance programs. FEMA provides information about its assistance programs using print materials in other languages, bilingual staff, and a helpline with translators for more than 50 languages. State, local, and voluntary organizations also disseminate information on health and safety information, such as evacuations and sheltering: In five of the six disasters GAO reviewed where translation was needed, these entities reported using a range of services, from bilingual staff to multilingual helplines. FEMA worked with the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC) to establish a national call center designed to field calls with information about children separated from their families during disasters. NCMEC also maintains a registry that serves as a web-based repository created to collect this information. However, according to FEMA officials, no disasters since Hurricane Katrina have required national child reunification support. Nevertheless, FEMA continues to work with NCMEC on maintaining reunification resources, such as by funding the deployment of NCMEC personnel following disasters. FEMA should establish written procedures for involving ODIC in regional activities; set goals for the number of state and local emergency managers who will take a key training on disability integration; and evaluate alternative delivery methods for the training. FEMA concurred with all of the recommendations.