Both Congress and the executive branch are actively considering reforms to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The proposals being discussed could significantly alter the current, federalized emergency management system that governs how disaster aid is delivered both during and after an incident. And while the bills Congress is debating often diverge from the recommendations made by President Donald J. Trump’s FEMA Review Council, both efforts share a common theme: states may need to play a larger role in supporting disaster response and recovery efforts within their jurisdictions. All states and territories have emergency management agencies (EMAs) charged with executing emergency management functions within their state’s borders. These agencies coordinate response and recovery activities to a large number of incidents, most of which never receive federal support. To assess whether these agencies have capacity to take on additional responsibility (some of which may have been previously performed or funded by federal agencies), consideration may be given to key governance, finance, and program features of a state, such as organization, staffing, and funding of EMAs; ability and experience with receiving federal assistance; established mutual aid agreements; and insurance strategies, amongst others. The exploration of state capacity in this report is presented to allow the reader to develop an understanding of a particular state’s approach to emergency management and disaster assistance, in order to facilitate assessment of the effect of proposed changes to federal programs and practices. Some state data is provided as illustrative example or to demonstrate a range of possibilities, but this report does not provide a full state-by-state survey of every feature discussed. A worksheet to assist the reader in documenting individual state features is provided in the Appendix.
Full content not yet available.