Discussion Question 8

GAO United States Government Ac countabilit y Office Testimony Before the Subcommittee on Emergency Communications, Preparedness, and Response, Committee on Homeland Security, House of Representatives DISASTER RECOVERY Past Experiences Offer Recovery Lessons for Hurricanes Ike and Gustav and Future Disasters Statement of Stanl ey J. Czerwinski, Director Strategi c Issues For R elea se on De live ry Expec ted at 10 :00 a.m. EST Tues da y, Ma rch 3, 2009 GAO-09-437T What GAO Found United States Government Accountability Office Why GAO Did This Study H ighlights Accountability Integrity Reliability March 3, 2009 DISASTER RECOVERY Pa st Experience s Offer Recovery Le ss on s for Hurricane s Ike and Gu stav and Future Di saster s Highlights of GA O-09 -437 T, a te stimony before the Su bco mmittee on Emergency Communication s, Prepared ness, and Respon se, Com mittee on Homel and Securit y, Hou se of Repre sentati ves Re co ve ry from m ajor disasters is a com plex un dertaki ng that invol ves the combi ned effo rts of federal, state, and loca l gove rnment in ord er to s ucceed. W hile th e feder al go ve rnm ent provi des a si gn ificant amou nt of fina nc ial and tech nica l assi stan ce fo r re co very, state and local jurisdi ctions wo rk closely wit h federa l ag enc ies to secure and mak e use of those r esour ces. This tes timon y des crib es less ons an d insights th at GAO has id en tified from review of past disas ters, which m ay b e useful to in form reco ver y e ffo rts in th e wa ke of Hurri ca nes Ike and Gustav, as wel l as dis asters yet to com e. Thes e l essons co me fr om two rep orts GA O recently r eleased l ast fall o n dis aster re co very. T he first dra ws o n the exp erien ces of comm uni ties th at ha ve recovered from pr evio us major disas ters in ord er to help inform reco very effor ts in th e wak e of Hurri canes Ike and Gustav as w ell as the 20 08 Midwes t floo ds. T he seco nd ex ami nes t he impleme ntation o f the F ederal Emer ge nc y Management Agency’s (FEMA) Public Assistance gr ant program and identifi es sev eral ac tions that the Depar tment of Ho mel and Security ca n ta ke to impr ove operations of th at pro gram. Th ese inc lude improv ing informa tion sharin g an d enhancin g co ntinuity and commu nica tion . Comm en ting on a d raft of that r epo rt, th e dep artment gen erally agr eed with our r ecomm endations . In d oing this work, G AO inte rviewed fede ral, state, and loca l offi cials involv ed in reco ver y an d re view ed rel eva nt docum ents , d ata, and l aws. Lessons from past disast ers provid e a potentially valuabl e sour ce of information for all leve ls o f governm en t as the y seek to meet the many chall eng es of recov ering from a m ajor disaster . For affected st ate and loc al jurisdictions, good practices to consid er include the following: • Creatin g a cl ear, impl eme ntable, and timel y re cover y plan can pr ovide communities with a road map for the recovery process. Just 2 months after the 1 995 Kobe earth quake in Jap an, the c ity created a re co very plan with these e lements. Providing fin anci al and te chnica l c apa city f aci litat es jurisdi ctions’ abi lity to implement federal disa ster programs . For exampl e, lo ans and t echnic al assistance provided after past di saster s helped com munities bett er navi gate the wide rang e o f federal d isaster program s. Implementin g busines s re cover y strat egie s to mini mize busines s relocat ions helps small bu sinesses adapt to postdis aster market conditions. For example, t o encourage businesses t o remain in the cit y Grand Forks after the 1997 flood, th e city forgave loans for businesses that stayed in the city. Adopting a comprehensive approach t oward combating fraud, waste, and abuse protects both disaster victim s from contractor fraud and public funds from fr audulent applicants. Cont rols to combat such activities before, during, and after a disast er can deter such ac tiviti es, inclu ding instances of contractor fraud. On the federal l evel, expe rience s with FEMA’s Public A ssi stanc e grant program afte r the 20 05 Gulf Coast hurri cane s illustra ted a v ariety of chall eng es in the day -to-day oper ation of the program that could be faced ag ain by Gulf Coast st ates recov ering from Hurricanes Ike and Gustav or othe r disaster s in t he future. These include the following: Challenges u sing program flexibilit ies t o respond to the postdisaster needs of gr ant applicants and determining project scope. For e xample, applicants r eported needing additional flexibilit y when rebuilding to address significant popul ation chan ges after the s torm. Chall enge s in sharing information am ong federal , state, and loc al offici als during project dev elopm ent that at ti mes slowed t he process . For example, so me applicants in Louisian a told us of the need to repeatedly resubmit key project docu ments beca use of the l ack of an effecti ve system to sh are su ch documentation. Oppor tunities exist for the federal go vernment to furthe r refine FEMA’s Public A ssi stance grant pr ogram to bet ter address these and other cha llenge s as recovery continues on t he Gulf Coas t and in adv ance of future disast ers. View GAO-09-43 7T or key compo nents. For mo re i nforma tion, conta ct Sta nley J. Czerwinski at (20 2) 512-6806 or cze rwin skis@ga o.gov . Mr. Chairman and Members of the Su bcommittee: Recovery fr om major disasters is a complex undertaking that involves th e combined ef forts of all le vels of gov ernment in order to succe ed. While th e federal go vernment provides a signifi cant amount of financi al and technica l as sistance for recovery, st ate and l ocal jurisdictions work closely with federal agenci es to secure and ma ke use of those resources. With thi s in mind and as requested , my testimo ny today des cribes a nu mber of lessons and insights that we have id entified from our work on past disasters that may be use ful to inform the actio ns of federal, st ate, and local go vern ment as they work to me et the ch alle nging proc ess of recovering after Hurricanes Ike and Gustav as well as other disasters yet to come.

My statement is primarily based on tw o recently re leased repor ts that are part of a bo dy of work GAO has developed re garding disaster recovery. 1 In September 2 008, we id en tified lessons from the experiences of communities that have recovere d from previous major disasters in order to help infor m recovery efforts in the wake of H urricanes Ike and Gusta v as well as the 2008 Midwest floods. 2 This past December, we examined the implementation of the Fe deral Emergency Mana gement Agen cy’s (FEMA) Public Assistance grant program after the 20 05 Gulf Coast hurricanes 3 an d identified se veral a ction s that the De partment of Homeland Security c an take to improve the oper ations of the program. 4 In commenting on a draft of that repor t, the dep artment generally agreed with our recommendations.

1See app. I of G AO, Disaster R ecove ry: Pa st Experi ence s Off er I nsights for Recove ring from Hur ricanes I ke a nd Gu stav and Oth er Rece nt Na tura l Di sasters , GA O-08-1120 (Was hingto n, D.C.: Se pt. 26, 20 08) fo r a partial lis ting of GAO pro ducts on dis aster recovery . 2See GA O-08-1120 . For this rev iew, we examined rec overy e xperiences follo wing thes e s ix major disaster events: (1 ) the 1989 Loma Pr ieta earthq uake i n northe rn California; (2) H urricane Andrew , which struck southe rn Florida in 199 2; (3 ) the 1994 North ridge earthquake in Los Angeles, Cal ifornia; (4) the 1995 Kobe eart hquake in Japa n; (5) the 1997 Grand Forks/Red River fl ood in N orth Dak ota and Minnes ota; an d (6) t he 20 05 Gulf C oast hurrica nes . 3For the purp oses of this tes timony, “2005 Gulf Coas t h urri canes ” refers to H urricanes Katrina and Rit a and is treated collecti vely as a single disaster event . 4GAO, Disaster Recove ry: FEM A’s Publi c As sista nce Gra nt P rogra m Ex peri enc ed Ch allenges wi th Gulf Coa st R ebui lding, GA O-09-129 (Washington, D .C.: D ec. 18, 2008). Page 1 GAO-09-437T We conduct ed our reviews in accordance with generally accepted government auditing sta ndards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain sufficient, appropriate eviden ce to provide a reasonable basis for our findings an d conclusio ns based on our audit objectiv es. We belie ve t hat the e vidence obt ain ed provides a reasonable basis for our findings an d conclusio ns based on our audit ob jectives. While the f ederal gov ernment provides significan t financial assistance after major disasters, state and l ocal government s play the l ead role in disaster recovery. Expe riences from pa st disasters can provi de states an d local communities with potential go od practices to consider. These practices ar e creatin g a recovery pl an; building s tate and l ocal cap acity t o use federal disaster assistance prog rams; supporting business recovery; and combati ng fraud, wa ste, and abu se of govern ment programs. Because each disaste r is distinctive and t he r esources an d capa cities of every community differ, each jurisdiction will need to consider whether and ho w to apply th ese insights to its own specific circu mstances. Past Disasters Offer Recovery Insi ghts for State and Local Governments Create a Clear , Implementabl e, and T imely Recover y Plan A recovery p lan can prov ide state an d local g over nments with a valu able tool to docu ment and co mmunicate recovery goal s, decisions, and priorities—in effect, th ey can pro vide a roadmap for the reco very process . Just as important, the v ery process of developin g these plans provides an opportunity for recoveri ng jurisdictions to invol ve the community in identifying r ecovery goal s and prioriti es. In our re view of reco very plans created after past disasters, we have i dentified c ertain chara cteristics that facilitated the recovery process.

Identify clear goals for recovery. A plan conta ining cle ar g oals can provide dire ction and sp ecific obj ect ives for a re covering co mmunity to focus on an d strive for. Clear goals can also h elp state and l ocal governments prioritize projects, allo cate resources, and establish a basis for subsequent evaluati ons about th e recovery. After the 1995 earthquake in Kobe, Jap an, jurisdicti ons identifie d specific re covery goals in their plans, such as the rebuil ding of all damaged hou sing units in 3 ye ars and removing all temporary housing within 5 years. These goals were critical for helping t o coordinate the wide ra nge of p artic ipants invol ved in recovery. Ad ditionally, th ese goals all owed the go vernment to communicate its recover y progress with the publi c. Each mon th, information on progress made toward achieving t hose goals was provided to the public online and to the media at press conferences. Fi nally, th ese goals provid ed a basis fo r evaluation s conducted by local governments, Page 2 GAO-09-437T which enabl ed policyma kers to measure the regio n’s progress toward recovery, identify ne ede d chang es to existing pol icies, and l earn lessons for future disasters.

Include det ailed information to f acilitate implementation . Includin g detailed imp lementation information in recovery plans can h elp communities realize rec overy go als. Im plementable recov ery plans specif y objectives and tasks, clarify roles and responsibilities, and identify potential fu nding sourc es. Accordin gly, the reco very plan cr eated b y the City of Grand Forks, North Dakota, after the 1997 Red River fl ood contained th ese element s. First, the plan outline d broad reco very go als, which were linked to a number of objectives and tasks that would help to realize those broad goals . The plan al so identified a target co mpletion date for each tas k so the city could better manage related acti vities . Second, Grand Fork’s plan assigned personnel to each tas k to carry o ut that activity. By clarifying the roles and responsibilities for those who would be involved in a ccomplishing specific t asks, the plan provided de tailed information to facilitat e i mplementation. Third, the Grand Forks plan identified fu nding sourc es for each r ecovery task . It also incl uded a financing m atrix, which presented various funding sources for each task along with t arget compl etion dates. A city evalu ation found that these pl an characteristi cs allowed t he city to co nceive and f ormulate projects in collaboratio n with the ci ty council and other governmental representatives. It also h elped Grand Forks meet its recovery goals as well as adhere to federal and state disaster assistance funding law s and regulations. Establish plans in a ti mely manner. The pro mpt completion of recovery pl ans help to facilitate the ensuing recovery pro cess by providing a cle ar framework early on. Creating plans in a ti mely manner can be a challen ge af ter disasters, as was the case in New Orleans after the 2005 hurrica nes. However, jurisdictions affected by the Kobe earthquak e devised a str ategy to ens ure that rec overy plans were finalized promptly after the 1 995 earthqu ak e. These lo cal jurisdictions had a rela tively short amount of time in which to submit proposals for the national budget that would be co nsidered for the coming year. Fa cing this deadlin e, officials develop ed a two-phase planning strat egy. First, th ey complete d a plan within 2 months of the earthquake th at identified broad recovery goals to provide a b asis for budget requests. Second, six months after the earthquak e, local Japan ese officials c ollaborated with citizens to devel op more detailed recovery p lans. This two-phase plan ning process enabled the jurisdictions to meet their tigh t n ational bud get submissio n deadlin e Page 3 GAO-09-437T while allowing addition al time for communities to develo p specific recovery str ategies. Build State and Local Capacity for Implementing Federal Disaster Programs Given the le ad role that state and loc al gov ernments play in d isaster recovery, their ability to act effectivel y directly af fects recovery after a major disaster. While the federal government plays a key supporting role by providing financial as sistance through a ran ge of programs, state and local go vern ments may need c ertain capaciti es—such as havi ng financi al resources and technical know-how—to e ffectively tak e advantage of th at assistance.

Enhance financial capacity . The widespread d estruction c aused by major disasters can impose significa nt financial burdens on the state and local go vern ments, such as creating unbudgeted expenses while at the same time decimating th e local t ax base. In addit ion, federal disaster programs often require s tate and l oca l governments to match a portion of the assistance the y recei ve. In th e pa st, affected j urisdictions have used loans from a variety of sources to en hance lo cal f inancial cap acity. For example, aft er the 1997 Red River fl ood, the Ban k of North Dakota provided a li ne of credit of over $4 4 million to the City of Grand Forks. The city use d this loan t o meet FEMA matching requirements, provide cash flow for the city go vernment’s ope rating ex penses, and fund recovery projects that commenced before the arrival of fin ancial assistance. Strengthen technical capacity . Sta te and lo cal governments face the challen ge of implementing the wide range of f ederal disaster programs. Some of these federal pr ograms requ ire a certai n amount of technical know-how to navigate. For example, FEMA’s Pu blic Assistance grant program has complicate d paperwor k requirements and multistage application processes that can pl ace considerabl e demands o n applica nts. To strengthe n their techn ical c apacit y to implement this program after the 2005 Gulf Coast hurricanes, FEMA and Mississippi state offic ials used federal fund ing to obtain an online accounting sys tem that tracked and facilitated the sharing of operationa l documents. In doing so, FEMA and the state red uced the burden on appl icants of mee ting Public Assistance grant progra m requirements, gained immediate ac cess to key documents that helped officials make project approvals, an d relieved th e documentati on and resul ting human capit al responsibilities that applicants faced during project de velopment. Page 4 GAO-09-437T Business recovery is a k ey element of a community’s recov ery after a major disaster. Small businesses ar e vital to a co mmunity’s e conomic health, y et a re especiall y vulnerable to disasters because th ey often lack resources to sustain financial loss an d have less c apacity to withstand market chan ges. Federal , state, and lo cal go vernments have d eveloped strategies to facilitate bu siness reco very, includin g several t argeted at small businesses. Implement Strategies for Business Recover y Provide technical assistance to help businesses adapt to postdisaster market conditions . Major disasters can cha nge communities in ways that require businesses to adapt. The ability of business owners to reco gnize chan ge and adapt to the postdi saster mark et for goods and services can help thos e firms attain long-term viability after a disaster. Recognizing t his after the 1994 Northridge e arthqu ake, Los Angeles officials assisted neighb orhood businesses in adapting to short- and long-term cha nges, using a combinati on of federal , state, and local funds. Specifically, a local nonp rofit provided direct tech nical assistance to affected b usinesses su ch as couns eling them o n how to obtain gov ernment assistance and pr oviding strat egies for ho w to adapt t o the chan ged business environment. This information was disseminated through doo r-to-door canvassing in affected areas to reach out to business owners and conferenc es to teach owners how to market their businesses given th e ch anged d emographics. Create stra tegies to minimize bus iness relocation and t he loss of customer base . Widespread business relocation s after a disa ster can hinder recov ery. Loc al g overnments have d evise d strategies to retain businesses after past disasters. For ex ample, after the Red River flood, th e City of Grand Forks used the Depart ment of Housing and Urban Developmen t’s Community Developm ent Block Grant funds to provide $1.75 million in loans to businesses. A feature of this program was that i t forgave 40 p ercent of the loan princip le of busines ses that were still operating in the community for 3 y ear s. According to a loc al of ficial, ov er 70 perc ent o f businesses that recei ve d this loan stayed in Gra nd Forks for 3 ye ars. Another local strategy t aken to minimize business relocation was implemented after the 1989 Loma Pr ieta e arthqu ake. The City of Santa Cruz constructed la rge aluminum and fabric pavilions where local businesses that suffered damage relo cated. City officials state d that these pavilions hel ped to mitig ate the impa ct of the eart hquake o n small businesses by enablin g t hem to conti nue operatio ns and thereby maintain their customer base.

Page 5 GAO-09-437T A persistent challen ge fa cing go vern ment at all l evels is the r isk of fraud, waste, and a buse of fund s targeted fo r disaster assistance. Th e influx of financial assistance a vail able aft er a major disaster provides i ncreased opportunities for such activities. Both disaster vict ims and public funds are at risk. We identifie d two action s that state a nd local gov ernments can take after m ajor disasters to combat th e issue of f raud, waste, and abuse. Adopt a Comprehensive Approach to Combating Fraud, W aste, and Abuse Create cre dentialing program to minimize i nstances of contract or fraud. Many disaster vict ims hire contractors to repair or reb uild their homes using government assistance. Re sidents are potential targets for fraud by uns crupulous contractors. To help prot ect its residents from contractor f raud after th e 1997 Red River flood, the City of G rand Forks established a required credentialin g program for contractors. This included a “one-stop shop” that ser ved as a man datory clearinghouse for contractors that wanted to do busine ss with recovering resid ents. State and local off icials staffing the cl earin ghouse carri ed out a vari ety of functions, in cluding checking that co ntractors had appropriat e licenses and insuran ce and did n ot have criminal records. After passing these checks and completing all the req uired applicati ons, contractors were issued photo identificati on cards that they were r equired to carry at all times while working within city limit s. In about 2 months, the city issued approximately 50 0 new c ontractor lic enses and 2, 000 contract or identificatio n cards through the on e-stop shop. During that same period, officials arrested more than 20 i ndivid uals who had outstanding warrants. In an effort t o minimize instances of contractor f raud after th e 2008 Midwest floods, the City of Ceda r Rapids, Iowa created a similar contractor certification program mo deled aft er Grand Forks’ program. Create com prehensive state framework to mi nimize fraud, waste, and abuse of federal programs . The need to quickly pro vide assistanc e to victims puts assistance payments at risk to fraudulent appl icants who try to obtain benefits they are not ent itled to. Our prior work o n FEMA’s Individuals and Households Program (IHP ) payments and the Department of Homeland Security’s purchase ca rd program showed significant instances of fraud, waste, and abuse in the wake of the 20 05 hurricanes. We previous ly estimated improper a nd potentially fraudulent payments related to the IHP application proces s to be appr oximately $1 billion of t he first $6 billio n provided. Additionally, FEMA prov ided nearly $20 million i n duplicate p ayments to individuals w ho registered and recei ve d assistance Page 6 GAO-09-437T twice by usi ng the same Social Secur ity numbers and addresses. 5 Because of the role st ate go vernments play in distributing and alloc ating this federal assistance, these known vulnerab ilities call for states to establish effective co ntrols to minimize opportunities for individual to defraud the government. We hav e pr eviously test ified on the need for fra ud preventio n controls, fraud detection , monitoring adherence t o controls throughout the entire pr ogram life, c ollection of i mproper payments, and aggressive prosecution of individual s committin g fraud. 6 Without the creation of such a fraud prot ection framework—espe cially th e ad option of fraud prevention controls—federal programs can end up losing millions or potentially billions of dollars to fraud, waste, and abuse. The Public Assistance grant program, administered by FE MA, is one of two key programs the federal govern ment has used to provid e federal rebuilding a ssistance to Gulf Coast states after th e 20 05 Gulf Coast hurricanes. Under this program the federal go ver nment provides funds on a project-by- project basi s. We have p reviously reported that f ederal, state, and local off icials reported experien cing a wide range of op erational challen ges, many of which were magnified becau se of the lar ge number o f rebuilding p rojects following the 20 05 Gulf Coast hurricanes. Today, I would like to focus on t wo broad challenges we identified in that report— those associated with de veloping P ublic Assistance projects a nd those involving inf ormation sh aring. Challenges with FEMA ’s Public Assistance Grant Program After the 2005 Gulf Coast Hurricanes Provide Potential Lessons Challenges Experienced in Developi ng Public Assistance Projects In our recen t review of t he Public As sistance gra nt program, we identifie d several ch all enges invol ving the proc ess of devel oping projec ts that at times contributed to del ays and in creased costs, particularly for many large permanent work projects. These included using program flexibilities to rebuild to the postdisaster needs of grant appli cants and d etermining the scope of projects. Limitations in using Public Assistance to rebuild to t he postdisaster needs of grant appli cants . Local ities experie nced difficulties u sing the Pub lic Assistance grant prog ram to rebuild in a way 5GAO, Hurri canes Ka tri na and Ri ta Di saster Re lief: Preve ntion I s th e K ey to Mi nimi zing Fra ud , Wa ste, and Abuse in Re covery Effo rts , GAO-07-418T (Was hington , D.C.: Jan. 29 , 2007). 6GAO-07-418T . Page 7 GAO-09-437T that met thei r postdisaster needs a nd conditions. This is because the program typically provi des funds to restore buildings, equipment, or infrastructure back t o th e way they were before the disaster. 7 For example when a community that was in the process of making infrastructure upgrades prior to the storms wanted to rebuild according to it s updated plans, it exp erienced ch allenges usi ng the progr am. Prior to the 20 05 Gul f Coast hurricanes, loca l o fficials in St. Bernard Parish were beg inning the process of consolidating the jurisdic tion’s seven s eparate wast ewater and sewer treatment plants into a sing le facility in order to meet EPA compliance rules, among other thing s. The parish had alre ad y begun construction of the cons olidated fa cilities and had issued a $50 million bond to fun d the project . However, the storms flooded the entire sewer system and destroyed e quipment in all seven tre atment plant s. When parish officials applied f or Public Assistance fun ding to repai r the facilities, th ey sought to structure the project to accomplish their previo us construction goals rather than buildin g a system that they p lanned to decommission. These of ficials reported experien cing ch allen ges obtainin g agreement fr om FEMA to build their pr oject as a consolidate d wastewater treatment plant instead of seven sep arate faci liti es. This chal lenge, along with other challenges in obtaining agreement on the scope an d cost of the project, led t o over 2 yea rs of delays i n starting rebuilding. Du ring that time, heavy trucks were used to pump and haul sewage as an interim measure, resulting in a considerable co st as well as damage t o the parish’ s roads. According to St. B ernard Parish officials, t he temporary measures have cost the federal go vernment more than $60 million. These officials estimated that had the y been abl e to move ahea d with their original plans , it would have taken abo ut 1½ years f or the new consolidated facility to become ope rational. Ho wever, more than 2 years after the pr oject was proposed, rebuilding had not yet b egun. Local gover nments in the Gulf Coast al so needed flexibility in rebuilding t o address postdisaster needs when the population o f their neigh borhoods change d sig nificantly fr om pre-Katrina lev els. Consequently, it was important for their rebuilding project s to take int o account new conditions. For example, in light of p ostdisaster population ch anges, Louisiana’s Recovery School District sought flexi bility in the size and location of t he schools t o be rebuilt. However, they exp erien ced challen ges with using the Public As sistance gra nt program to do this 7The pr ogram c ontains p rovisions—thro ugh the use of alter nate or improve d projects—tha t allow some cha nges, but t his typically res ults in res trictions in fun ding. Page 8 GAO-09-437T because th e program is designed to r estore infrastructure bac k to the condition, lo cation, and f unction that existed befo re the disaster. FEMA and school d istrict officials ultimate ly were able t o work together to resolve their differences by moving t oward a more flexible ap proach to rebuilding.

Difficulties in accurat ely determining scope of projects. Federal, state, and lo cal offici als also experie nced ch allen ges with dev eloping the scope of work of Gulf Coast recover y projects. D uring the pr ocess of developin g the scope of Gulf Coast projects, offic ials had diffi culty determining which damage was disaster related a nd therefore potentially eligible for coverage und er the progr am. For exa mple, in St. Bernard Parish, roughly 2 years p assed before FEMA and parish field i nspection teams completed identifi cation of eli gible damage to approxi mately 2,500 blocks of lo cal streets. T he parish had no records to documen t the condition of its streets prior to the 2005 Gulf Coast hurricanes, so according to state officials, FEMA conducted ins pections of each street i n an attempt t o distinguish predisaster damage from what was caused directly as a result of the hurricanes. I n contrast, n earby Jeffer son Parish did not enco unter similar challenges with distinguishing pred isaster damage fro m damage directly relat ed to the hurricanes. This is because the parish maintained a r oad repair- management information system (including a road-maintenance pl an) prior to the disaster that enabled the parish to identify preexis ting road conditions to FEMA officials, thereby helping to expedite its r oad-repair p rojects. FEMA plans to incorporate some project development flexibilities into it\ s regular practices. For ex ample, FEMA ’s Public Assistance Catastrophic Disaster Recovery Conce pt Plan, fina lized in May 2008 , recog nizes the need for regulations to allow applican ts to more easily tailor projects to meet postdisaster needs. In Septembe r 2008, FEMA officials in formed us that policies to address this issue as well as a ran ge of other i nitiatives related to th e plan are in developme nt and are expected to be complete by March 2009. Challenges with, an d Lessons for , Information Shari ng Because the Public Assistance grant program is complex and requires collaboratio n among fed eral, state, and local offi cials, effe cti ve sharing o f project information is especiall y impor tant. We i dentified ch allenges to sharing project information among i ntergovern mental participants during project dev elopment. Federal, state, and local off icials involv ed in the program in Louisiana reported facin g chall enges in effecti vel y sharing critical oper ational infor mation about projects in cluding do cuments used Page 9 GAO-09-437T to support scope and co st estimates, such as receipts, invoices, and facili ty assessments. For example, some appl icants in Lo uisiana told us of the need to rep eatedly resub mit key project docume nts because of the lac k of an effecti ve system to share such doc umentation. This situation was made worse because key fed eral and state officials responsible for reviewing and approvi ng documen tation were not primarily locat ed in the same place. Altho ugh FEMA typicall y colo cates with state grant ees in order to facilitate inf ormation sh aring, FEMA and Louisiana state offi cials conducted t heir work primarily from different cit ies—approximately 80 miles away.

In Mississip pi, federal, state, and lo cal officials adopted strategies that helped to f acilitate the sharing of pr oject information. For example, following the disaster, FEMA’s Miss issippi Transitional Reco very Office and the stat e grante e were located in the same office comple x in Biloxi, Mississippi, and officials from these agenci es were are also p ositioned together thr oughout the state. They t old us that t his colocati on had multiple benefits for information sharing and ex change, inclu ding the timely sharing of critical documents and facilit ati on of daily meetings on project-development issues. Further, as previous ly mentioned, FEMA and Mississippi state officials used Public Assistance funding to secure an \ online ac co unting syste m that made operational documents associated with projects readily av ailable to all parties. As a result, FEMA and the state had immediate ac cess to key d ocuments that helped th em to make project appr oval decisions and relieve the do cumentation and resulting human capit al burdens t hat applic an ts faced duri ng project d evelopment. To help the Department of Homeland Security i mprove the operation of the Public A ssistance grant program and build o n some of the actions it has taken, o ur December 2008 rep ort contained a number of recommendations, inclu ding that FE MA imp rove collaboratio n and information sharing within the Public Assistance process by i dentifying and disseminating practi ces that fa cil itate more ef fective communication among feder al, state, and local e ntitie s communic ating and tra cking project information. 8 In commenting on a draft of our report, the department generall y ag reed with our recommen dations and noted that FEMA is ma king efforts to improve collaboration and information sharing within the Public Assistance process. 8GAO-09-129 . Page 10 GAO-09-437T The insights and lessons gained from the recov ery experienc es of past major disasters provide a potentiall y valuabl e so urce to all l evels of government as they seek to meet the ma ny challe nges and co mplexities of recovering f rom a major disaster. While there is no one right way for state and local jurisdictions to manage rec overy, the practices I h ave presented today provid e a basic set of considerations and ap proaches for communities recovering from Hurri canes Ike an d Gustav as well as disasters yet to come. Fo r its part, the federal go vernment ha s been an active partner in disaster recovery, s pending tens of billions of dollars on efforts to recover from disasters over the last se veral y ears. Our work on one key fede ral recovery program—FEMA’s Public Assistance grant program—has identified several spe cific a ctions that can b e taken to address the operational challen ges t hat the prog ram faced in the wake of the 20 05 hur ricanes. Opp ortunities exist for the federal gov ernment to take steps in the f uture to continue to refi ne this program to better address these chall enges that co uld be fa ced again by Gu lf Coast states recoverin g from Hurricanes Ike an d Gustav, and in adv ance of future disasters. Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, this conclu des my statement. I would be ha ppy to resp ond to any qu estions you may have at this time.

For informa tion about t his testimon y, please co ntact Stanl ey J. Czerwinski, Director, Strategic Issues, at (202) 51 2-680 6 or [email protected] . Contact point s for our Offices of Congressional Relations an d Public Aff airs may be f ound on the last page of this statement. Major contributors to this testimony include Pet er Del Toro, Assistant Director; Shirley Hwang; a nd Latesha L ove. Susan Etzel, Christopher Harm, and Michael O’Neill also made key contri butions. Conclus ions Contacts and Acknowledgements (450744) Page 11 GAO-09-437T This is a work of the U.S. government a nd is not subject to copyrig ht prote ction in the United States. The pub lish ed prod uct may be r epro duce d and distri buted i n its entirety without further permissi on fro m GAO. Howe ver, becaus e this work may c ontai n copyrig hted im ages or oth er material, p ermi ssion from the copyrig ht hol de r may be necess ary if you wish to repr oduce this mate rial sep arate ly. GAO’ s Mission The Govern ment Accountability Offi ce, the audit , evalu ation, and investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its\ constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the perfor mance and account abili ty of the fed eral government for the American people. GAO examines the use of pub lic funds; eval uates fed eral programs and policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and ot her assistance to hel p Congress make informed oversight, policy, and f unding decisions. GAO’s commitment to good go vernment is reflected in it s core values of account abili ty, integrity, and reliabilit y. The fastest a nd easiest way to obta in copies of GAO documents at no cos t is through GAO’s Web site ( ww w.gao.gov ). Each weekday aft ernoon, GAO posts on its Web site newly released reports, testimony, and correspondence. To h ave GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products, go to ww w.g ao.gov and s elect “E-mail Updates.” The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO’s actual cost of production and distribution and dep ends on the number of pages in the publication and whether the publicat ion is printed in color or black and white. Pricing and orderi ng information is posted on GAO’s W eb site, http://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm . Place orders by call ing ( 202) 5 12-6 000, toll free (8 66) 80 1-70 77 , or TDD (202) 512-25 37. Orders may be paid for u sing American Express, Discover Card, MasterCard, Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional i nformation. Contact:

Web site: www.gao.gov/ fraudnet/fraudnet.htm E-mail: [email protected] Automated answering system: ( 800) 424- 545 4 or (202) 51 2-74 70 Ralph Dawn, Managing Director, da [email protected] v, (202) 512- 4400 U.S. Government Accountability Offi ce, 441 G Str eet NW, Roo m 7125 Washington, DC 20548 Chuck Youn g, Managing Director, yo ungc1@gao. gov , (202) 5 12-48 00 U.S. Government Accountability Offi ce, 441 G Str eet NW, Roo m 7149 Washington, DC 20548 Obtaini ng C opi es of GAO R eports and Te stim ony Order by Phone To R eport F raud, W aste, and Abus e in Federal Programs Congressional Relations Public Affairs