1. Using Mitigation Planning to Reduce Disaster Losses Karen Helbrecht and Kathleen W. Smith United States: Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) May 7, 2008

2. Evolution of Hazard Mitigation Large Structural Projects  Traditional response to floods  Focused on levees, dams, and stream diversions  Flood victims received disaster relief  Traditional approach did not: –discourage unwise development –promote sound floodplain management

3. Evolution of Hazard Mitigation National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP)  The Need for the NFIP –Flood losses and Disaster relief continued to mount –Property owners were unable to buy flood insurance from insurance companies  Congress created the NFIP in 1968

4. Evolution of Hazard Mitigation Disaster Recovery  Communities built back the same way  Same or similar damages suffered after another disaster

5. Evolution of Hazard Mitigation Preparedness Getting people and equipment ready to quickly and effectively respond to a disaster Recovery Putting a community back together after a disaster Response Saving life and property during and immediately after a disaster Mitigation Sustained actions taken to reduce or eliminate long-term risk to people and property from hazards and their effects

6. Evolution of Hazard Mitigation  Elements of Mitigation Risk Reduction Elevation Acquisition Retrofitting Floodplain Management Risk Analysis Impact Assessment Flood Hazard Mapping Mitigation Planning Risk Insurance Strengthening Building Codes Flood Insurance Floodplain Management

7. Hazard Mitigation Planning  Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 –Places new importance on mitigation planning –National guidelines for planning –Promotes sustainability as a strategy for disaster resistance

8. Mitigation Plans  Encourage sound decision-making based on a good understanding of hazards and vulnerabilities of the community  States must have an approved mitigation plan to receive non-emergency disaster assistance  Communities must have an approved local hazard mitigation plan in place to be eligible for project grants under FEMA’s mitigation grant programs

9. Hazard Mitigation Planning  Local Mitigation Plans –Single Jurisdictional –Multi-Jurisdictional  Tribal Mitigation Plans  State Standard Mitigation Plans  State Enhanced Mitigation Plans Four Types of Mitigation Plans

10. Roles and Responsibilities Agency Relationships FEMA Headquarters (HQ) FEMA Headquarters (HQ) State Emergency Management Agencies (SEMAs) FEMA Regional Offices FEMA Regional Offices Local Jurisdiction Local Jurisdiction Local Jurisdiction Local Jurisdiction Local Jurisdiction Local Jurisdiction

11. Roles and Responsibilities State Hazard Mitigation Offices  Responsible for implementing planning activities at the state and local level including: –preparing and submitting a “standard state plan” (or “enhanced state plan”) –reviewing, updating, and resubmitting, for FEMA approval, the state mitigation plan every three years –conducting preliminary reviews of local DMA 2000 hazard mitigation plans

12. Roles and Responsibilities Local Jurisdictions  Responsible for: –preparing and submitting a local plan –reviewing, updating and resubmitting the mitigation plan for FEMA approval every five years  A local mitigation plan can address: –A single jurisdiction –Multiple jurisdictions within a county, watershed, regional planning district

13. 4 Step Planning Process  Organize resources  Understand risks and vulnerabilities  Prepare the mitigation plan - Identify goals and mitigation strategies  Implement the plan

14. Organize Resources  Assess Community Support  Build the Planning Team  Engage the Public

15. Risk Assessment  Identify Hazards  Profile Hazard Events  Inventory Assets  Estimate Losses

16. Mitigation Strategy “An Thorough Risk Assessment Leads to an Effective Mitigation Strategy” Risk Assessment Update Mitigation Strategy Changes Goals, Objectives, & ACTIONS Reduction in Vulnerability

17. Mitigation Strategy  Develop Mitigation Goals and Objectives  Identify and Prioritize Mitigation Actions  Implementation Strategy  Document the Process

18. Bringing the Plan to Life  Adopt the mitigation plan  Implement the plan recommendations  Evaluate planning results  Revise and update the plan

19. Mitigation Planning Facts Technical Assistance  How-To Guides

20. Mitigation Planning Facts Technical Assistance  Guidance created by FEMA (Multi-Hazard Mitigation Planning Guidance) provides interpretation and clarification regarding the intent of, and approaches to meeting, the requirements of the Rule

21. Planning Guidance “Crosswalk” Element Location in the Plan (section or annex and page #) Reviewer’s Comments Score N S N S Does the plan include an overall summary description of the jurisdiction’s vulnerability to each hazard? Section II, pp. 4-10 The plan describes the types of assets that are located within geographically defined hazard areas as well as those that would be affected by winter storms.  Does the plan address the impact of each hazard on the jurisdiction? Section II, pp. 10-20 The plan does not address the impact of two of the five hazards addressed in the plan. Required Revisions: Include a description of the impact of floods and earthquakes on the assets. Recommended Revisions: This information can be presented in terms of dollar value or percentage of damage. Recommended Revisions: This information can be presented in terms of dollar value or percentage of damage. Summary Score Not Met

22. Mitigation Planning Six Years Later  By May 1, 2004, every State had an approved plan  Approved Local Hazard Mitigation Plans –Who is covered today?  65 percent of the US population –How many plans today?  More than 16,000 jurisdictions covered covered

23. Status of Local Plan Approval

24. Challenges and Opportunities  Stay engaged in the planning process  Different cultural perspectives  Range of capabilities

25. Challenges and Opportunities  Emergency Managers vs Community Planners  Integration and consistency of plans  Accuracy of risk assessment data

26. Challenges and Opportunities  Mitigation Actions vs. Response Actions  Think “Outside of the Box”  To Accomplish Other Local Goals  Other Funding Sources  Identify a comprehensive range of Actions

27. Challenges and Opportunities  Incorporation of Mitigation Planning into Other Planning Mechanisms  Analyzing Growth & Development Trends  Increasing involvement of city officials and the public

28. Challenges and Opportunities  Risk Assessment –Ensuring that best available data is used in developing the plan –Incorporate any new Scientific Data on Hazards –Incorporate updated loss estimates

29. What We’ve Learned  Be more specific in guidance –“What’s the Bottom Line?”  Provide web resources  Provide more guidance and tools  And we’re still learning…

30. Where do we go from here?  How can we demonstrate effectiveness of plans? –Document actual reduction in damages –Demonstrate continuous improvement in the planning process