1. Project Management Committee Meeting Washington, D.C. September 21, 2004 Independent Study to Assess Future Savings from Mitigation, Track B Telephone Interview Data Preliminary Analysis

2. 2 Track B Progress to Date [2][2] Meeting with State Officials while in Tuscola County.

3. 3 Track B Progress - I [2][2] Meeting with State Officials while in Tuscola County. Community FEMA Call w/ Region State Visit Federal Visit FEMA Letter Sent Given OK to Start Calls Hayward, CA 11/25/0312/15/03 (Sacramento) 12/16/03 (Oakland) 12/19/031/8/04 Jefferson Co., AL Project Impact 1/5/04Not Planned (Clanton ) 2/11/04 (Atlanta) 1/15/042/5/04 Horry Co., SC Project Impact 1/5/042/18/04 (Columbia) 2/13/04 (Atlanta) 1/15/042/7/04 Freeport, NY Project Impact 2/5/04Not Planned (Albany) 2/27/04 (New York City) 3/1/043/11/04 Tuscola, MI 1/27/043/17/04 (Lansing) 2/18/04 (Chicago) 3/4/043/10/04 Jamestown, ND Project Impact 3/30/048/16/04 (Bismarck) 4/27/04 (Denver) 4/15/044/26/04 Multnomah Co, OR Project Impact 6/23/04Not Planned (Salem) 8/2/04 (Seattle) 7/15/048/9/04 Orange, CA Pending Fort Walton Bch., FL Pending Mandeville, LA Pending

4. 4 Track B Progress - II [2][2] Meeting with State Officials while in Tuscola County. Community Given OK to Start Calls Interviews Completed Community Visited BCA Data Collected Bibliography Created Hayward, CA 1/8/043/12/041/22/04Complete Jefferson Co., AL Project Impact 2/5/043/10/044/6/04Complete Horry Co., SC Project Impact 2/7/043/2/044/20/04Complete Freeport, NY Project Impact 3/11/047/1/047/15/04Complete Tuscola, MI 3/10/047/15/043/17/04Complete Jamestown, ND Project Impact 4/26/047/25/048/17/04CompletePending Multnomah Co, OR Project Impact 8/9/04In ProcessPendingCompletePending Orange, CA Pending Fort Walton Bch., FL Pending Mandeville, LA Pending

5. 5 Track B Process Data [2][2] Meeting with State Officials while in Tuscola County.

6. 6 Informant Participation Status

7. 7 Informant Participation Status by Community # Individuals

8. 8 Reasons Informants Were Not Approached (n=21) Likely bias (e.g., State Hazard Mitigation Officer, Federal Hazard Mitigation Officer) Insufficient/inaccurate contact information Individual working outside of the country/moved/retired Interviews already completed for community Job title/role suggests minimal contribution to study –Approved by Track B team leader

9. 9 Informant Referrals by Community FAKE DATA

10. 10 Total Number of Contacts Needed to Complete Interviews (Includes Telephone, Mail, Fax, Email)

11. 11 Index Informants Key individuals with knowledge of mitigation activities within the community Identified based on: – FEMA recommendation – Preliminary data analysis Provided research staff with names and contact information of potential informants Provided local “endorsement” of study

12. 12 Acting Assistant City Manager REFUSED 2/3/04 Assistant Director of Public Works INTERVIEWED 1/27/04 1 City Manager, Originally agreed Then REFUSED 1/30/04 1 Dir. Public Works INTERVIEWED 2/9/04 Chief Building Inspector REFUSED 2/5/04 Associate Civil Engineer INTERVIEWED 2/11/04 Senior Planner REFUSED 2/5/04 HAZMAT Program Coordinator INTERVIEWED 2/18/04 Fire Chief REFUSED 2/5/04 Emergency Operations REFUSED 2/9/04 Division Head of Water Facility INTERVIEWED 2/19/04 1 Index Informant 2 Independent Network Director, Community & Economic Development INTERVIEWED 3/12/04 2 Public Information Officer INTERVIEWED 3/12/04 2 Flow Chart of Interview Network in Hayward FEMA Deputy Publicity Dir. for Utilities Not Approached Cal State Hayward Not Approached

13. 13 FEMA Director, County EMA Interviewed 1 3/1/04 1 Index Informant Flow Chart of Interview Network in Jefferson Co. County Commissioner Interviewed 1 3/4/04 Director, Land Development Interviewed 3/4/04 Land Development e Interviewed 2/24/04 Land Development pr Interviewed 2/17/04 Former City Planner, Consultant Interviewed 2/23/04 Admin. Assistant, County EMA Interviewed 2/24/04 City NFIP Not Approached Director, Inspection Services Not Approached County GIS Manager Not Approached County Commissioner Refused 3/8/04 Dir., Local Land Trust Interviewed 3/4/04 Fire Chief, City of Tarrant Not Approached Auburn University Not Approached USGS Not Approached Dir. of County Inspection Services Not Approached State Hazard Mitigation Officer Not Approached President, Local Engineering Company Interviewed 3/10/04 Hydrologist, Local Engineering Company Interviewed 3/10/04 County EMA Not Approached County EMA Not Approached

14. 14 FEMA 1 Index Informant Flow Chart of Interview Network in Horry Co. Emergency Planner, County EMD Interviewed 1 2/18/04 Director, Emergency Services County Red Cross Chapter Interviewed 3/19/04 Meteorologist, Local Television Station Interviewed 3/1/04 Public Safety Director, County EMD Interviewed 2/25/04 Property Manager, County EMD Interviewed 3/2/04 Professor, Civil Engineering Department, Clemson University Interviewed 2/23/04 National Weather Service Not Approached Head Building Official, City of Conway Not Approached Fire Chief, County Fire Department Refused 3/8/04 Director, County Storm Water Management Not Approached

15. 15 FEMA 1 Index Informant Flow Chart of Interview Network in Freeport Grant Administrator, Public Works Interviewed 1 3/23/04 Floodplain Manager, Superintendent of Buildings, Mitigation Coordinator Interviewed 3/18/04 Manager, Public Works Interviewed 3/16/04 Village Trustee; Owner, Local Insurance Agency Interviewed 3/23/04 Business Owner, Local Marine Storage Interviewed 4/14/04 Coordinator, Emergency Management Team Interviewed 5/25/04 Director, Emergency Management Interviewed 4/21/04 Business Owner, Local Restaurant Refused 5/27/04 Village Trustee Refused 5/21/04 Village Engineer, Department of Public Works Not Approached

16. 16 FEMA 1 Index Informant Flow Chart of Interview Network in Tuscola County Drain Commissioner Interviewed 1 4/5/04 Engineer, Local Eng. Group Refused 4/6/04 Prog. Admin., Intercounty Drains Interviewed 5/25/04 Lieutenant, State Police Dept. Interviewed 4/5/04 Township Mgr., Tittabawassee Interviewed 4/1/04 Engineer, Local Company Interviewed 3/25/04 Flood Specialist, City of Vassar Interviewed 4/2/04 President, Local Business Not Approached Environmental Engineer, State Dept. Environmental Quality Interviewed 5/24/04 Engineer, Local Eng. Group Interviewed 4/1/04 Preliminary Research Manager, City of Vassar Interviewed 1 3/25/04 Director, Public Works City of Frankenmuth Interviewed 1 4/2/04 State Hazard Mitigation Officer Not Approached Local Construction Co. Interviewed 1 3/22/04 Engineer, Canadian Company Not Approached

17. 17 1 Index Informant Flow Chart of Interview Network in Jamestown City Engineer Interviewed 6/4/04 Consultant Interviewed 6/7/04 Local Red Cross Chapter Interviewed 6/18/04 Parks and Recreation Interviewed 6/30/04 State House of Reps. Interviewed 7/9/04 Weather Spotter Refused 6/4/04 Training Office, Fire Dept. Refused 6/8/04 City Fire Chief Interviewed 6/8/04 Police Chief Not Approached State Department of Emergency Management Not Approached City Administrator Interviewed 7/1/04 FEMA Mayor Interviewed 1 6/1/04 Director, State Dept. of Emergency Mgmt. Refused 7/6/04 Asst. City Engineer Refused 7/6/04 President, Amateur Radio Association Interviewed 6/17/04 Local Cable Services Interviewed ??/??/04 County Emergency Manager Interviewed 6/21/04

18. 18 Interview Informant Job Titles (N=52)

19. 19 Track B Preliminary Findings [2][2] Meeting with State Officials while in Tuscola County.

20. 20 Informant Perceptions of Community Risk Very Low Very High (n=47, n=48, n=49)

21. 21 Percent of Informants who Believe the Community Has a Natural Hazard Mitigation Program % Yes In your opinion, does the community have a natural hazard mitigation program? (N=47)

22. 22 Informants’ Knowledge of the Community’s Natural Hazard Mitigation Program Average Knowledge How much do you know about the community’s natural hazard mitigation program? (N=39)

23. 23 Informants’ Assessment of the Community’s Natural Hazard Mitigation Program? (Community Officials) Insert Sample quotes. What is your assessment of the community’s natural hazard mitigation program?

24. 24 Informants’ Assessment of the Community’s Natural Hazard Mitigation Program? (CBO/Community Partners) Insert Sample quotes. What is your assessment of the community’s natural hazard mitigation program?

25. 25 Informants’ Assessment of the Community’s Natural Hazard Mitigation Program? (Local Informants) Insert Sample quotes. What is your assessment of the community’s natural hazard mitigation program?

26. 26 Informants’ Assessment of the Appropriateness and Effectiveness of Natural Hazard Mitigation Programs How appropriate/effective do you consider these [natural hazard mitigation] efforts? (N=40)

27. 27 Informants’ Perceptions of how the Community’s Natural Hazard Mitigation Program Compares to Others In your opinion, how does the community’s natural hazard mitigation program compare to natural hazard mitigation programs in other communities? (N=38) Much Better Much Worse About the Same MEAN

28. 28 Informants’ Perceptions of Benefits Provided by Mitigation Activities Which of the following benefits were provided by [this mitigation activity]? (N=?)

29. 29 Informants’ Perceptions of Primary Objectives/Benefits of Mitigation Activities What was the major objective of this activity? (N=?)

30. 30 Informants’ Perceptions of Success Meeting Major Objectives with VS. without Mitigation Activities How would you rate the community’s success in meeting this [major] objective with/without this activity? (N=?)

31. 31 Total Number of Spin-Offs: Mentioned Vs. Confirmed # Spin-Offs