Coordinate efforts of departments and agencies to increase efficiency of disaster response

The Challenge

There are unnecessary fiscal and operational burdens on America’s cities, towns and citizens due to a need for improved coordination among federal departments and agencies. In too many cases disaster recovery efforts remain disconnected. Federal silos result in funding that is not aligned, and city staff are frustrated by federal grant applications and compliance requirements that demand large duplications of effort, and can be counter to one another. These include contradictory design requirements and redundant regulation and permitting, which can be time consuming and costly. Attempts to resolve such issues demonstrate how no one agency is empowered to resolve interagency inconsistencies. These issues are particularly evident in the way agencies manage disaster response and recovery, exemplifying how this lack of coordination can be both costly and risky to America’s stability and security.

The Opportunity

Federal and city leaders commend past federal efforts to resolve inefficiencies through interagency coordination, including the Hurricane Sandy Rebuilding Task Force efforts and Strong Cities Strong Communities initiative, which city officials believe increased the efficiency and effectiveness of federal programs. Cost savings, the ability to prevent harm and make swift and resilient recovery from disasters, as well as the chance to achieve other resilience policy priorities (such as protection of the most vulnerable populations) should be increased when Federal agencies coordinate. In certain cases, the required cooperation that extreme events inspire can be a catalyst for ongoing coordination, as demonstrated by the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s National Disaster Resilience Competition.
The multibillion dollar federal investments in recovery from 2017 disasters including Hurricanes Harvey, Irma, and Maria and the fires in North California, presents ideal timing for examining opportunities to improve resilience efforts, which should include:

• Identifying conflicting or inconsistent federal requirements, barriers to disaster impact avoidance, and cost- and delay-drivers in disaster recovery.
• Streamlining permitting.
• Removing identified barriers to disaster avoidance and recovery.
• Harmonizing funding application requirements.
• Developing joint guidance to cities on the design and development of strategies for safeguarding housing and infrastructure from future shocks including:
• Utilizing common methodologies (including the benefit-cost analyses strategy recommended in this document).
• Integrating future forecast and scenario data and analysis into decision making.

Action Steps

Agency

The President should call for an executive-level interagency task
force on increasing urban security, stability, safety and cost savings, enabling agencies to collaborate on community preparedness and resilience. Departments and agencies within the interagency task force should meet
at least quarterly to determine ways to streamline funding, design and regulations.

Offices, departments and agencies in the group should include the White House Office of Management and Budget, White House Council on Environmental Quality, White House National Security Council, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Department of Agriculture (Forest Service, National Resource Conservation Service, Rural Development), Department of Commerce (NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service), Department of Energy (Power Marketing Associations), Department of Homeland Security (Federal Emergency Management Agency, Infrastructure Protection, Science and Technology), Department of Housing and Urban Development, Department of Interior (Bureau of Revenue, Geological Survey), Environmental Protection Agency, and others as appropriate.