[House Hearing, 116 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
EXPERIENCES OF VULNERABLE POPULATIONS DURING DISASTER
=======================================================================
(116-62)
REMOTE HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, PUBLIC BUILDINGS, AND EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON
TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
JULY 28, 2020
__________
Printed for the use of the
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available online at: https://www.govinfo.gov/committee/house-
transportation?path=/browsecommittee/chamber/house/committee/
transportation
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
42-967 PDF WASHINGTON : 2021
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE
PETER A. DeFAZIO, Oregon, Chair
SAM GRAVES, Missouri ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON,
DON YOUNG, Alaska District of Columbia
ERIC A. ``RICK'' CRAWFORD, Arkansas EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas
BOB GIBBS, Ohio RICK LARSEN, Washington
DANIEL WEBSTER, Florida GRACE F. NAPOLITANO, California
THOMAS MASSIE, Kentucky DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois
SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania STEVE COHEN, Tennessee
RODNEY DAVIS, Illinois ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey
ROB WOODALL, Georgia JOHN GARAMENDI, California
JOHN KATKO, New York HENRY C. ``HANK'' JOHNSON, Jr.,
BRIAN BABIN, Texas Georgia
GARRET GRAVES, Louisiana ANDRE CARSON, Indiana
DAVID ROUZER, North Carolina DINA TITUS, Nevada
MIKE BOST, Illinois SEAN PATRICK MALONEY, New York
RANDY K. WEBER, Sr., Texas JARED HUFFMAN, California
DOUG LaMALFA, California JULIA BROWNLEY, California
BRUCE WESTERMAN, Arkansas FREDERICA S. WILSON, Florida
LLOYD SMUCKER, Pennsylvania DONALD M. PAYNE, Jr., New Jersey
PAUL MITCHELL, Michigan ALAN S. LOWENTHAL, California
BRIAN J. MAST, Florida MARK DeSAULNIER, California
MIKE GALLAGHER, Wisconsin STACEY E. PLASKETT, Virgin Islands
GARY J. PALMER, Alabama STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts
BRIAN K. FITZPATRICK, Pennsylvania SALUD O. CARBAJAL, California,
JENNIFFER GONZALEZ-COLON, Vice Chair
Puerto Rico ANTHONY G. BROWN, Maryland
TROY BALDERSON, Ohio ADRIANO ESPAILLAT, New York
ROSS SPANO, Florida TOM MALINOWSKI, New Jersey
PETE STAUBER, Minnesota GREG STANTON, Arizona
CAROL D. MILLER, West Virginia DEBBIE MUCARSEL-POWELL, Florida
GREG PENCE, Indiana LIZZIE FLETCHER, Texas
MIKE GARCIA, California COLIN Z. ALLRED, Texas
SHARICE DAVIDS, Kansas
ABBY FINKENAUER, Iowa
JESUS G. ``CHUY'' GARCIA, Illinois
ANTONIO DELGADO, New York
CHRIS PAPPAS, New Hampshire
ANGIE CRAIG, Minnesota
HARLEY ROUDA, California
CONOR LAMB, Pennsylvania
------ 7
Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency
Management
DINA TITUS, Nevada, Chair
JOHN KATKO, New York DEBBIE MUCARSEL-POWELL, Florida
GARY J. PALMER, Alabama SHARICE DAVIDS, Kansas
JENNIFFER GONZALEZ-COLON, ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON,
Puerto Rico District of Columbia
CAROL D. MILLER, West Virginia HENRY C. ``HANK'' JOHNSON, Jr.,
GREG PENCE, Indiana Georgia
MIKE GARCIA, California JOHN GARAMENDI, California
SAM GRAVES, Missouri (Ex Officio) ANTHONY G. BROWN, Maryland
LIZZIE FLETCHER, Texas, Vice Chair
PETER A. DeFAZIO, Oregon (Ex
Officio)
CONTENTS
Page
Summary of Subject Matter........................................ v
STATEMENTS OF MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE
Hon. Dina Titus, a Representative in Congress from the State of
Nevada, and Chairwoman, Subcommittee on Economic Development,
Public Buildings, and Emergency Management:
Opening statement............................................ 1
Prepared statement........................................... 3
Hon. John Katko, a Representative in Congress from the State of
New York, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Economic
Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management:
Opening statement............................................ 4
Prepared statement........................................... 5
Hon. Peter A. DeFazio, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Oregon, and Chairman, Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure, prepared statement............................. 73
Hon. Sam Graves, a Representative in Congress from the State of
Missouri, and Ranking Member, Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure, prepared statement............................. 73
WITNESSES
Curtis Brown, State Coordinator of Emergency Management, Virginia
Department of Emergency Management, testifying on behalf of the
Institute for Diversity and Inclusion in Emergency Management:
Oral statement............................................... 6
Prepared statement........................................... 8
Chad Higdon, Chief Executive Officer, Second Harvest Community
Food Bank:
Oral statement............................................... 14
Prepared statement........................................... 15
Marcie Roth, Executive Director and Chief Executive Officer,
World Institute on Disability:
Oral statement............................................... 21
Prepared statement........................................... 23
Diane Yentel, President and Chief Executive Officer, National Low
Income Housing Coalition:
Oral statement............................................... 33
Prepared statement........................................... 35
SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD
Statement of Erik Talkin, Chief Executive Officer, Foodbank of
Santa Barbara County, Submitted for the Record by Hon. Salud O.
Carbajal....................................................... 57
Report, ``Preserving Our Freedom: Ending Institutionalization of
People with Disabilities During and After Disasters,'' May 24,
2019, National Council on Disability, Submitted for the Record
by Hon. Jenniffer Gonzalez-Colon............................... 69
APPENDIX
Questions from Hon. Peter A. DeFazio and Hon. Dina Titus to
Curtis Brown, State Coordinator of Emergency Management,
Virginia Department of Emergency Management, testifying on
behalf of the Institute for Diversity and Inclusion in
Emergency Management........................................... 75
Questions to Chad Higdon, Chief Executive Officer, Second Harvest
Community Food Bank, from:
Hon. Peter A. DeFazio and Hon. Dina Titus.................... 80
Hon. Henry C. ``Hank'' Johnson, Jr........................... 83
Hon. John Garamendi.......................................... 83
Questions from Hon. Peter A. DeFazio and Hon. Dina Titus to
Marcie Roth, Executive Director and Chief Executive Officer,
World Institute on Disability.................................. 84
Questions to Diane Yentel, President and Chief Executive Officer,
National Low Income Housing Coalition, from:
Hon. Peter A. DeFazio and Hon. Dina Titus.................... 85
Hon. Henry C. ``Hank'' Johnson, Jr........................... 91
Hon. John Garamendi.......................................... 92
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
July 24, 2020
SUMMARY OF SUBJECT MATTER
TO: LMembers, Subcommittee on Economic Development,
Public Buildings, and Emergency Management
FROM: LStaff, Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public
Buildings, and Emergency Management
RE: LSubcommittee Hearing on ``Experiences of
Vulnerable Populations During Disaster''
_______________________________________________________________________
PURPOSE
The Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings,
and Emergency Management will meet on Tuesday, July 28, 2020,
at 10:00 a.m. in 2167 Rayburn House Office Building and via
Cisco Webex, to receive testimony on ``Experiences of
Vulnerable Populations During Disaster.'' At the hearing,
Members will receive testimony directly from witnesses who work
to address hardships of several populations disproportionately
impacted during disaster. The Subcommittee will hear from the
Partnership for Inclusive Disaster Strategies, the National Low
Income Housing Coalition, the Institute for Diversity and
Inclusion in Emergency Management, and the Second Harvest
Community Food Bank. This hearing will serve as a venue for
this Subcommittee to hear from groups working on behalf of some
of the larger vulnerable communities in the United States on
how they are impacted during disasters, but it is not meant to
be an exhaustive group speaking on behalf of all vulnerable
communities.
BACKGROUND
Disasters of varying forms and intensities strike this
Nation randomly and without prejudice to the people impacted.
Disaster survivors may experience varying degrees of impact and
assistance as a result of their race, creed, color, ethnicity,
physical or mental ability, and socio-economic standing.\1\
Federal agencies providing disaster relief are subject to a
clear nondiscrimination clause in the Robert T. Stafford
Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (Stafford Act,
P.L. 93-288, as amended).\2\ Further, Title VI of the Civil
Rights Act (P.L. 88-352) and the subsequent Americans With
Disabilities Act (ADA, P.L. 101-336) provide additional
assurances that should eliminate disparities in assistance, but
there are many examples where varying types of assistance are
delayed, denied, or simply not disbursed equitably to disaster-
impacted populations.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Wilson, Charley E., Phillip M. Singer, Melissa S. Creary, and
Scott L. Greer. ``Quantifying inequities in US federal response to
hurricane disaster in Texas and Florida compared with Puerto Rico,''
available at https://gh.bmj.com/content/4/1/e001191; Hamel, Liz, Bryan
Wu, and Mollyann Brody. ``An Early Assessment of Hurricane Harvey's
Impact on Vulnerable Texans in the Gulf Coast Region: Their Voices and
Priorities to Inform Rebuilding Efforts,'' Kaiser Family Foundation,
December 5, 2017, available at https://www.kff.org/other/report/an-
early-assessment-of-hurricane-harveys-impact-on-vulnerable-texans-in-
the-gulf-coast-region-their-voices-and-priorities-to-inform-rebuilding-
efforts/.
\2\ 42 U.S.C. 5151.
\3\ See footnotes 1, 5, 18, 21, and 31.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hurricane Katrina in August 2005 was a perfect storm with
respect to its outsize impacts on vulnerable communities. In a
November 2005 report shortly following the storm, the
Congressional Research Service (CRS) wrote the following
regarding social impacts of the storm:
``Hurricane Katrina likely made one of the poorest areas of the
country even poorer. Among those displaced by the storm, many
lost their homes, material possessions, and jobs. Some had
insurance to replace their material property losses, received
help from FEMA or Small Business loans to get by on an
emergency basis or replace property, or received unemployment
insurance or disaster unemployment insurance to replace lost
wages. However, some who lived in the areas most impacted by
the storm may now be destitute; while having financially gotten
by before the storm, in the storm's aftermath they may have
joined the ranks of the poor. Further, the socio-economic
profile of the areas hardest hit by Katrina indicates that
these newly poor would join a population that was already
disproportionately poor and disadvantaged. Before the storm,
the 700,000 people acutely affected by Katrina were more likely
than Americans overall to be poor; minority (most often
African-American); less likely to be connected to the
workforce; and more likely to be educationally disadvantaged
(i.e., not having completed a high school education). Both
those who were poor before the storm, and those who have become
poor following the storm, are likely to face a particularly
difficult time in reestablishing their lives, having few if any
financial resources upon which to draw.'' \4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Congressional Research Service, ``Hurricane Katrina: Social-
Demographic Characteristics of Impacted Areas'', November 4, 2005.
Available at https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/RL/RL33141.
8While Stafford Act Section 308 was in effect at the time
of Hurricane Katrina, the 2005 hurricane season brought to
light some of the discrepancies in Federal disaster planning
and assistance for vulnerable communities, including
disproportionate death and adverse impacts for many.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Barnshaw, John, Joseph Trainor. Race, Class, and Capital Amidst
the Hurricane Katrina Diaspora, 2007; Farber, Daniel A. ``Disaster Law
and Inequality,'' Law & Inequality: A Journal of Theory and Practice,
2007, available at https://scholarship.law.umn.edu/cgi/
viewcontent.cgi?article=1122&context=lawineq.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Statutory changes in the Post-Katrina Emergency Management
Reform Act (P.L. 109-295, Title VI) led to the re-establishment
of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) as an agency
focused on the total cycle of preparedness, prevention,
response, recovery, and mitigation. Additionally, the
legislation specifically called for the establishment of the
Office of Disability Integration and Coordination at FEMA to
work to ensure that communities with access and/or functional
needs were incorporated into planning assumptions for hazard
events.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ P.L. 109-295, Subtitle A, Sec. 611.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
During the next several years, emergency management
significantly transformed at the Federal level to improve upon
the very public response and recovery shortcomings from the
2005 storms. Perhaps the most significant foundational
development was the issuance of Presidential Policy Directive-8
(PPD-8) and its focus on bolstering national preparedness.\7\
PPD-8 led to the National Response Framework, the Recovery
Framework, as well as a formal FEMA-led shift to a whole-of-
community approach to emergency management, intended to ensure
that emergency managers and planners were not only working in
concert with other organizations that play key roles during the
response and recovery phases of an event, but also to ensure
that there was an almost ``universal design'' to the programs
and policies being reviewed, updated, or developed.\8\ Such an
approach would ensure that disaster survivors would not
necessarily need to seek special accommodations if they
required them during an evacuation, seeking shelter, or seeking
other assistance; the whole-of-community approach would take
these needs into consideration as planning or operations were
underway so the survivor's experience would be as seamless as
possible.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Presidential Policy Directive 8--National Preparedness. https:/
/www.dhs.gov/presidential-policy-directive-8-national-preparedness.
\8\ Federal Emergency Management Agency, ``A Whole Community
Approach to Emergency Management: Principles, Themes, and Pathways for
Action.'', December 2011. Available at https://www.fema.gov/media-
library-data/20130726-1813-25045-0649/whole_community_
dec2011__2_.pdf.
\9\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 2016, there was a clear focus on a whole-of-community
construct to emergency planning and management, including joint
guidance released in August by the US. Departments of Justice,
Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development,
Homeland Security, and Transportation, as well as follow-up
from DHS specifically to FEMA grantees in December.\10\
Unfortunately, there were examples during Hurricanes Harvey,
Irma, Maria, and the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic that have
highlighted areas where the Federal government, as well as
state, local, tribal, and territorial governments, could
improve support for vulnerable communities before, during, and
after disasters.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ U.S. Department of Justice, ``Federal Agencies Issue Joint
Guidance to Help Emergency Preparedness, Response and Recovery
Providers Comply with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act'', August 16,
2016. Available at https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/federal-agencies-
issue-joint-guidance-help-emergency-preparedness-response-and-recovery;
U.S. Department of Homeland Security, ``Notice to Recipients on
Nondiscrimination During Disasters'', December 5, 2016. Available at
https://www.dhs.gov/publication/notice-recipients-nondiscrimination-
during-disasters.
\11\ U.S. Government Accountability Office, ``FEMA Action Needed to
Better Support Individuals Who Are Older or Have Disabilities'', June
5, 2019. Available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-318.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT WORKFORCE DOES NOT REFLECT SOCIETY
Significant research and thought has focused on the impacts
and costs of disasters, as these events have increased in
number and severity, and have had greater societal impact. This
includes work to identify inequities of disaster assistance for
vulnerable populations--people and communities of color, of
lower socio-economic standing, of differing levels of physical
or mental ability or access, of limited English proficiency,
and Native Americans.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See footnotes 1, 5, 18, 21, and 31; Urban Institute.
``Improving the Disaster Recovery of Low-Income Families,'' available
at https://www.urban.org/debates/improving-disaster-recovery-low-
income-families.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Self-examinations of the emergency management workforce at
most levels of government--Federal, State, and local--have
identified a relatively homogenous workforce and a need to
recruit a more representative set of individuals into the
emergency management workforce to better serve the needs of the
whole community during the entirety of the emergency management
cycle.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ Trotter, Brittany. ``Diversity in Emergency Management and the
New Normal,'' March 18, 2016, available at www.fema.gov/blog/2016-03-
18/diversity-emergency-management-and-new-normal; Holdeman, Eric.
``More Diversity Is Needed in Emergency Management.'' Government
Technology--Emergency Management, September 19, 2014, available at
www.govtech.com/em/training/More-Diversity-Needed-Emergency-Management-
Opinion.html;Laine, John, and Ellis Stanley. ``Diversity and Emergency
Management.'' International Association of Emergency Managers, October
2013. Available at https://www.iaem.org/portals/25/documents/Diversity-
and-EM-2013.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
SELECT CHALLENGES FACED BY VULNERABLE POPULATIONS BEFORE, DURING, AND
AFTER DISASTER
As noted above, vulnerable populations often face
additional hurdles in obtaining Federal disaster assistance,
but there are also hurdles for these populations before,
during, and after a disaster.
BEFORE DISASTER
Advocates for various vulnerable populations--notably the
National Association for the Advancement of Colored People
(NAACP),\14\ National Council on Disability,\15\ Partnership
for Inclusive Disaster Strategies \16\--have stressed the
importance of the whole-of-community approach to pre-disaster
planning and resilience-building. Unfortunately, in countless
disasters in the years since Katrina, shortcomings in response
and recovery for these populations have cited failures in
meaningful engagement and planning, or abandonment or waiving
pre-disaster plans due to the severity of events, resulting in
ongoing frustrations with whether and how pre-disaster planning
is executed during an actual hazard event.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ NAACP, ``In the Eye of the Storm: A People's Guide to
Transforming Crisis and Advancing Equity in the Disaster Continuum,''
September 2018, available at https://live-naacp-site.pantheonsite.io/
wp-content/uploads/2018/09/NAACP_InTheEyeOfTheStorm.pdf.
\15\ NCD, ``Effective Emergency Management: Making Improvements for
Communities and People with Disabilities.'' August 12, 2009. Available
at https://ncd.gov/publications/2009/Aug122009.
\16\ Roth, Marcie, June Isaacson Kailes, and Melissa Marshall, J.D.
``Getting It Wrong: An Indictment with a Blueprint for Getting It
Right,'' Partnership for Inclusive Disaster Strategies, May 2018,
available at https://disasterstrategies.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/
5-23-18_After_Action_Report_-_May__2018.pdf.
\17\ Perry, David M. ``America Is Not Ready for Disability Disaster
Response in the Coming Hurricane Season,'' June 1, 2018, available at
https://psmag.com/environment/disability-disaster-response-in-2018-
hurricane-season.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Beyond the scope of this Subcommittee's jurisdiction, yet
still within Congress' purview given the Federal nexus,
research has questioned whether inadequate regulations and
procedures before and after storms contribute to
disproportionate harms to low-income communities and
communities of color in the wake of natural disasters,
demonstrating clear discrepancies in the wake of Hurricane
Harvey between communities of vulnerable people and non-
vulnerable populations.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ Sherwin, Brie. ``After the Storm: The Importance of
Acknowledging Environmental Justice in Sustainable Development and
Disaster Preparedness,'' Spring 2019, available at https://
scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/
viewcontent.cgi?article=1362&context=delpf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DURING DISASTER
Given that roughly 26% of American adults are classified as
having a disability, one of the most impacted vulnerable
populations during disaster are those with disabilities and
other access and functional needs.\19\ Failure to accommodate
for basic needs of this population--including things like
ensuring shelters have accessible bathrooms, accessible
entrances, access to a refrigerator for medications, and backup
power for powering any medical devices--has often led to these
individuals being placed into medical environments such as
rehabilitation centers, nursing homes, psychiatric
institutions, assisted living facilities, or other long-term
care facilities.\20\ This creates inconvenience and inequity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ ``Disability Impacts All of Us,'' September 9, 2019, available
at https://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/disabilityandhealth/infographic-
disability-impacts-all.html.
\20\ McKay, Jim. ``People with Disabilities Often Face
`Institutionalization' During Disasters,'' May 31, 2019, available at
https://www.govtech.com/em/preparedness/People-with-Disabilities-Often-
Face-Institutionalization-During-Disasters.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
More broadly, vulnerable populations in the path of
disaster--including the disabled--may lack the resources to
evacuate. This could be due to a suspension of public
transportation or a lack of funds to pay for fuel; more than
100,000 residents of New Orleans did not evacuate from the path
of Katrina for many of these reasons.\21\ Being forced to ride
out a hazard event because there are inadequate resources
exponentially increases the likelihood that there may be a need
for greater resources after disaster strikes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ Barnshaw, John, Joseph Trainor. Race, Class, and Capital
Amidst the Hurricane Katrina Diaspora, 2007; Farber, Daniel A.
``Disaster Law and Inequality,'' Law & Inequality: A Journal of Theory
and Practice, 2007, available at https://scholarship.law.umn.edu/cgi/
viewcontent.cgi?article=1122&context=lawineq.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
AFTER DISASTER
In 2017 and 2018, Americans witnessed shortfalls in
disaster assistance for vulnerable communities impacted by
catastrophic hurricanes and wildfires, particularly FEMA's
Individuals and Households Program (IHP), or Individual
Assistance (IA). An antiquated land-titling infrastructure and
non-traditional system of passing home ownership in Puerto Rico
shed light on some of these inequities, which persists during
recovery from the 2020 earthquakes on the island.\22\ Unable to
demonstrate ownership, survivors were denied Federal assistance
or received less than they would have were they able to prove
ownership.\23\ In wildfire-ravaged communities in California,
people already experiencing homelessness, subject to choking
air quality and stifling heat, were denied FEMA assistance
because, ``[u]nless people are made homeless by a declared
disaster, assistance for pre-disaster homelessness does not
fall within the rules, policies, and guidance for eligibility
to receive Stafford Act assistance,'' a FEMA spokesperson wrote
to Jefferson Public Radio in southwest Oregon.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ Garci, Ivis. ``The Lack of Proof of Ownership in Puerto Rico
Is Crippling Repairs in the Aftermath of Hurricane Maria,'' American
Bar Association, February 21, 2020, available at https://
www.americanbar.org/groups/crsj/publications/
human_rights_magazine_home/vol--44--no-2--housing/the-lack-of-proof-of-
ownership-in-puerto-rico-is-crippling-repai/.
\23\ Viglucci, Andres. ``They Lost Homes During Hurricane Maria,
But Didn't Have Deeds. FEMA Rejected Their Claims,'' Miami Herald,
September 20, 2018, available at https://www.miamiherald.com/news/
nation-world/national/article217935625.html.
\24\ Erlich, April. ``After Wildfires, Homeless People Left Out Of
Federal Disaster Aid Programs,'' September 24, 2019, available at
https://www.opb.org/news/article/fema-disaster-aid-wildfires-homeless-
people/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As part of its work examining issues requested by this
Committee and others during the supplemental appropriation
process to provide additional relief for powerful 2017
hurricane and wildfire seasons, the Government Accountability
Office released its findings that:
``aspects of the process to apply for assistance from FEMA
after the 2017 hurricanes were challenging for older
individuals and those with disabilities . . . disability-
related questions in the registration materials are confusing
and easily misinterpreted. For example, FEMA's registration
process does not include an initial question that directly asks
individuals if they have a disability or if they would like to
request an accommodation for completing the application process
. . . While FEMA has made efforts to help registrants interpret
the questions, it has not yet changed the language of the
questions to improve clarity. As a result, individuals with
disabilities may not have requested accommodations or reported
having disabilities, which may have hindered FEMA's ability to
identify and assist them.'' \25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ U.S. Government Accountability Office, ``FEMA Action Needed to
Better Support Individuals Who Are Older or Have Disabilities'', June
5, 2019. Available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-318.
8This is particularly troubling given that the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reports that 61 million
adult Americans--or 26%--live with at least one disability.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ CDC, ``Disability Impacts All of Us'', September 9, 2019.
Available at https://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/disabilityandhealth/
infographic-disability-impacts-all.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Subcommittee has met with the Disaster Housing Research
Consortium--researchers from several public universities who
conduct significant research utilizing Federal datasets,
primarily from the Census Bureau--frustrated with FEMA's
willingness to share disaster survivor registrant data with
them for research purposes.\27\ What disaster survivor data has
been released by FEMA regarding its Individual Assistance
program, has been limited in scope compared to the total
universe of disaster survivors who have sought Federal
assistance from the Agency. The National Council on Disability
has expressed similar concerns in a letter to former FEMA
Administrator Brock Long.\28\ That said, there is limited yet
repeated, evidence over several years and geographically
disparate disaster-impacted communities to inform some social
science research and analysis into access to FEMA assistance
and recoveries of individuals and communities.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ T&I EDPB&EM staff-level meetings with Disaster Housing
Research Consortium. February 12, 2019 and March 2, 2020.
\28\ National Council on Disability, Letter to FEMA Administrator
Long Regarding Disaster Management, April 10, 2018, available at
https://ncd.gov/publications/2018/ncd-letter-fema-administrator-long-
regarding-disaster-management.
\29\ See footnotes 1, 5, 18, 21, and 31.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While there may be Federal statute, regulation, and policy
crafted to prevent discrimination in emergency management, the
construct of locally-executed, state-managed, and Federally-
supported emergency management experiences discussed above show
that some communities are more attuned to addressing the needs
of vulnerable populations than others as a result of practice,
resources, awareness, or past experience.
CONCLUSION
When examining the disparities of assistance in disaster-
impacted communities, salaried, home-owning, insured disaster
survivors are more likely to have an easier time applying for
FEMA disaster assistance and often also qualify for tax rebates
and Small Business Administration assistance above and beyond
initial FEMA grants.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ Hersher, Rebecca, and Robert Benincasa. ``How Federal Disaster
Money Favors The Rich.'' National Public Radio, March 5, 2019.
Available at www.npr.org/2019/03/05/688786177/how-federal-disaster-
money-favors-the-rich; Frazee, Gretchen. ``How Natural Disasters Can
Increase Inequality.'' Public Broadcasting Service, April 11, 2019.
Available at www.pbs.org/newshour/economy/making-sense/how-natural-
disasters-can-increase-inequality.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The disparities touched upon above may also contribute to
widening wealth inequality following disasters for these
vulnerable communities. One study, conducted by researchers at
Rice University and the University of Pittsburgh, found
significant correlation of increasing wealth inequality in
counties receiving FEMA-administered disaster assistance in
times before and after disaster struck along the lines of race,
education, and homeownership.\31\ This exacerbates a widening
gap in family wealth while the United States is concurrently
experiencing more and costlier natural disasters.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ Howell, J. & Elliott, J.R. ``Damages Done: The Longitudinal
Impacts of Natural Hazards on Wealth Inequality in the United States.''
August 14, 2018. Available at https://doi.org/10.1093/socpro/spy016.
\32\ Congressional Budget Office, ``Trends in Family Wealth, 1989
to 2013.'' August 18, 2016. Available at www.cbo.gov/publication/51846;
Congressional Budget Office, ``Expected Costs of Damage from Hurricane
Winds and Storm-Related Flooding,'' April 10, 2019, available at http:/
/www.cbo.gov/publication/55019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This Subcommittee hearing will explore where there may be
room for further congressional guidance to FEMA and reforms to
Stafford Act to address these challenges so that vulnerable
populations--before, during, and after disaster--are treated
with equity and receive proper assistance commensurate to
address their needs.
WITNESS LIST
LCurtis Brown, State Coordinator of Emergency
Management, Virginia Department of Emergency Management,
Testifying on Behalf of the Institute for Diversity and
Inclusion in Emergency Management
LChad Higdon, CEO, Second Harvest Community Food
Bank
LMarcie Roth, Executive Director and CEO, World
Institute on Disability
LDiane Yentel, President and CEO, National Low
Income Housing Coalition
EXPERIENCES OF VULNERABLE POPULATIONS DURING DISASTER
----------
TUESDAY, JULY 28, 2020
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public
Buildings, and Emergency Management,
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:07 a.m., in
room 2167 Rayburn House Office Building and via Webex, Hon.
Dina Titus (Chairwoman of the subcommittee) presiding.
Ms. Titus. The subcommittee will come to order. Thank you
to our tech folks for getting us all connected. I ask unanimous
consent that the chair be authorized to declare recess at any
time during today's hearing. Without objection, so ordered. I
also ask unanimous consent that Members not on the subcommittee
be permitted to sit with the subcommittee at today's hearing
and ask questions. Without objection, so ordered.
Since this is a hybrid meeting, I want to remind Members of
key regulations of the House Committee on Rules to ensure that
the hearing goes smoothly. Members must be visible on screen
for purposes of identification when joining the hearing.
Members must also continue to use the video function of today's
software platform, Cisco Webex, for the remainder of the time
they are attending this hearing unless they're experiencing
connectivity issues or some other technical problems.
If a Member is experiencing any kind of technical problems,
please inform the committee's staff as soon as possible so you
can receive assistance. A chat function is available for
Members on the Cisco Webex platform for this purpose, or you
can call the committee's main phone line at 202-225-4472 for
technical assistance by phone.
Members may not participate remotely in any other
proceeding that may be occurring simultaneously. It's the
responsibility of each Member seeking recognition to unmute
their microphone prior to speaking. To avoid any inadvertent
background noise like dogs barking or babies crying, I request
that every Member keep their microphone muted when not seeking
recognition to speak. Should I hear any inadvertent background
noise, I will respectfully request that the Member please mute
the microphone.
Finally, despite this being a hybrid hearing, I want to
emphasize that all the standard rules of decorum apply. As the
chair of today's hearing, I will make a good faith effort to
provide every Member experiencing these connectivity issues an
opportunity to fully participate in the proceedings. Members
will have the standard 5 minutes to ask questions. To insert a
document into the record, please have your staff email it to
the committee's clerk, Mike Twinchek. This hearing is also
being livestreamed for the public to view.
Before we get started today, I want to recognize the loss
of our friend and colleague, Congressman John Lewis. John Lewis
dedicated his life to service to this Nation and to the goal of
a more perfect union. He famously said, ``When we see something
that is not right, not fair, not just, you have to speak up.
You have to say something; you have to do something.''
It's in that spirit that we hold today's hearing, which
focuses on the experiences of vulnerable and underserved
populations during disasters. Disaster survivors experience
varying degrees of both impact and assistance as a result of
factors such as race, ethnicity, gender identity or expression,
immigration status, physical or mental ability, and
socioeconomic status.
As is often the case in this country, the most vulnerable
among us are the most adversely affected during times of
hardship. We are certainly seeing this play out in communities
across the country with respect to ongoing disaster recovery
and the coronavirus pandemic. The continued failures by our
emergency preparedness apparatus at every level of Government
to account for the well-being of certain communities prior to,
during, and in the wake of disasters, and right now, these are
just unacceptable and must be addressed.
Take several examples of the problem. Whether it's due to
underfunded public transportation or insufficient means to pay
for a personal vehicle, fuel, or alternate means of shelter,
vulnerable populations in the path of disaster often lack the
resources to evacuate. Second problem, while taking refuge in
congregate sheltering during a storm, individuals with
disabilities or mobility issues frequently face accessibility
challenges due to a lack of proper accommodations.
Third, some of our most vulnerable populations continue to
be overlooked or neglected by existing FEMA programs. For
instance, in the wildfire ravaged communities in California,
people experiencing homelessness were told by FEMA that they
were not eligible for sheltering assistance to escape heat and
smoke under the Stafford Act, because their homelessness was a
pre-existing condition.
During this subcommittee's hearing back in March with FEMA
Administrator Gaynor, we raised some of these concerns. I noted
then that FEMA's Office of Disability Integration and
Coordination was established over a decade ago during the post-
Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act. We thought this would
address some of the issues.
But the current administration's attention to and
engagement with people with disabilities is lackluster to say
the least. It is appropriate that we have this hearing today,
because just this past Sunday marked the 30th anniversary of
the enactment of the Americans with Disabilities Act.
We have done a good job when it comes to improving
conditions for those with disabilities. I'm proud of the U.S.
when I travel internationally. Much has been accomplished, but
much needs to be accomplished, and it's troubling when we
consider how far we need to go to live up to the intent of this
landmark legislation.
I'd like to conclude by saying that the spectrum of
vulnerable communities represented by witnesses today is by no
means exhaustive, but we hope that they can provide some
perspective so that we might take a step towards making
disaster response efforts and assistance more inclusive, more
just, more fair, and more right.
[Ms. Titus' prepared statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Dina Titus, a Representative in Congress
from the State of Nevada, and Chairwoman, Subcommittee on Economic
Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management
Before we get started today, I want to recognize the loss of our
friend and colleague, Congressman John Lewis.
Congressman Lewis dedicated his life in service to this nation and
to the goal of a more perfect union.
He famously said, ``When you see something that is not right, not
fair, not just, you have to speak up. You have to say something; you
have to do something.''
It is in that spirit that we hold today's hearing, which focuses on
the experiences of vulnerable and underserved populations during
disasters.
Disaster survivors experience varying degrees of impact and
assistance as a result of factors such as race, ethnicity, gender
identity or expression, immigration status, physical or mental ability,
and socio-economic status.
As is the case too often in this country, the most vulnerable among
us are the most adversely affected during times of hardship. We're
seeing this play out in communities across the United States with
respect to ongoing disaster recovery and the coronavirus pandemic.
The continued failures by our emergency preparedness apparatus at
every level of government, to account for the well-being of certain
communities prior to, during, and in the wake of disasters is
unacceptable and must be addressed.
Whether it's due to underfunded public transportation; or
insufficient means to pay for a personal vehicle, fuel, and alternative
means for shelter; vulnerable populations in the path of disaster often
lack the resources to evacuate.
While taking refuge in congregate sheltering during a storm,
individuals with disabilities or mobility issues frequently face
accessibility challenges due to a lack of proper accommodations.
For instance, in wildfire-ravaged communities in California, people
experiencing homelessness were told by FEMA that they were not eligible
for sheltering assistance to escape heat and smoke under the Stafford
Act because their homelessness was a pre-existing condition.
Some of our most vulnerable populations continue to be overlooked
or neglected by existing FEMA programs.
During this Subcommittee's hearing back in March with FEMA
Administrator Gaynor, we raised some of these concerns.
I noted then that FEMA's Office of Disability Integration and
Coordination was established over a decade ago by the Post-Katrina
Emergency Management Reform Act, but the Trump Administration's
attention to and engagement with people with disabilities is lackluster
to say the least.
Just this past Sunday we recognized the 30th anniversary of
enactment of the Americans With Disabilities Act.
Yet, it is troubling when you consider how far the federal
government still has to go to live up to the intent of this landmark
legislation and do right by people with disabilities.
I'd like to conclude by saying that the spectrum of communities
represented by our witnesses today is by no means exhaustive, but we
hope they can provide some perspective so that we might take a step
forward in making disaster response efforts and assistance more
inclusive, more right, more fair, and more just.
Ms. Titus. With that, I thank you, and I would yield to the
minority leader.
Mr. Katko. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you today for the witnesses that are joining us
remotely. Before I start my comments, I wanted to just take a
brief second to honor the life and the legacy of John Lewis.
John and I became friendly at my first State of the Union
Address where I showed up 10 minutes beforehand thinking I was
going to have a seat. And remarkably, the seat right next to
him was open, so I sat down, and we started talking, and became
friends. And one time, a reverend came down from Syracuse. I
said, John, would you just say hello to him? He idolizes you.
And John said, yeah, sure. Of course. He then said, come on
back to my office. Brought us back to his office, canceled his
appointments, and spent 1\1/2\ hours with the reverend, just
showing him everything in his office and talking about the
history and what he's been through in his life, and he couldn't
have been more gracious and humble and he impacted that
individual--that pastor's life immensely, and it's just a small
example of the kind of person he was, and the gentle spirit he
was, and the great leader he was.
So, I commend him to the afterlife here, but I also commend
him for a life well lived, and an example that we can all
follow, and I miss him already.
I'd like to begin by bringing specific attention to
important work that is being done in my district to support
vulnerable populations amid the COVID-19 pandemic.
Organizations like Vera House, AccessCNY, the Food Bank of
Central New York, and so many others are working hard to
maintain services in our community during this disaster. These
organizations provide critical services to vulnerable members
of our community, including our seniors, survivors of domestic
violence and sexual assault, individuals with disabilities, and
families struggling with mental health issues.
To provide a snapshot of the historic challenges these
organizations face, the Food Bank of Central New York saw a 20-
percent increase in households utilizing their services in the
month of March alone. This translates to the distribution of
1.9 million pounds of food, 500,000 additional pounds compared
to the food bank's typical monthly distribution.
This increased demand persists, and is indicative of the
unprecedented nature of this crisis. Unfortunately, these
conditions are being felt all across the United States.
Americans are responding to the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as
flooding, storms, and wildfires across the country. In many
cases, these challenges are on top of ongoing recovery efforts
from prior disasters. In all of this, it is critically
important that all communities are prepared for and recover
from disasters.
To be successful, lawmakers must work to plan for and
address the needs of the most vulnerable among us. These
efforts are not only essential to saving lives, but to helping
impacted areas put the pieces back together quickly. To this
end, Congress has enacted significant reform over the years,
including the post-Katrina Act, the Sandy Recovery Improvement
Act, and more recently, the Disaster Recovery Reform Act.
Each of these bills and others included provisions intended
to help the most vulnerable. In DRRA, for example, we ensured
those with disabilities could be eligible for additional
assistance to ensure the repaired homes are accessible.
We expanded FEMA's flexibility for temporary housing
solutions, and we clarified eligibility for food banks. We also
worked to update and improve the agency's public alerting
system, IPAWS, to ensure capabilities are in place to reach
persons with disabilities and those with limited English
proficiency.
And we continued examining ways where FEMA's process can be
simplified and streamlined to reduce administrative hurdles for
eligible applicants. Ultimately, we must ensure our emergency
management system works for everyone. Today, I look forward to
hearing from our witnesses on what is working, and where we
still need improvement. I also want to welcome for the first
time Mr. Garcia of California to our subcommittee, and I look
forward to working with him on these and other issues.
[Mr. Katko's prepared statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. John Katko, a Representative in Congress
from the State of New York, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on
Economic Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management
I would like to begin by bringing specific attention to important
work that is being done in my district to support vulnerable
populations amid the COVID-19 pandemic. Organizations like Vera House,
ACCESS CNY, the Foodbank of Central New York, and so many others are
working hard to maintain services in our community during this
disaster.
These organizations provide critical services to vulnerable members
of our community, including our seniors, survivors of domestic violence
and sexual assault, individuals with disabilities, and families
struggling with mental health issues.
To provide a snapshot of the historic challenges these
organizations face, the Foodbank of Central New York saw a 20 percent
increase in households utilizing their services in the month of March.
This translates to the distribution of 1.9 million pounds of food--
500,000 additional pounds compared to the Foodbank's typical monthly
distribution.
This increased demand persists and is indicative of the
unprecedented nature of this crisis. Unfortunately, these conditions
are being felt across the United States.
Americans are responding to the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as
flooding, storms, and wildfires across the country. In many cases,
these challenges are on top of ongoing recovery efforts from prior
disasters.
In all of this, it is critically important that all communities are
prepared for and can recover from disasters.
To be successful, lawmakers must work to plan for and address the
needs of the most vulnerable among us. These efforts are not only
essential to saving lives, but to helping impacted areas put the pieces
back together quickly.
To this end, Congress has enacted significant reforms over the
years--including the Post-Katrina Act, the Sandy Recovery Improvement
Act, and more recently the Disaster Recovery Reform Act (DRRA). Each of
these bills and others included provisions intended to help the most
vulnerable.
In DRRA, for example, we ensured those with disabilities could be
eligible for additional assistance to ensure their repaired homes are
accessible, we expanded FEMA's flexibility for temporary housing
solutions, and we clarified eligibility for food banks. We also worked
to update and improve the nation's public alerting system--IPAWS--to
ensure capabilities are in place to reach persons with disabilities and
those with limited English proficiency. And, we continue to examine
ways where FEMA's process can be simplified and streamlined to reduce
administrative hurdles for eligible applicants.
Ultimately, we must ensure our emergency management system works
for everyone.
Today, I look forward to hearing from our witnesses on what is
working and where we still need improvement.
I also want to welcome Mr. Garcia of California to our subcommittee
and look forward to working with him on these and other issues.
Mr. Katko. And in that, Madam Chair, I yield back.
Ms. Titus. Thank you, Ranking Member Katko. I don't believe
that our chairman of the full committee, Mr. DeFazio, is here,
nor Mr. Sam Graves who is the ranking member, so we'll go
straight to our witnesses' testimony.
I'd like to now welcome the witnesses on our panel. They
represent great expertise, and we're looking forward to hearing
from them. Mr. Curtis Brown, who is the State coordinator of
emergency management with the Virginia Department of Emergency
Management; he's going to be testifying on behalf of the
Institute for Diversity and Inclusion in Emergency Management.
Mr. Chad Higdon, who is the CEO of Second Harvest Community
Food Bank, and I know he's had an association with Three Square
in Las Vegas. Ms. Marcie Roth, executive director and CEO of
the World Institute on Disability, and Ms. Diane Yentel,
president and CEO of the National Low Income Housing Coalition.
We want to thank you for participating today. We look
forward to your testimony. Without objection, our witnesses'
full statements will be included in the record. Since your
written testimony has been made a part of the record, the
subcommittee requests that you limit your oral testimony to 5
minutes. So, we'll proceed with the testimonies.
Mr. Brown, we look forward to hearing from you first.
TESTIMONY OF CURTIS BROWN, STATE COORDINATOR OF EMERGENCY
MANAGEMENT, VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT,
TESTIFYING ON BEHALF OF THE INSTITUTE FOR DIVERSITY AND
INCLUSION IN EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT; CHAD HIGDON, CHIEF EXECUTIVE
OFFICER, SECOND HARVEST COMMUNITY FOOD BANK; MARCIE ROTH,
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, WORLD INSTITUTE
ON DISABILITY; AND DIANE YENTEL, PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE
OFFICER, NATIONAL LOW INCOME HOUSING COALITION
Mr. Brown. Thank you. Good morning, Chairwoman Titus,
Ranking Member Katko, and members of the subcommittee. I
appreciate the opportunity to discuss the disproportionate
impacts on at-risk communities, and solutions for addressing
systemic and structural inequities in disaster management. My
name is Curtis Brown, and I am an emergency manager and
cofounder of the Institute for Diversity and Inclusion in
Emergency Management.
I-DIEM was created to increase diversity in the profession,
and to promote the integration of equity for at-risk and
marginalized people and communities, and to all aspects of
emergency management practices. My approach to providing
testimony and recommendations today is based on research data
with a keen understanding that the equitable implementation of
disaster policies would address the continuous losses currently
left unaddressed after each disaster.
Political leaders, policymakers, and emergency managers can
no longer turn a blind eye to the recurring disproportionate
impact of disasters on vulnerable populations. FEMA and the
entire emergency management enterprise--Federal, State, local,
nonprofit, and private--must drastically improve. The COVID-19
disaster once again brings to light the glaring disparities
that continue to entrap far too many communities of color in
continuous cycles of tragedy and loss. COVID-19 is
disproportionately affecting black, indigenous, Hispanic,
Latino, and other people of color the most.
What are the experiences of vulnerable populations during
disasters? Unfortunately, the answer to that question is the
same as it has been for quite some time. With examples of mass
fatalities and economic loss throughout the 20th century, and
the first 20 years of this one, there are numerous documented
examples of disaster inequities resulting in negative impacts
for communities of color, underserved communities, and people
with disabilities whose needs have not been consistently
integrated in disaster preparedness mitigation response and
recovery efforts. Whether the disaster is a pandemic or an
extreme weather event, one thing is consistently true.
The most vulnerable individuals of communities will
disproportionately suffer disaster impacts, fatalities,
injuries both physical and psychological, infrastructure damage
and loss, and economic decline which contributes to widening
wealth inequality. Nationwide, black people are dying of COVID-
19 at 2.5 times the rate of white people.
Considering flooding risks, research has found that a
higher share of the population living in the combined flood
plain identified as Hispanic and Latino. The fatality rate of
people with disabilities has been found to be two to four times
higher than the general population. Unaddressed systemic and
structural racism and inequitable discriminatory economic
policies are the root causes for creating and enhancing
vulnerability faced by at-risk and marginalized communities.
Environmental injustices have located toxic facilities in
and around communities of color contributing to the
concentration of black and brown people with the same
underlying health conditions that make COVID-19 so fatal.
Integrating equity into emergency management and prioritizing
the needs of the most vulnerable will produce numerous
benefits, including limiting fatalities and injuries, reducing
disaster costs, and improving the effectiveness and efficiency
of emergency management operations. We have to commit to
disaster equity, and prioritize the needs of the most
vulnerable in legislation, policies, practices, plans, and
funding programs.
We must commit to dismantling systemic and structural
inequities in disaster preparedness mitigation response and
recovery to reverse the current trend of disproportionate
impacts. Unfortunately, these numerous disaster events in lives
lost have not prompted a major change in existing emergency
management approaches. It has become painfully clear that
effective emergency management practices require a new
equitable approach that prioritizes those most in need.
As we celebrate the life and significant contributions to
civil rights of Congressman John Lewis, let his legacy serve as
a motivation to promote efforts to finally and fundamentally
address the systemic and structural inequities that continue to
negatively impact marginalized people and communities by
integrating equity into emergency management. Thank you,
Chairwoman Titus, and I look forward to offering
recommendations and answering any questions from the committee.
[Mr. Brown's prepared statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Curtis Brown, State Coordinator of Emergency
Management, Virginia Department of Emergency Management, testifying on
behalf of the Institute for Diversity and Inclusion in Emergency
Management
Good morning, Committee Chairman Peter A. DeFazio, Committee
Ranking Member Sam Graves, Subcommittee Chairman Dina Titus,
Subcommittee Ranking Member John Katko and members of the Subcommittee.
My name is Curtis Brown; and I am the co-founder of the Institute for
Diversity and Inclusion in Emergency Management (I-DIEM). I-DIEM was
created to diversify the profession of emergency management and to
promote the integration of equity into all aspects of emergency
management practices to improve disaster outcomes for those most
vulnerable. Last month, Governor Ralph Northam appointed me State
Coordinator of Emergency Management at the Virginia Department of
Emergency Management. Throughout my career, I have worked closely on
issues related to emergency management, resilience-building and
diversity, equity and inclusion. I appreciate the opportunity to
provide testimony on the experiences of vulnerable populations before,
during, and after disasters and the responsibility for lawmakers,
public policy leaders, and emergency managers on all levels of
government to make changes in order to fundamentally address the
systemic and structural inequities that continue to negatively impact
marginalized people and communities.
I-DIEM's mission is to serve as a resource and an advocate for the
value of diversity and inclusion in emergency management (EM). I-DIEM
leads efforts to increase representation of women and people of color
in the field of emergency management, including in positions of
leadership, through awareness and education. I-DIEM serves as the
conduit for research on diversity and inclusion (D&I), social equity,
and the practical application of equitable EM practices to improve
outcomes and build resilience. Our approach to providing our comments
and recommendations is based on data with a keen understanding of
equitable implementation within disaster policies to support
individuals and communities disproportionately impacted by disasters.
Long-term change can only occur by educating and training the emergency
management enterprise on diversity, inclusion and equity issues as it
relates to women, people of color, people with disabilities, LGBTQ,
various religious beliefs, rural, low-income, disadvantaged
communities, and other underrepresented groups within each phase of
emergency management (preparedness, mitigation, response, recovery). I-
DIEM believes that leveraging and integrating diversity, inclusion, and
equity will produce numerous benefits including limiting fatalities and
injuries, increasing trust in government, building response and
recovery capacity, reducing disaster costs, improving the effectiveness
and efficiency of disaster operations, and building long-term
resilience.
Long Struggle for Social Justice and Equity Continues
Last week America lost two great leaders of the Civil Rights
movement. Congressman John Lewis and Reverend C.T. Vivian each
dedicated their lives to the work of social justice and the fight
against racism. Both men risked their lives in order to end
discriminatory laws and practices that terrorized African Americans.
Their resolve along with many other civil rights leaders during a
critical time in our nation's history led to dramatic changes that
resulted in the expansion of rights for African Americans that were
long delayed due to sanctioned and legal discrimination such as Jim
Crow laws. All Americans benefit from their work because we live in a
more just society, but more work remains. The fight for civil rights
during that pivotal time provides a great roadmap for today's efforts
to address systemic and structural racism that remains deeply embedded
in every public policy area, including in emergency management. The
ongoing impact of the COVID-19 disaster has demonstrated, once again,
that disasters disproportionately impact Black, Indigenous, People of
Color (BIPOC), low-income, and people with disabilities. Both primary
impacts such as fatalities and COVID-19 cases and the numerous
secondary negative economic (i.e. unemployment) and health impacts have
ravaged marginalized individuals and communities. Sadly, this
disproportionate impact of disasters on vulnerable populations is no
surprise. It is consistent theme with a long narrative that requires
urgent and intentional action. The 20th and 21st centuries have
numerous examples of disaster inequities resulting in the loss of life
to BIPOC, low-income, and people with disabilities who have
consistently not benefitted from disaster preparedness, mitigation,
response, and recovery efforts. The recent murder of George Floyd has
awakened a new sense activism across the country intended to dismantle
both the symbols and the systemic policies and practices of inequities
that continue to entrap marginalized communities of color, people with
disabilities, low income and marginalized individuals and communities.
The Issue: Disproportionate Impact of Disasters on Marginalized
Individuals and Communities
Whether the disaster is a pandemic or natural, one thing is
consistently true, the most vulnerable individuals and communities will
be disproportionately impacted due to existing inequities. Numerous
natural disasters indiscriminately have impacted large swaths of the
United States over the last decade but the resulting impacts continue
to reveal inequities. These disasters continue to demonstrate the need
for emergency planners and key decision-makers to understand how
historical and existing exclusionary and discriminatory practices
increase the risks and impact of disasters on specific individuals and
communities. Those most vulnerable are consistently not prioritized in
disaster planning or allocated sufficient resources during recovery.
Years of biased ``community development'' segregated communities of
color to higher risk areas have contributed to creating distrust in
government. Emergency management officials have a responsibility to
integrate equity into preparedness and response to disasters by
understanding the unique vulnerabilities and limitations of
communities. There should be a clear recognition that the vulnerability
of the community was heightened due to discriminatory policies and
these communities will need the more support during a disaster.
Preparedness efforts directed to at-risk BIPOC communities prior to
COVID-19's onslaught in the United States were slow and disjointed.
Clear and accurate emergency information regarding the seriousness of
the threat was lacking. Black and Brown communities represented a large
percentage of the essential workforce but access to essential personal
protective equipment was unavailable. Public awareness messaging
regarding social distancing failed to take into consideration cultural
differences and living conditions of diversity communities. Data
regarding the disproportionate impact of the pandemic on people of
color was not regularly collected further delaying mitigation efforts.
Consistent fumbled response efforts reaffirm the belief that systemic
and structural issues exist within emergency management.
``Social Equity'' is defined as the fair, just and equitable
management of all institutions serving the public directly or by
contract, and the fair and equitable distribution of public services,
and implementation of public policy, and the commitment to promote
fairness, justice, and equity in the formation of public policy
(Standing Panel on Social Equity in Governance of the National Academy
of Public Administration). Inequitable policies have lead to the
congregation of marginalized individuals in communities across the
country. Equitable emergency planning is required due to the rising
frequency of extreme weather caused by climate change and
disproportionate impacts based on systemic biases.
Emergency planning must understand the historic and existing
barriers that create and enhance vulnerability. Disasters act as
``shocks'' to communities amplifying and exacerbating the existing
inequities experienced by those lacking resources and excluded from
``mainstream'' disaster planning. Further contributing to the issue is
the lack of diversity within the profession of emergency management
from a racial and gender perspective. This lack of diversity combined
by a failure to integrate cultural competence and fully understanding
and respecting the unique attributes of communities has resulted in a
disconnect leading to non-inclusive and inequitable emergency plans.
The negative impact on emergency management results in preparedness,
mitigation, prevention, response, and recovery plans consistently
falling short of meeting the needs of those individuals and communities
requiring the most support. As noted in FEMA's 2019 Building Cultures
of Preparedness: Report of the Emergency Management Higher Education
Community, ``to meet the challenge, professionals in the field of
emergency management must better understand the communities, peoples,
and varied populations that they hope will become ``better prepared.''
The report also states that, ``these households are not at risk simply
due to their exposure when disaster threatens; they live in a state of
permanent emergency resulting from socio-economic conditions and
marginality that make each day precarious.'' Recognition of the
causality of vulnerability and intentional inclusion of diverse
stakeholders is required in order to improve emergency planning and
outcomes.
In recent years, numerous research findings have identified
inequity as the root cause for vulnerability which results in
disproportionate and sometimes fatal impacts for marginalized people
include:
``Communities of color and other frontline communities
tend to live in the most at-risk environments and are more vulnerable
to the negative impacts of these kinds of events due to a range of
preexisting factors.'' (Source: NAACP In the Eye of the Storm: A
People's Guide to Transforming Crisis & Advancing Equity in the
Disaster Continuum, Page 9, 2019)
``These households are not at risk simply due to their
exposure when disaster threatens; they live in a state of permanent
emergency resulting from socio-economic conditions and marginality that
make each day precarious. (Source: FEMA Building Cultures of
Preparedness: Report of the Emergency Management Higher Education
Community, Page 8, 2019)
Researchers found ``a consistent pattern over a 30-year
period of placing hazardous waste facilities in neighborhoods where
poor people and people of color live''. (Source: 2016 University of
Michigan and University of Montana)
3 out of 4 neighborhoods ``redlined'' on government maps
80 years ago continuing to struggle economically. (Source: 2018
National Community Reinvestment Coalition)
The vast majority of neighborhoods marked ``hazardous''
in red ink on maps drawn by the federal Home Owners' Loan Corp. from
1935 to 1939 are today much more likely than other areas to comprise
lower-income, minority residents. (Source: 2018 National Community
Reinvestment Coalition)
People in lower income brackets often live in the most
vulnerable housing and lack the resources to undertake recommended
loss-reduction or evacuation measures. (Source: Insurance Institute for
Business & Home Safety)
``People with disabilities may be unable to undertake
self-protective actions before, during or after disasters''. According
to a 2006 Census Bureau report commissioned by the National Institute
on Aging, almost 20% of the U.S. population age 65 and older report
some level of disability.'' (Source: Insurance Institute for Business &
Home Safety)
``Low-income individuals and families often live in lower
cost homes that are less able to withstand disasters.'' (Source:
Insurance Institute for Business & Home Safety)
``As sea levels rise, each of the 23 coastal states in
the contiguous US faces the loss of residential and commercial
properties and frequent flooding of populated areas, posing new
challenges for all communities and adding particular stressors for
communities of color and low-income and working-class communities.''
(Source: Underwater: Rising Seas, Chronic Floods, and the Implications
for US Coastal Real Estate, Union or Concerned Scientist, 2018)
``Additionally, wildfire vulnerability is spread
unequally across race and ethnicity, with census tracts that were
majority Black, Hispanic or Native American experiencing ca. 50%
greater vulnerability to wildfire compared to other census tracts.
Embracing a social-ecological perspective of fire-prone landscapes
allows for the identification of areas that are poorly equipped to
respond to wildfires.'' (Source: The unequal vulnerability of
communities of color to wildfire, Ian P. Davies, Ryan D. Haugo, James
C. Robertson, Phillip S. Levin, 2018)
``So when natural disasters pour, literally, trillions of
gallons of water onto largely Black and Latinx cities surrounded by oil
and gas refineries, don't blame Mother Nature; blame institutions,
historic and systemic racism, and the people behind these institutions,
systems, and history.'' (Source: 5 Reasons Why Natural Disasters Screw
Over People of Color, Yessenia Funes, 2017)
``Extreme weather events impact the most vulnerable in a
multiplicity of ways. In the days before, poorer people have less
opportunities to evacuate as they may not have anywhere to go, cannot
afford a motel out of town, or do not have a car to drive there.''
(Source: Hurricane Harvey was a natural disaster, but a man-made
catastrophe that will hurt the poor the most, Andrew Buncombe, 2017)
Prioritizing adaptation actions for populations that face
higher risks from climate change, including low-income and marginalized
communities, may prove more equitable and lead, for instance, to
improved infrastructure in their communities and increased focus on
efforts to promote community resilience that can improve their capacity
to prepare for, respond to, and recover from disasters. (Source: Fourth
National Climate Assessment, Volume II Impacts, Risks, and Adaptation
in the United States, Page 55, 2018)
``Results indicate that as local hazard damages increase,
so does wealth inequality, especially along lines of race, education,
and homeownership. At any given level of local damage, the more aid an
area receives from the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the more
this inequality grows. These findings suggest that two defining social
problems of our day--wealth inequality and rising natural hazard
damages--are dynamically linked, requiring new lines of research and
policy making in the future.'' (Source: Damages Done: The Longitudinal
Impacts of Natural Hazards on Wealth Inequality in the United States,
Rice U., University of Pittsburgh, 2018)
``Compared to the overall U.S. population, a higher share
of the population living in the combined floodplain identified as
Hispanic. 25% of the population living in the combined floodplain
identified as Hispanic, as compared to 17% nationally''. (Source:
Populations in the Floodplain, NYU Furman Center, 2018)
Finding 1: Natural disaster-affected areas in 2016 and
2017 differed from the U.S. overall, in notable ways:
FEMA-designated disaster zip codes contained a higher
share of individuals who identify as Hispanic or African American.
These zip codes were also more likely to contain
individuals who were foreignborn and speak a language other than
English at home.
Finding 3: Disasters struck small firms across the age
and income spectrum, but losses were concentrated among Hispanic-owned
firms and firms in the retail and leisure & hospitality industries
54% of Hispanic-owned firms in affected areas reported
natural disaster-related losses, compared to 40% of White-owned firms
and 35% of Black or African American owned firms. (Source: 2017 Small
Business Credit Survey (SBCS), Federal Reserve Banks)
Root Cause of Vulnerability: Systemic Racism and History of Negative
Impacts/Examples of Past and Present Inequitable Impacts (Explaining
why there are disproportionate impacts)
The COVID-19 disaster has once again brought to light the glaring
disparities that continue to entrap far too many communities of color
in a continuous cycle of tragedy and loss. Institutional racism serves
as the fuel that creates the inequities that combust when disasters
strike. Discriminatory economic and social policies are the root cause
for the vulnerability faced by marginalized communities. Decades of
divestments have created impoverished communities across the country
that lack basic necessities including affordable, safe, and adequate
housing. Federal and State guidance to ``socially distance'' to limit
the spread of COVID-19 is difficult when systemic racism has confined
impoverished families to occupy incredibly small living spaces.
Environmental injustices have located toxic facilities in and around
communities of color contributing to concentration of Black and Brown
people with the same ``underlining health conditions'' (asthma, cancer,
etc) that makes COVID-19 so fatal.
Lack of Diversity and Representation
The profession of emergency management's lack of diversity with
representation of people of color and women within its ranks prevents
the field from rising to the great disaster challenges of the present
and tomorrow. Research and labor data indicates that an overwhelming
number of individuals, designated as ``Emergency Managers'' are white
males. But several studies have been released over the last decade that
confirms the positive impact of diversity on organizational
performance. Private sector companies increase profits with more women
and people of color throughout their organization, especially in
positions of leadership. Though not studied as much, the impact of
diversity in public service positions, such as emergency management,
produces similar positive results. Racial diversity within the EM
workforce improves decision-making, reduces ``blind spots'' errors by
leveraging new perspectives, and results in better performance and
improved outcomes. Within emergency management, a more diverse
workforce would ensure that emergency operation and preparedness plans
are inclusive and equitably consider the unique needs of communities of
color. More representation of people of color in emergency management
would increase the likelihood for investing greater mitigation funding
into communities that have historically been divested and has
contributed to increased vulnerability. A more diverse network of
emergency managers at the decision-making table and in senior
leadership roles would promote better response decisions such as
allocating equitable resources to communities most in need and
possessing the cultural competence to effectively engage diverse
communities. Short-term and long-term recovery would be improved by the
participation of people of color that have a connection to the
communities most impacted. Simply put, diversity in emergency
management will help to reverse the existing failure to enact equitable
practices before, during, and after disasters.
Recommendations for Integrating Equity to support At-Risk Populations
Dismantling the systemic and structural inequities in each phase of
emergency management (preparedness, mitigation, response, and recovery)
requires significant commitment, resources, and time. The inequities
have been embedded and institutionalized for many years so the
solutions will not be quick and require more than ``lip service'' or
``check the box'' efforts that do nothing more than further
institutional inequitable practices. I-DIEM's hope is that the COVID-19
disaster and recent focus on equity by a broader audience will lead to
dramatic and fundamental changes to all aspects of disaster management.
The entire Emergency Management Enterprise (Federal, State, local, non-
profit, and private) must prioritize and embed equity as a core part of
all its responsibilities. Emergency management leaders should be held
accountable with performance measures aligned to equitable practices
and outcomes. Emergency managers are unable to make sustained changes
alone. Political leaders on all levels of government must provide the
resources and prioritize equity as critical function of government.
There have been positive actions taken in recent years to embed
equity into emergency management which serve as great examples or
implementation nationally. The Commonwealth of Virginia created a
Health Equity Working Group (HEWG) as a key component of the COVID-19
Unified Command (UC) response. Led by a multi-agency leadership team
that includes representatives from the Governor's Chief Diversity
Office, Virginia Department of Health-Office of Health Equity, and
Virginia Department of Emergency Management, the Health Equity Working
Group was initially created at the beginning of the COVID-19 response
due to the recognition of inequitable impacts and the need to embed
equity into all aspects of the disaster response. The Health Equity
Working Group reports directly to the UC leadership and have designed
innovative programs to support those most in need. The purpose of HEWG
is to apply a health equity lens to the Commonwealth of Virginia's
COVID-19 response by proactively and reactively:
Identifying and prioritizing resources and decision
points impacting marginalized and at-risk individuals and communities.
Supporting intentional inclusion of the needs of at-risk
and marginalized individuals and communities within each working group
related to preparedness, mitigation, response, and recovery.
In Houston, officials are integrating equity into flood protection
efforts by prioritizing communities of color which have historically
excluded from mitigation efforts in the past. City officials are
removing the normal cost-benefit ratio that has prioritized more
valuable housing properties which tended to only benefit wealthy and
white areas. Instead of prioritizing spending to protect the most
valuable properties, that tended to exclude communities of color, the
intentional focus and priority has been placed to target communities
``that would have the hardest time recovering, including communities of
color'' (Source: A Climate Plan in Texas Focuses on Minorities. Not
Everyone Likes It. Christopher Flavelle. New York Times, 7/24/29). This
type of bold mitigation action is necessary due to the increasing
number of extreme weather events due to climate change that will
disproportionately impact vulnerable communities. Funding priorities
should focus on the communities most in need. Dedicating pre-disaster
mitigation funding in the most at-risk areas will reduce cost long-term
and improve disaster outcomes.
Below are several recommendations for sustainably integrating
equity into each phase of emergency management:
Integrate Diversity, Inclusion, and Equity as
Foundational Goal and Responsibility of Emergency Management.
Prioritize Vulnerable and Underserved Populations in all
planning and grant programs.
Thoroughly review all current emergency management laws
and policies through an equity lens, including identifying the intended
and unintended effects of current policies on marginalized on
individuals and communities.
Integrate equity and cultural competence into the current
FEMA doctrine, training and educational programs, including
incentivizing equity in grants programs, to influence sustainable
changes throughout the Emergency Management Enterprise.
Integrate diversity, equity, and inclusion, and
information on disproportionate impacts of disasters into FEMA's
planning, exercises, guidance and priorities.
Include the addition of equity-related performance
measures in emergency management grants and other funding requirements.
Invest in innovative technology to conduct predictive
modeling to identify potential inequitable outcomes.
Ensure continuous use of Social Vulnerability Assessments
and Community Engagement to identify and understand the needs of
vulnerable individuals and communities.
Commitment to enhance efforts to promoting diversity
within the Emergency Management Profession by increasing the number of
people of color and women, especially in positions of leadership.
Leverage Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion experts and
engage marginalized communities when making any changes to policies and
plans.
Increase the number of Small, Minority, and Woman-owned
Businesses in FEMA procurement opportunities
Fund efforts to increase research and improve datasets on
equity and disproportionate impacts of disasters
Stafford Act Changes
The Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act
provide critical support to states, tribes, and local governments when
a federal emergency declaration is issued. Since its creation in the
1950s, the Stafford Act has evolved based on increasing disasters,
failures, and lessons learned. The next evolution of the Stafford Act
should intentionally focus on equity and disproportionate impacts of
disasters to eliminate any barriers that negatively impacts vulnerable
individuals and communities.
Require equitable delivery of Stafford Act services
equitably.
FEMA updates policy guidance for the Building Resilient
Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) program to dedicate the majority
of funding to support marginalized communities that will be
disproportionately during disasters
Better leverage FEMA's Office of Civil Rights to ensure
equity is integrated into the delivery of all Stafford Act related
response, recovery, and mitigation programs.
Equitably adjust caps for federal assistance to recognize
that at-risk individuals and communities need more support for longer
periods of time.
Create additional provision so FEMA can provide equitable
support for long-term housing recovery efforts.
FEMA should ensure match requirements are equitable and
consider the limited resources of different stakeholders
Provide additional support or allow under-resourced local
governments to follow State Procurement requirements instead of 44 CFR
since many lack adequate number of staff capable to navigate all the
requirements.
Ensure the integration of equity into the delivery public
assistance and individual assistance program to provide additional
resources and support for vulnerable communities.
Eliminate the preference for homeowners in the Individual
Assistance Program which has been found to be biased against
communities of color and contributes to the expansion of wealth
inequality.
Ensure FEMA equitably considers the diverse resource,
capacity, and limitations of communities its support and has resources
and authority to provide additional support.
The Fierce Urgency of Now
Fifteen years have passed since Hurricane Katrina battered New
Orleans resulting in over 3,000 fatalities, mostly within the Black
community. Since then there are have been other major natural disasters
that resulted in disproportionate impacts on at-risk population, in
terms of both lives lost and economically. Unfortunately, these
numerous events and lives lost have not prompted a major change in
existing emergency management approaches. It has become painfully clear
that effective disaster management requires a new, equitable approach
that understands the unique circumstances of the individuals and
communities in order to prioritize their needs. The emergency
management tactics in recent years have proven ineffective in many
cases because false assumptions have been made about the ability of
individuals and communities who are already suffering to survive
disaster impacts. Political leaders, policymakers, and emergency
managers can no longer turn a blind eye to the reoccurring
disproportionate impact of disasters on vulnerable populations. New and
innovative equitable practices must be integrated and prioritized in
emergency management in order for dramatic and sustainable changes to
be made to build resilience in the most at-risk communities. As the
COVID-19 response continues and the heart of hurricane season starts,
the transition to equitable disaster approaches should begin now. There
is a ``fierce urgency of now'' that requires all levels of government
to take action before the next disaster continues the horrible, unjust,
and disproportionate cycle of loss in vulnerable populations.
Ms. Titus. Thank you much, Mr. Brown.
Mr. Higdon?
Mr. Higdon. Good morning, Chairwoman Titus, Ranking Member
Katko, and members of the subcommittee. My name is Chad Higdon,
chief executive officer for Second Harvest Community Food Bank,
and I appreciate the opportunity to offer perspective regarding
the experiences of vulnerable populations during disasters.
For 7 years I have been the CEO of Second Harvest, which is
headquartered in St. Joseph, Missouri, and serves 19 counties
in northeast Kansas and northwest Missouri. Second Harvest is a
member of Feeding America, the nationwide network of 200 food
banks which provide food and services to food insecure people
in every county in the United States. I first want to thank
members of the committee for your support of food banks in your
districts.
Every food bank is very appreciative of the support we
receive from Members of Congress, and we recognize your efforts
to support the work we do. We have seen a tremendous increase
in need as a result of COVID-19. This past fiscal year, Second
Harvest distributed 9.9 million pounds of food, up 31 percent
from our record distribution the year prior. There are no signs
of this slowing down as we distributed 1 million pounds of food
product in July, our first month of the new fiscal year.
We understand that low-income families in general are
vulnerable. One vehicle emergency or unexpected home repair can
set a family back financially for months, and we know that low-
income seniors often must choose between needed prescriptions
and a nutritious meal. We are mindful of racial disparities and
the prevalence of poverty and food insecurity across
demographics, as well as urban and rural disparities.
Our focus has always been to support all families in need,
and in doing so have worked to identify and address inequities
in our service and distribution efforts. To address inequities,
we recently closed our onsite pantry in an effort to focus more
attention to mobile pantry distributions across our 19
counties. We learned that our poorest performing county,
Leavenworth County in Kansas, is the county with our largest
black population.
I'm proud to say our focus in Leavenworth County saw an
increase in distribution by more than 72 percent in the past 2
years. Second Harvest also created partnerships with Native
American populations in northeast Kansas and has established
food distribution programs on the reservations. Our goal is to
reach all distressed populations, and the Federal support we
have received has helped us accomplish this.
We have seen the benefit of food purchased through the
Families First Coronavirus Response Act and the CARES Act, the
Kansas Department of Emergency Management has purchased shelf-
stable food packages for us to distribute, and we have seen
increases in USDA commodity purchases to support the need. Even
with these additional sources of food being provided, we are
still purchasing significantly more product at a higher price
than we did a year ago.
We understand programs such as pandemic unemployment
assistance, housing assistance, SNAP, and CFAP are temporary
solutions and will eventually come to an end. I am concerned
that as the Federal relief programs expire, demand will remain
high, as will the price to distribute food.
Among the most important support we have received is that
provided by National Guard members deployed to Second Harvest.
The Guard has been assisting in all facets of our operations,
including preparing disaster relief food boxes, distributing
product at local pantry locations, and deliveries of food and
other efforts to support food distributions. The National Guard
has shown commitment to safety at a time when traditional
volunteers are on the decline because of concerns related to
the pandemic.
We also appreciate FEMA's response efforts, including
efforts of emergency feeding activities eligible for
reimbursement under FEMA Public Assistance. The PPE that has
been offered and provided across the country to support our
personnel and volunteers has also been greatly appreciated.
There does appear to be a lack of clarity about which incurred
expenses may be reimbursable, as well as how partnering with
the State or local government might impact our ability to
receive reimbursement for emergency food distribution.
We also heard concerns with the implication and overlap of
services for individuals who would receive food through FEMA
Public Assistance in addition to other Federal services. For
all the assistance we have received to support our pandemic
response, the continuance of title 32 funding to support
deployment of the National Guard by the States is what would
best support our efforts to continue our pandemic response.
I would also strongly encourage States to consider
developing proactive agreements with individual food banks and
State associations so that when food banks are needed to
support emergency food distribution efforts, we have the tools
necessary to rapidly support the communities we serve. Through
all the adversity and challenges, I'm proud to say our team at
Second Harvest has demonstrated a tremendous effort in keeping
up with the demand.
We are very appreciative of everything the Federal
Government has done to help our response and support vulnerable
populations, and I hope you consider this testimony as an
indication of what has been working well, and ideas for how we
can all be better at what we do.
Thank you.
[Mr. Higdon's prepared statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Chad Higdon, Chief Executive Officer, Second
Harvest Community Food Bank
Dear Chairwoman Titus, Ranking Member Katko, and Members of the
Subcommittee:
Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to provide written
testimony regarding the experiences of vulnerable populations during
disasters. It has been an honor and privilege for Second Harvest
Community Food Bank and myself to support distressed families during
this pandemic. I hope the insight I provide will be taken into
consideration as the federal government continues to respond to the
needs of its citizens and prepares for future unforeseen emergencies.
I also want to take the opportunity to thank Members of the
Committee for your support of food banks within the Feeding America
network and your dedication and commitment to hunger relief efforts and
causes. We appreciate Chairwoman Titus' efforts on legislation targeted
to assist children with weekend and out-of-school meals in previous
sessions. While preparing my testimony and remarks, I solicited
feedback from food banks across the country. Food bank staff from
Nevada communicated how attune Chairwoman Titus is to the work of food
banks, citing her efforts to address childhood food insecurity. Food
bank staff in New York commended Ranking Member Katko for being
genuinely concerned with issues surrounding poverty and food
insecurity. They mentioned he has visited their food bank as well as
summer feeding sites for children, has volunteered at a mobile pantry
distribution and has taken time to discuss issues related to food
insecurity with their staff. My own Congressman, full Committee Ranking
Member Sam Graves, has visited my food bank and others in his district
learning about United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Commodity
distributions, our partner agency network, food distribution programs,
and legislative issues critical to our cause. We appreciate and thank
all Members of Congress who have taken time to visit or volunteer at
food banks serving their constituents and hearing our concerns.
Second Harvest Community Food Bank is a non-profit food
distribution organization serving fifteen counties in Northwest
Missouri and four counties in Northeast Kansas. Our mission is to
provide nourishment and hope to the hungry, while engaging and
empowering the region in the fight to end hunger. We welcome food from
the federal government, food manufacturers, retailers, restaurants,
food drives, through our own purchases, and from other partners. We
strive for efficiency and integrity in our work and are proud to say
that ninety-six percent of our operating budget goes directly to
providing food for families and only four percent is used for
administrative or fundraising purposes. We distribute nutritious food
product through a network of 54 partner agencies and direct
distribution programs such as mobile pantries, childhood, and senior
hunger initiatives. In the last fiscal year, 39 percent of the
nutritious food product Second Harvest distributed was associated with
federal nutrition programs.
From July 1, 2019 to June 30, 2020, Second Harvest distributed
nearly 9.9M pounds of food through direct service programs and partner
agency distributions. This translates to the equivalent of
approximately 8.25M meals to families in need. This was a 31 percent
increase over our distribution from the year before. We employ a staff
of 24 full-time employees with an annual operating budget of $3.7M.
Prior to the pandemic we served an estimated 45,000 individuals
identified as food insecure out of a total estimated population of
350,000, or 13 percent of the population. The estimated number of food
insecure is expected to increase by approximately five percent to an
estimated 64,000 individuals as a result of the pandemic.
Second Harvest Community Food Bank is also part of the Feeding
America nationwide network of 200 food banks and 60,000 food pantries
and meal programs which provide food and services to food insecure
people in every county in the United States. Together, we are the
nation's largest hunger-relief organization. While food banks
throughout our network are very diverse and vary in size and types of
distributions, one thing that we all have in common is our reliance on
donors and volunteers to carry out our day-to-day operations. I am
proud to serve on Feeding America's Policy Engagement and Advocacy
Committee (PEAC), which helps direct policy and advocacy work for the
organization.
The focus of this hearing--the impact on vulnerable populations of
disasters like the COVID-19 pandemic--is something our food bank has
also been considering. When we look at vulnerable populations, we
understand that low-income families in general are vulnerable. One
vehicle emergency or unexpected home repair can set a family back
financially for months, and we know that low-income seniors often must
choose between needed prescriptions and a nutritious meal.
We are particularly mindful of racial disparities and the disparate
prevalence of poverty and food insecurity among various ethnic groups
as well as between urban and rural communities. While the focus for our
food bank has always been reaching and serving all food insecure
families in our service territory, we also seek to better understand
the inequities that exist in our service territory so that we may
develop plans to address any disparities.
As an example of our efforts in this area, during the past two
years we have benchmarked our food distribution efforts against the
estimated need in each of the nineteen counties we serve, and perhaps
not surprisingly, we discovered that some counties were receiving more
support than others. The county where our food bank is physically
located received more support than counties in more remote, rural
areas, as a significant amount of our distribution was happening
through an on-site pantry and pickups from local agencies. We made a
conscious decision to close our on-site pantry and initiate a mobile
pantry program. Initially this idea was met with some criticism and
skepticism, but the focus on mobile pantries in every county we serve
has not only helped us increase our overall distribution but also
improve the equity of service we provide.
Additionally, we learned that our poorest performing county--
Leavenworth County--is the county in our service area with the largest
black population. Because of this work evaluating our service at the
county level I am proud to say we have increased our food distribution
in Leavenworth County by more than 72 percent in the past two years. We
will continue to challenge ourselves to be better and ask the tough
questions about why these disparities exist, and how we can continue to
ensure our distribution is fair and equitable throughout our 19-county
service territory.
Second Harvest also created partnerships with the Iowa Tribe of
Kansas and Nebraska and Kickapoo Tribe, both operating on federally
established reservations in Northeast Kansas and worked with these
native populations to support food distributions to children when
schools on the reservations closed. Second Harvest is currently
providing support through the summer feeding program for children at
both locations. Monthly mobile pantry distributions are regularly
scheduled on the reservations and food product received for COVID-19
relief has been provided through these distributions.
The focus of all Second Harvest programs and distribution efforts
is reaching all vulnerable populations within our service territory.
The response and recovery effort from COVID-19 will be the largest
relief assistance program in American history by far and will require
significant partnerships along the way, including federal, state, and
local government and nonprofit organizations. Our work to support
hunger relief needs resulting from the pandemic in the communities we
serve would not have been possible if not for the federal support and
assistance our organization has received. This support has allowed us
to begin building a path to a brighter, food secure future for people
in our communities and we are proud to be a partner in this endeavor.
Obviously, this is an unprecedented time, and I believe this has
been the quickest I have witnessed the government respond to the needs
of its citizens. This is not to say there have not been challenges
along the way. We appreciate the response and continuous efforts to
support us in hunger relief strategies for vulnerable families. From
passage of the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (FFCRA), to the
Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security (CARES) Act, the
Coronavirus Food Assistance Program (CFAP), and the Paycheck Protection
Program, we have seen the government roll out new programs to respond
to the pandemic, illustrating a commitment and dedication to serving
the citizens of this country.
In Missouri the FFCRA provided $5.1M for food purchases and $7.6M
was provided by the CARES Act for the State to purchase and distribute
food through The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP) channels.
Additionally, $1.7M has been allocated through FFCRA for administrative
funding to support food distribution and an additional $1.5M in
flexible CARES Act funding is being funneled to the food banks in
Missouri for reimbursement of purchased food. A total of $107,811 of
the flexible CARES Act funding has been provided directly to Second
Harvest.
In Kansas, $2.7M was allocated for food purchase through FFCRA and
an additional $400,000 allocated for administrative funding, and $3.5M
in CARES Act funding was authorized for food purchases. In addition,
the Kansas Department of Emergency Management has purchased nutrient-
dense, shelf stable meals that were packaged by members of the National
Guard. Second Harvest has also distributed over 1M pounds of CFAP
product between the two states it serves with an estimated value of
$1.5M.
With as much additional food provided for our pandemic response
efforts, we still have purchased significantly more food product than
we did a year ago. In addition, the cost for purchased product has
increased and our budget for food purchases does not go as far as it
did before the pandemic. From March to June of 2019 Second Harvest
spent $404,538 on purchased food product, and from March to June of
2020 we spent $727,284. With funds spent last year we purchased 692,492
pounds of product, compared to 793,649 pounds this year. This results
in a $0.33 increase in the price per pound of purchased product. I am
extremely concerned that as the federal relief programs expire, demand
will remain high, prices to purchase food will remain higher and the
strain this will put on most food banks will be difficult to navigate.
The federal support received has been very critical to our response
efforts. Yet we also understand these programs are temporary solutions
and will eventually come to an end. Pandemic unemployment assistance
will soon expire. Housing and SNAP assistance programs will eventually
return to pre-pandemic levels. Funds families have received through
stimulus programs will eventually be spent. The CFAP program will
eventually expire. Unfortunately, I do not believe the food insecurity
crisis caused by the pandemic will be short-lived. In fact, I am
concerned the significant increase in demand we have seen since March
will only increase, and as some of these federal disaster response
programs end it will be a tremendous challenge for food banks to
sustain current levels of operations without ongoing support.
The estimated food insecurity rate for Second Harvest's service
territory in 2018 was 13 percent of the total population. For 2020 we
expect that number to increase by 40 percent to an estimated 18.3
percent of the population--and 26.5 percent of the children--living in
our 19 counties. We have closely monitored our demand and service
between mid-March and mid-July of 2020 compared to the same period in
2019. Through our partner agency network, we have witnessed an increase
of approximately 58 percent of individuals served, and through Second
Harvest's mobile pantry distributions we have seen an increase of more
than 220 percent of individuals served from the previous year. This has
been possible in large part due to the additional support of food
product received from USDA and through CARES Act food purchases, and
increased distributions made possible through utilization of the
National Guard in both Missouri and Kansas.
Our biggest concern is that the increased demand will remain
heading into 2021, while much of the support we received in the current
year will not.
Among the most important support we have received, and that we can
least afford to lose, is that provided by National Guard members
deployed to Second Harvest who have done an exceptional job and have
been critical to our work of providing much needed support to families
in need. The Guard has been assisting in all facets of our operations
including preparing disaster relief food boxes, distributing product at
mobile pantry locations, delivering USDA commodities and other food
product, sorting produce for distributions, packaging boxes of food for
distributions to children, delivering food to the homebound, and
serving at summer feeding sites for children.
Additionally, clients receiving services and our staff feel
extremely confident in the Guard members' efforts to adhere to social
distancing and best safety practices with our distributions, where
monitoring volunteers to adhere to the same standards can be a
challenge. One of our biggest fears would be one volunteer working a
mobile distribution who tested positive for COVID-19 where more than
200 vehicles received food through that distribution, and the effort it
would take to track families who received support through that
distribution and provide future assurances to families that we are
taking all necessary measures to ensure their safety when receiving
food. The National Guard has shown a tremendous commitment to safety
through their mission at the food bank.
Many of our efforts and service levels would have been highly
impacted without the support of the National Guard. With the increase
in demand and reduction in traditional volunteers, what we have
accomplished during the pandemic would not have been possible without
their support. From May to July we established 67 additional mobile
pantry distributions utilizing National Guard personnel and vehicles
and the majority of these would not have been possible without their
support. In total during those months, 70 mobile pantry distributions
in Missouri and 34 in Kansas were conducted utilizing National Guard
support at Second Harvest.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) response efforts
are no different, and we are especially grateful for the Agency's April
11 guidance that made emergency feeding activities eligible for
reimbursement under FEMA Public Assistance. FEMA staff in regional
offices have also been working hard to meet the requests of state and
local governments and their partner non-government organizations,
including food banks.
In Texas FEMA Public Assistance funds were utilized for food
replenishment in the amount of $65M. Food bank staff shared that this
effort came at a critical juncture and helped bridge the gap from
existing inventory and private funding shortages. In Indiana, FEMA
supported delivery of meals for approximately six weeks as donations
decreased. This effort was greatly appreciated and well received by the
food bank's partner agencies and clients served. Across the country
food banks are distributing record amounts of food product, and the
various channels of food sourcing which have been made available to
support the record levels of demand have directly correlated to the
success we have seen in our disaster response efforts.
We have seen other initiatives that have contributed to the
disaster response in different parts of the country. Funding has been
provided to support pork processing initiatives in Missouri and pork
and beef processing efforts in Iowa. Drive thru distribution models
proved to be a safe and efficient way to get a large quantity of food
distributed to a high volume of individuals with contactless
distribution efforts implemented. Personal protective equipment (PPE)
has been offered and provided across the country. Face shields have
been offered by Missouri's State Emergency Management Agency and will
be delivered to food banks this week.
All of these combined efforts and much needed support have arrived
during a critical time of need for hunger relief in this nation as a
result of the pandemic. We truly appreciate the efforts of federally
elected officials, administrative agency staff, state officials and
local resources who have had a hand in carrying out each of these
efforts. The work of food banks like ours would not have been as
responsive to the needs of Americans if not for these actions taken.
With all the demonstrated success stories, there are also going to
be opportunities for improvement and takeaways to improve on future
disaster response efforts. When no one could have planned and prepared
for everything that transpired as a result of COVID-19, the federal
response should be commended for the swift action and rapid response.
In the next few paragraphs, I will outline areas which I hope will be
considered as the federal government continues to evaluate the
effectiveness of its COVID-19 response efforts and the impact on
vulnerable populations.
One of the challenges food banks experienced was a disparity in
response efforts across FEMA regions. It seems that in some instances,
discretion from the FEMA regional offices and the level of effort or
understanding on the part of state and local emergency management
agencies directly impacts the likelihood of emergency feeding
activities by food banks having been reimbursed by FEMA during the
pandemic.
There appears to be a tremendous opportunity to better educate
state, local, tribal and territorial governments about how to partner
with food banks to receive reimbursement for food distribution expenses
during a disaster. Specifically, for Second Harvest Community Food Bank
there has been a lack of clarity about which incurred expenses may be
reimbursable, as well as how partnering with a state or local
government might impact our ability to receive reimbursement for
emergency food distribution. We developed a Memorandum of Understanding
with our largest county served but to date have not had a need to act
on this initiative. In addition, if we were to try and determine
increased costs as a response to the pandemic, it would be difficult to
differentiate costs that would be eligible for other federal program
reimbursement or private funding and exclude those expenses.
As an example, Second Harvest provides a report to Missouri
Department of Social Services regarding purchases and value of
distributions to families with children as a third-party maintenance of
effort (MOE) claim toward the state's Temporary Assistance to Needy
Families (TANF) MOE. We do not directly receive federal TANF dollars as
a result of this, but we do receive funding from the state for the
partnership created. However, it would be my understanding that if we
claim expenses toward TANF MOE those expenses would not be eligible for
any FEMA disaster reimbursement. Additionally, we received funding from
a private donor for food purchases in response to the pandemic through
March and April, and I assume we would not be able to claim costs
covered through private donations also as a disaster reimbursement.
However, there has not been much clarity on whether we can claim any
expenses for disaster reimbursement, or what the guidelines would be in
doing so. And for a small organization which employs 23 full-time
employees and only one staff member handling all financial activity,
tracking expenses across government programs can be very challenging.
Feedback provided by other food banks reiterated some of these same
concerns, with a lack of understanding for what populations or services
would be eligible for reimbursement. I also heard concerns from other
food banks that FEMA prohibits reimbursement of expenses which are tied
to serving anyone who receives any other form of government food
assistance. Typically, during a disaster we would assume that those
seeking additional assistance may very well also be SNAP recipients or
receive federal commodities through USDA TEFAP or the Commodity
Supplemental Food Program (CSFP). When the goal would be to serve a
high volume of individuals in drive thru operations, it would be
extremely difficult to track who might be receiving any other type of
federal assistance. It appears that this may not in fact be the case,
but this is the message some food banks received from emergency
management officials they had been working with. Food banks shared that
they along with many local governments could not afford to take the
risk that FEMA would not reimburse expenses for emergency food
distributions, and therefore did not pursue the opportunity.
In addition to these challenges, it can also be problematic
managing various food distribution programs across multiple states and
among different state agencies operating in the same state. States are
allowed flexibilities to operate food distribution programs within the
standards set by the federal government, but within those standards can
manage programs as they best see fit. This can be a challenge when
managing the same program, with basically the same food product in the
same warehouse, but variances in how to manage each of these for
different states. In Kansas we operate USDA Commodity programs with
oversight from the Kansas Department of Children and Families. In the
same state we operate the USDA Child and Adult Care Food Program
(CACFP) and USDA Summer Food Service Program (SFSP) under the Kansas
Department of Education. In Missouri we work with the Missouri
Department of Social Services in operating SNAP Outreach Assistance and
the TEFAP Commodity program, and the Missouri Department of Health and
Senior Services in operating the USDA CSFP, CACFP, and SFSP programs.
In addition, each state has other departments managing other federal
nutrition programs. This can often cause challenges in working to find
the best methods to efficiently manage each program.
As we look at what the federal government could do to best support
our efforts going forward, the first effort which would be a tremendous
help to our food bank and others across the country would be extension
of the Title 32 authorization to support states in the deployment of
the National Guard to support food distribution efforts. We know that
over the next few months many of the food distribution programs will
continue and we expect to have increased amounts of food available to
distribute. The challenge will be in our individual food bank cold
storage capacity and logistical limitations. With National Guard
support we can increase distributions and move product more quickly so
that it reaches families needing support in a timely manner. The second
item which would be most helpful is financial support for the purchase
of shelf-stable food product. Because product from the CFAP program and
other steady channels includes more perishable product, an increase in
shelf-stable food would complement our current product offerings and is
much easier for food banks and partner agencies to distribute in a safe
and efficient manner.
I would also encourage any efforts to provide consistency across
FEMA regions to ensure all parts of the country are receiving similar
support and resources for disaster response. We know that states may
have different priorities in how they choose to respond to the
pandemic, but a priority should be placed on making sure food banks
have the support and tools they need to keep up with the increased
demand, regardless of how those resources are acquired. We know there
are different approaches that can work to address any problem and we
simply hope steps are being taken to make sure the end-result is the
same and vulnerable families receive the support they need.
I also believe steps could be taken to build stronger partnerships
between emergency management agencies and Feeding America food banks.
Feeding America has the infrastructure and history of meeting the
hunger needs of American citizens. During this pandemic we found
ourselves developing an agreement with a state for emergency food
distribution to receive product that was highly needed just prior to
implementation, and consequent month-to-month agreements were signed as
prior agreements expired.
If a time comes when we must respond to a disaster worse than this
pandemic, it could be detrimental to have a need to develop and
requirement to sign a formal agreement which could delay a food bank
from being able to provide the necessary and expedient response.
Instead, we should be focused on meeting the need and equipping food
banks to be ready to move as disaster strikes. Ideally, we would like
FEMA to encourage proactive partnerships with food banks and state
associations of food banks on an ongoing basis, so that relationships
already exist for food banks to respond quickly when such need should
arise.
Providing PPE to food banks for staff and volunteers at the food
bank and partner agency level is encouraged. This has been a tremendous
help and provides added safety for staff, volunteers, and clients
involved with food distributions. Along those lines, if hand sanitizer
is provided, it is most needed in individual sizes or more manageable
packaging, rather than large 55-gallon drums which some food banks were
offered. No contact thermometers have also been very helpful to check
temperatures for staff and volunteers involved in food distribution
efforts.
The final suggestion I would offer is related to the capacity of
food banks to meet ongoing community needs and also be better prepared
to respond to future disaster situations. The dramatic increase in
commodity foods being distributed by our nation's food banks, which
began with the introduction of the USDA's Food Purchase and
Distribution Program two years ago, is stressing the ability of food
banks and our agency partners to store and distribute this volume of
perishable foods.
The $600 million for TEFAP food purchases provided in the FFCRA and
CARES Acts, as well as the approximately $500 million in additional
USDA Section 32 food purchases announced in May 2020, will add further
distribution strain to food banks and agency partners. This need is
more acute in communities that are also receiving a high volume of
perishable food through the CFAP program. Specifically, we are seeing a
significant need at food banks and partner agencies across the country
to acquire the coolers, freezers, trucks, and trailers necessary to
efficiently store and distribute food across their service areas.
Additionally, and especially during disaster response, there is a need
for on-site generators to help ensure food banks can maintain
operations during prolonged power outages.
To address these needs Feeding America has recommended an
investment of $543,625,000 to support the rental, lease, or purchase of
these essential assets across the nation's network of 200 food banks
and 60,000 partner agencies. Such an investment will allow Second
Harvest Community Food Bank and our colleagues across the country to
better meet the ongoing needs related to the current pandemic, and
ensure we are prepared to respond to future crises.
In conclusion, there have been multiple challenges we have faced
during our pandemic response at Second Harvest. I am extremely proud of
my team and the efforts of our food bank, to distribute record levels
of nutritious food product this past fiscal year. We have persevered
and accomplished much of this while dealing with partner agency
closures including food pantries and meal service centers and concerns
among staff for their own safety. Children's initiatives were impacted
with school closures, and our staff worked closely with multiple school
districts to continue to provide much needed support to families with
children. We have worked through a decrease in volunteerism, and we
still have many volunteers reluctant to return because of COVID-19
concerns.
While food safety and product integrity has always been a focus of
our food bank, we have been extremely mindful of safety and sanitation
needs associated with food distributions during the pandemic. We have
dealt with work from home efforts with full intention of keeping our
doors open and uninterrupted service. We dealt with challenges
acquiring and providing PPE and hand sanitizer to accommodate staff and
volunteers. We understood families needing assistance were at times
reluctant to go out to a food distribution site to receive food product
their family needed. We have experienced increased food costs and
disruptions to supply chains, impacting our food sourcing efforts.
Finally, we have worked through extreme limitations with cold storage
capacity and a significant increase in the amount of frozen and
refrigerated product received and needed to support families in need.
Through all the adversity and challenges I am proud to say my team
has demonstrated a tremendous effort keeping up with the demand and
serving families in need. And we are very appreciative of everything
the federal government has done to help us respond to COVID-19 and
support vulnerable populations which have been impacted. We will
continue to serve the American public and I hope you consider this
testimony as an indication of what has been working well, and ideas for
how we can all be better in what we do.
If I can provide any additional information to support the
committee's efforts through this process, please do not hesitate to
reach out.
Ms. Titus. Thank you, Mr. Higdon.
Ms. Roth, you may proceed.
Ms. Roth. Good morning, Chairwoman Titus, Ranking Member
Katko, and distinguished members of the subcommittee. It is an
honor to testify before you today as one voice among the 26
percent of the U.S. population who have disabilities. I too
honor a man who was a beacon for me and so many others with
disabilities.
In that spirit, I am here to make good trouble. I am the
executive director and CEO for the World Institute on
Disability. I've been focusing on the intersection of
disability rights, emergency management, disasters, public
health emergencies, and disaster resilience since the 9/11
terrorist attacks almost 20 years ago.
For almost 8 years, I served as Senior Advisor to FEMA
Administrator Craig Fugate, establishing and directing the FEMA
Office of Disability Integration and Coordination. Thank you
for allowing me to share the experiences of people with
disabilities during disasters, the topic of today's hearing.
After so many years of effort, I wish I was here with
better news. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
reports that at least 1 in 4 adults has a disability. Like me,
they have sweeping civil rights protections against
discrimination on the basis of their disability, and are
entitled to equal access throughout almost all aspects of daily
life in the U.S. These rights are never suspended or waived,
including before, during, and after public health emergencies
and disasters.
Having a disability does not make people more vulnerable in
disasters. Everyone is potentially vulnerable to the impact of
disasters. What makes people vulnerable is the failure of
communities and governments to plan for the inclusion of people
with disabilities in every aspect of the disaster cycle,
including community preparedness and disaster exercises,
accessible instant warnings, building and community evacuation,
sheltering in temporary housing, access to health, maintenance,
and medical services, and all aspects of the recovery process.
Chairwoman Titus, we can't even assure that service animals
will be consistently admitted to shelters in a disaster,
despite the obligation, training, and technical assistance I
and many others have been providing for years. Failure to
comply with the ADA and other key civil rights laws is what
makes people with disabilities more vulnerable in disasters and
public health emergencies.
While 8 percent of the country's COVID-19 cases have
occurred in long-term care facilities, deaths related to COVID-
19 in these facilities account for at least 43 percent of the
country's pandemic fatalities. With 150,000 Americans dead,
this means at least 65,000 people, almost all disabled, many
black, indigenous, brown, and other people of color, mostly
poor, have died horrible deaths in the last 137 days, almost
always without any loved ones to hold their hand.
How can I say most of these people were disabled? Because
no one ever goes to a nursing home or a long-term care facility
because they're old. They go because of the failure of their
community and their Government to provide adequate housing,
support, and services in their own home, despite the
requirements of disability civil rights laws. These 65,000
people with disabilities all have unwaiverable rights confirmed
in the 1999 Supreme Court Olmstead decision, giving them all
the right to live in the most integrated setting appropriate to
their needs, which was clearly not in the COVID infested death
pits in which they gasped their final breath without loved ones
by their side.
It's too late for them, but not for the millions of others.
According to a New York Times database, as of July 23rd, the
virus has infected more than 335,000 people at some 15,000
facilities. This includes people who are in prisons and in
detention facilities.
We have many asks in our testimony, but most particularly,
we asked for immediate passage of the bipartisan bicameral Real
Emergency Access for Aging and Disability Inclusion for
Disasters Act, and the Disaster Relief Medicaid Act.
And we ask you to help us find out who is monitoring and
enforcing FEMA's and HHS' use of disaster funds to ensure that
every Federal dollar spent or granted to others to spend are in
full compliance with all of the obligations under the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973.
We can't seem to get that answer, and can't seem to get an
answer for who is responsible for monitoring the folks who are
supposed to be monitoring the expenditure of billions, perhaps
trillions, of taxpayer disaster funds. I have many individual
examples I wish I had time to share with you today.
[Ms. Roth's prepared statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Marcie Roth, Executive Director and Chief
Executive Officer, World Institute on Disability
Good morning Chairman Titus, Ranking Member Katko, and
distinguished members of the Committee. It is an honor to testify
before you today, as one voice among the 26 percent of the US
population who have disabilities.
I am the Executive Director and Chief Executive Officer for the
World Institute on Disability, one of the first global disability
rights organizations, founded in 1983 by people with disabilities and
continually led by disabled people for the past 37 years. Thank you for
allowing me to share the experiences of people with disabilities during
disasters, the topic of today's hearing.
I have been active in the disability rights movement since I was in
high school and have worked as an advocate for the rights and services
needed by people with disabilities throughout my 45-year career. Along
the way, I acquired my disability, raised two disabled children,
married a man with a disability and, though some don't own it, most of
my family and friends have disabilities, too.
Disability Rights, Disasters and Public Health Emergencies
Since the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reported
in 2018 that at least 1 in 4 adults has a disability, it's safe to
assume that many people listening to or reading my testimony has a
disability too. Like me, they have sweeping civil rights protections
against discrimination on the basis of their disability and are
entitled to equal access throughout almost all aspects of daily life in
the US.
Two days ago, July 26, 2020, the 30th anniversary of the Americans
with Disabilities Act was celebrated. This law, known as the ADA, gives
civil rights protections to individuals with disabilities similar to
those provided to individuals on the basis of race, color, sex,
national origin, age, and religion. The ADA also assures equal
opportunity for individuals with disabilities for access to businesses,
employment, transportation, state and local government programs and
services, and telecommunications. These rights are never suspended or
waived, including before, during and after public health emergencies
and disasters.
In the words of one of the original authors of the ADA, Bob
Burgdorf, written in the Washington Post ``The ADA was a response to an
appalling problem: widespread, systemic, inhumane discrimination
against people with disabilities. In 1971, a New York judge described
people with disabilities as ``the most discriminated [against] minority
in our nation.''
My laser focus on emergency preparedness and improving disaster
outcomes for people with disabilities and building accessible disaster-
resilient communities began in the immediate aftermath of the September
11, 2001 terrorist attacks, when I was asked to advise the White House
on the rights and urgent needs of thousands of people with disabilities
living in the area around ground zero.
Appointed by President Obama to the U.S. Department of Homeland
Security--Federal Emergency Management Agency from 2009 to 2017, I
served as Senior Advisor to Administrator Fugate, establishing and
directing the FEMA Office of Disability Integration and Coordination. I
also served as FEMA's Congressionally mandated Disability Coordinator;
a requirement established when the Post Katrina Emergency Management
Reform Act (PKEMRA) amended the Stafford Act in 2006.
Now I'm going to speak about what happens to people with
disabilities in disasters, again and again. The news is not good.
Having a disability does not make people more vulnerable in
disasters. Everyone is potentially vulnerable to the impacts of
disasters. What makes people vulnerable is the failure communities and
governments to plan for the inclusion of people with disabilities in
every aspect of the disaster cycle, including community preparedness
and disaster exercises, accessible alerts and warnings, building and
community evacuation, sheltering and temporary housing, access to
health maintenance and medical services, and all aspects of the
recovery process.
Failure to comply with the ADA and other key civil rights laws is
what makes people with disabilities more vulnerable in disasters and
public health emergencies. Most notable among the civil rights laws is
the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 which requires equal physical access,
program access and equally effective communication access. The
Rehabilitation Act, now almost 50 years old, applies to EVERY federal
dollar spent, including all funds expended by the federal government
before, during and after disasters, and every federal dollar spent by
grantees and sub grantees, including states, tribes, territories and
their subgrantees from cities and counties and any other user of
federal funds.
The US Department of Justice, FEMA, the Departments of Health and
Human Services, Homeland Security, Housing and Urban Development have
all confirmed that they know that these civil rights laws are NEVER
waived or suspended, including in a disaster. Even when waivers of
other laws are granted in a federally declared disaster, those waivers
never apply to the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act, nor do they apply to
the non-discrimination requirements in the Stafford Act.
Despite this, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid have repeatedly
issued waivers in public health emergencies that allow states to bypass
many of the protections that keep people with disabilities out of
institutions, nursing homes and other congregate facilities, in direct
violation of their rights. These Section 1135 of the Social Security
Act blanket waivers have been issued repeatedly over the past four
years with dire consequences for people with disabilities, despite
their ADA, Stafford and Rehabilitation Act rights.
I have repeatedly raised these concerns for years, including in a
formal complaint from the Partnership for Inclusive Disaster Strategies
in 2017, filed with the Departments of Justice, Health and Human
Services, Homeland Security and FEMA. As the Executive Director of the
Partnership for Inclusive Disaster Strategies, I was granted a
``listening session'' hosted by the Disability Rights Section of the
Department of Justice in November 2017. Representatives from HHS and
DHS attended, FEMA RSVPed to DOJ that they would attend, but never
showed up. In my one-way conversation, while everyone ``listened'', I
requested that these federal representatives exercise their obligation
to enforce disability rights laws since the civil rights of people with
disabilities are never allowed to be waived or suspended. I never heard
another word about my complaint and the issuance of 1135 blanket
waivers continued in many subsequent disasters, including the current
COVID-19 pandemic.
The National Council on Disability (NCD) is an independent federal
agency charged with advising the President, Congress, and other federal
agencies regarding policies, programs, practices, and procedures that
affect people with disabilities. In May 2019, NCD published Preserving
Our Freedom: Ending Institutionalization of People with Disabilities
During and After Disasters. In NCD's cover letter to President Trump,
Presidential Appointee NCD Chairperson Neil Romano tells the president,
``NCD has found that people with disabilities are frequently
institutionalized during and after disasters. The report examines
factors that lead to institutionalization. Then, most critically, it
provides recommendations to eliminate institutionalization of people
with disabilities during and after disasters. It also recommends how to
improve community readiness to meet obligations that require equal
access to emergency and disaster services and programs in the most
integrated setting appropriate for disaster-impacted people.'' Chairman
Romano tells President Trump, ``There will be no remedy in future
disasters without sweeping changes.''
Where do we need to focus?
After many years of calls for action to address the disaster rights
and needs of 26% of the population, we have largely failed. Among the
many issues we are asking this Committee to prioritize, include the
following:
Focus on disability inclusive preparedness, response and
recovery.
Please help us find out who is monitoring and enforcing
FEMA and HHS' use of disaster funds to ensure that every federal dollar
spent or granted to others to spend are in full compliance with all of
the obligations under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973? We can't seem to
get that answer and can't seem to get an answer for who is responsible
for monitoring and enforcing the agencies required to monitor and
enforce the expenditure of billions--perhaps trillions of taxpayer
dollars!
Are we centering our efforts on the disaster needs of
multiply marginalized Black, Indigenous, Brown and other People of
Color?
Are the rights and needs of disabled prisoners and
detainees prioritized in emergency and disaster planning?
What efforts are being taken to ensure people with
intellectual disabilities, autistic people, people with mental health
needs and other disabled people who are most often the most excluded
from emergency planning?
Why are funds being directed to improve nursing homes
when they very obviously are incapable of protecting the people in
their facilities from infections, including deadly COVID-19. Invest
funds in home and community based services and accessible housing!
Who is responsible for monitoring the GAO findings
regarding FEMA's obligations to people with disabilities? Despite
several recent reports about the failures of the Office of Disability
Integration and Coordination, several agreements remain unfulfilled and
although GAO reported that they weren't conducting a civil rights
review, many disability civil rights violations have been documented
and remain unresolved. If GAO is not responsible for addressing these
documented civil rights violations, who is?
Are people with disabilities involved in planning,
participating in and reviewing disaster exercises?
Do they get alerts and warnings in formats accessible
to them? Has the Integrated Public Alerts and Warning Act adequately
addressed all accessibility requirements? Information must be
accessible to be actionable.
The only service provided to individuals under the
nationwide COVID-19 disaster declarations is ``Crisis Counseling''.
Currently, FEMA has been unable to provide any information about which
states are providing accessible crisis counseling services or what
those accommodations are and how to locate them.
Can they evacuate from multistory buildings? Can they
evacuate the community with everyone else, even if they need accessible
transportation, or are they left behind?
Are shelters prepared to meet their access and
functional needs?
Will service animals be welcomed? Despite relentless
efforts, people with service animals are still repeatedly denied access
to shelters.
Can people with disabilities register for FEMA
assistance? Can they request reasonable accommodations for the
application process when they apply? After years of repeatedly raising
these issues, FEMA told GAO over a year ago that they would have this
resolved. It still is not, and we are told, ``hopefully by the end of
2020''.
Will national disability organizations finally be
invited to work with FEMA's Office of Disability Integration and
Coordination after being refused time and again since 2017.
How will personal assistance and other accommodations
be provided in concurrent disasters during the pandemic? There is a
need for immediate solutions to prevent admissions to nursing homes and
other COVID-19 infested congregate facilities.
There is a national shortage of accessible and
affordable housing before disasters destroy homes. This must be a
priority or the cascade that leads to institutionalization won't be
stemmed.
Likewise, we must prioritize Home and Community Based
Services funding and Money Follows the Person funding to prevent
institutionalization and provide the resources for nursing home
transition and other deinstitutionalization for all who wish to live in
the community, without exception.
Meeting the educational needs of students with
disabilities remains an especially urgent need during the pandemic. The
disaster related needs of students with disabilities have been an issue
in every recent disaster, and this must be addressed so that planning
can prevent the disproportionate interruption of the educational needs
of these students, in violation of their rights under the Individuals
with Disabilities Education Act.
And, disaster recovery and mitigation must always start
with a commitment to universal design standards and accessibility as
imperatives. Without accessibility, community resilience is impossible.
Immediately pass the bi-partisan, bi-cameral Real
Emergency Access for Aging and Disability Inclusion for Disasters
(REAADI for Disasters Act)--S-1755 and HR-3208 and Disaster Relief
Medicaid Act (DRMA) S-1754 and HR-3215. These bills will go a long way
towards closing many of the deadly gaps in disasters and public health
emergencies, not just for people with disabilities, but for the whole
community.
The current crisis
On March 3, 2020, in anticipation of what was to come, disability
advocates led by the Partnership for Inclusive Disaster Strategies, the
National Council on Independent Living Emergency Preparedness
Subcommittee, and my organization, the World Institute on Disability
issued a National Call to Action joined by 194 other local, national,
and international groups.
The coalition, led by the Partnership followed our Call to Action
with a letter to Vice President Pence and the White House COVID-19 Task
Force on March 9, 2020.
It took many complaints before CMS amended their COVID-19 1135
blanket waiver guidance last month, adding one line to the document
originally published 4 months earlier. The added language reads,
``States are still subject to obligations under the integration mandate
of the Americans with Disabilities Act, to avoid subjecting persons
with disabilities to unjustified institutionalization or segregation.
In a footnote, CMS also added ``Please note that consistent with
the integration mandate of Title II of the ADA and the Olmstead vs LC
decision, States are obligated to offer/ provide discharge planning
and/or case management/ transition services, as appropriate, to
individuals who are removed from their Medicaid home and community
based services under these authorities during the course of the public
health emergency as well as to individuals with disabilities who may
require these services in order to avoid unjustified
institutionalization or segregation. Transition services/ case
management and/or discharge planning would be provided to facilitate
these individuals in their return to the community when their condition
and public health circumstances permit.'' Based on reports, this has
not stemmed the placement of people with disabilities in COVID infested
nursing homes.
Who is affected?
On March 13, 2020, President Trump declared the COVID-19 pandemic a
national emergency. While 8 percent of the country's COVID-19 cases
have occurred in long-term care facilities, deaths related to COVID-19
in these facilities account for 50 percent of the country's pandemic
fatalities, according to Larry Kudlow, representing President Trump on
CNN's State of the Union on 7/26.
According to Mr. Kudlow's numbers, in the 137 days that have
followed President Trump's National Emergency Declaration, 50% of the
150,000 US COVID-19 deaths, 75,000, were almost all people with
disabilities who despite their right to live in the community, died a
horrific death, without any loved ones by their side, in congregate
facilities, such as nursing homes, long term care facilities, and group
homes. Countless other disabled people are also dying from COVID in
juvenile and adult psychiatric hospitals and carceral facilities, such
as jails, prisons and detention centers. Many of these people are
multiply marginalized Black, Indigenous, Brown and other people of
color, most of them were poor.
According to a New York Times database, as of July 23, the virus
has infected more than 335,000 people at some 15,000 facilities. These
numbers would indicate that there are still well over a million
institutionalized people who could still be prevented from contracting
the virus. Clearly, given the abject failure of these facilities to
protect the people under their care, this won't be possible in those
15,000 facilities.
Disability rights advocates from across the country are calling for
immediate relocation of all disabled people currently in congregate
facilities. Many of the nation's 400+ Centers for Independent Living,
non-residential community advocacy organizations, serving most
communities in every state, have completed thousands of successful
transitions from nursing homes to non-congregate community living. They
are ready, willing and able to implement their federally mandated
nursing home transition services. In a July 6, 2020 letter to the
nation's governors, these community living experts and their allies
notified the governors that they will assist state and federal
government authorities to meet their civil rights obligations under the
ADA and the Rehabilitation Act by rapidly relocating nursing home
residents with disabilities to far safer transitional housing where
they would continue to receive all of the supports and services they
require in the privacy and safety of non-congregate community
locations. FEMA has been repeatedly requested to provide guidance to
governors about how to use the current disaster declarations to enable
the use of Public Assistance, Category B funds, Emergency Protective
Measures, to fund the emergency protective needs of hundreds of
thousands of people with disabilities in dangerous COVID infested
congregate facilities. FEMA has shown no urgency in providing this life
saving guidance. People with disabilities living in our communities, in
their own homes, have a radically lower infection rate than people
living in congregate settings. Home and community-based services are
also a very cost-effective solution.
In the NCD report Preserving Our Freedom: Ending
Institutionalization of People with Disabilities During and After
Disasters
``data shows it is more cost-effective to provide community-
based services like accessible shelters versus
institutionalization. In NCD's 2009 report The Cost of
Deinstitutionalization: Comparing the Cost of Institution
Versus Community-Based Services, the average annual expenditure
for a state institution was $188,318 compared to $42,486 for
Medicaid funded home and community-based services.1 The fiscal
disparity between the two options is staggering and further
supports NCD's recommendations in this report that
institutionalization of persons with disabilities during and
after disasters is not an economically sound option.''
Real Experiences
Here are the experiences of three disabled people affected in
extreme ways in the midst of the COVID-19 federally declared disaster.
Katy is a disability advocate in Yuba City, CA. She lives in her
own home, and, as a person with quadriplegia, she receives In-Home
Supportive Services (IHSS) as an alternative to out-of-home care. This
State of CA program is described as ``enabling recipients to remain
safely in their own homes''. Due to COVID, Katy's in-home support
providers stopped coming and, despite repeated promises from the state,
she was told IHSS workers were unavailable. Without in-home support,
Katy's health and safety were in danger. She could find people to hire
on Craigs List, but they were far more expensive than the $133/day IHSS
currently pays but IHSS won't cover the additional cost. Instead, Katy
was forced to go into a nursing home at a cost to the state of $600/
day, a $467 more expensive option in an especially dangerous place for
anyone to be forced to live.
Kristen is a mother of four, from Atlanta. During childbirth, she
had a massive stroke, resulting in paralysis and a brain injury. After
a recent hospitalization related to her brain injury, the hospital was
in a hurry to discharge Kristen so they could fill her bed with a
higher paying patient. While she and her friends scrambled to find an
accessible home for her and her children to live, she was relocated 300
miles away to a nursing home in TN against her will. As a result of
that decision, she can't see her children and she has been told that
since she is out of state, proceedings to sever her parental rights
will begin soon.
Both Katy and Kristen have submitted Civil Rights complaints to the
US Department of Health and Human Services Office for Civil Rights. As
of this hearing, neither has had any action taken by HHS.
Last month, a Black, disabled, 46-year-old African American father
of five was one of the tens of thousands of disabled people who had
contracted COVID-19 in a nursing home. However, Michael Hickson, who
was paralyzed after a massive heart attack caused a brain injury in
2017, did not die from the virus. He was euthanized, despite his wife's
pleading with doctors to provide life sustaining care to her husband.
In the words of one reporter, Michael ``was black and paralyzed, so
doctors decided his life wasn't worth saving''.
Michael's wife, Melissa, legally recorded an exchange she had with
her husband's doctor about Michael's care. ``As the recording shows,
they agreed that Michael should not be intubated, but Melissa still
wanted Michael to be treated aggressively. The doctor insisted
aggressive treatment wouldn't ``help him improve'' and ``right now, his
quality of life . . . he doesn't have much of one.'' ``What do you
mean?'' Melissa asked. ``Because he's paralyzed with a brain injury, he
doesn't have quality of life?'' ``Correct,'' the doctor flatly replied.
``The doctor admitted he'd had ``three patients survive who were in
Michael's situation'' but claimed ``Michael's ``quality of life is
different from theirs.'' The others ``were walking and talking people.
I don't mean to be frank or abrasive, but at this point, we are going
to do what we feel is best for him along with the state, and this is
what we decided.'' Michael, a father of 5, was denied food and water
and he died a horrific death six days later, with none of his loved
ones by his side.
Kristen is a black woman and Michael was a black man.
Advocates had to move quickly earlier in the declared disaster to
prevent children and adults from rationing of their medical care and
medical devices based simply on their disability and the perceived
quality of life.
``The Center for Public Representation and others filed complaints
alleging that crisis standard of care plans in two of the states
currently being hardest hit by COVID-19, Arizona and Texas,
discriminate against people with disabilities, older adults, and people
of color, placing these communities at risk of substantial and imminent
harm--and the real risk of being denied basic and emergency treatment--
during the pandemic.
In response to the disability community's strong advocacy, the U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services' Office of Civil Rights (HHS
OCR) published a bulletin on March 28, 2020 to ensure that covered
entities follow civil rights laws, including Section 1557 of the
Affordable Care Act and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act which
``prohibit discrimination on the basis of disability in HHS funded
health programs or activities.'' The guidance explains that entities
funded by HHS cannot deny people with disabilities medical care ``on
the basis of stereotypes, assessments of quality of life, or judgments
about a person's relative ``worth'' based on the presence or absence of
disabilities.'' It is also discusses the obligations of hospitals to
ensure equal access and effective communication.''
In many states, efforts have been taken to provide immunity to all
hospitals, nursing homes and other congregate facilities, protecting
those facilities and their employees from any criminal or civil
liability for their treatment decisions and actions. Families,
disability advocates and advocates for older adults are outraged. One
advocate in New York told the New York Times ``Having liability can
cause a facility to be more diligent and prevent incidents occurring
that will cost them money,'' said Susan M. Dooha, the executive
director of the Center for Independence of the Disabled. ``The
preventive power of liability has been muted.''
Based on the findings of the report, Preserving Our Freedom: Ending
Institutionalization of People with Disabilities During and After
Disasters, NCD recommends that:
The Department of Justice (DOJ), the Department of Health
and Human Services (HHS), the Department of Homeland Security (DHS),
and the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) monitor and
enforce the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Olmstead integration
mandate and the Rehabilitation Act obligation to use federal funds in
such a way that people are served in the most integrated setting
appropriate to their needs.
All relevant federal agencies engage with national,
state, and local coalitions of disability led organizations and
stakeholders.
DOJ assesses the equal access and non-discrimination
civil rights compliance performance of the American Red Cross and other
shelter and mass-care providers in relation to actions resulting in
institutionalization of disaster survivors with disabilities.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) explore
ways to expeditiously modify its Individual Assistance registration
process to curtail the incidence of institutionalization of individuals
with disabilities.
DHS/FEMA and HHS/Administration for Community Living
(ACL) provide grant funds to support Independent Living Centers in
supporting disaster-impacted people with disabilities in their
community. (This funding should incorporate all five core services of
Independent Living Centers, including their obligation to prevent and
divert institutionalization of disaster-impacted people throughout
disaster response and recovery.)
Relevant federal agencies integrate disaster-related
services for veterans with disabilities with all other emergency and
disaster services in order to address the current gap in coordination.
Legislation be introduced and swiftly enacted to address
all gaps in meeting the civil rights obligations to people with
disabilities impacted by disasters.
Recommendations from the Emergency Relocation of Congregate Setting
Residents letter to the National Governors Association:
Relocate residents to safe, non-congregate, cohort
settings that house no more than one person per room
Identify residents who want to transition to Home &
Community Based Services (HCBS)
Require that institutions / long-term care facilities
grant access to essential CIL staff and transition coordinators in
order to implement these relocation plans
Expedite HCBS eligibility determinations for those who
want to remain in the community OR who refuse to return to an unsafe
congregate setting
Work with your Department of Commissioners, etc. to
utilize alternative funds (such as FEMA Public Assistance Category B
funds) to cover the costs of care, shelter and food during disaster
relocations
Immediately lift the restrictions on visitations. Data
shows visits from family are critical to the well-being and quality of
life of people housed in these congregate settings. Not allowing
visitations is contributing to the increases in death
And, the Partnership for inclusive Disaster Strategies led our
COVID-19 Coalition to issue the following Legislative Recommendations
for Public Health Emergencies and Disasters to meet the urgent and
immediate needs of people with disabilities, including multiply-
marginalized people, throughout the COVID-19 Public Health Emergency,
Presidential Disaster Declarations, concurrent disasters and in
preparation for future disasters and public health emergencies:
There must be the establishment and funding of one or
more Disability, Emergency and Disaster Technical Assistance Centers
led and managed by disability inclusive emergency management experts,
operational within 30 days of enactment in order to meet the immediate
lifesaving and life sustaining needs and protecting the rights of 61
million adults with disabilities and for others who also have access
and functional needs in a disaster or public health emergency. Purposes
of the Disability, Emergency and Disaster Technical Assistance Centers:
Operating a National Disability Disaster and COVID-19
rights and needs Hotline
Developing and delivering remote just-in-time training
on the COVID-19 rights and needs of people with disabilities, with a
specific focus on:
The rights and immediate needs of people with
disabilities who need supports and services to protect themselves from
exposure.
People with disabilities who are in quarantine.
People with disabilities who are in isolation or in
an acute care medical setting.
Information for medical, public health, and public
safety officials, government and non-government, and private sector
entities to understand their obligations to people with disabilities,
before, during and after public health emergencies and disasters.
Meeting continuity of operations and continuity of
services for serving people with disabilities across the lifecycle and
throughout the disaster cycle.
Public engagement, coordination between all public
and NGO stakeholders to provide accessible information, promising and
good practices, and problem-solving via disability accessible
teleconference and web-based information sharing.
Crisis counseling and Disaster Case Management for
people with disabilities, eligible as a result of Federal Disaster
Declarations. Crisis counseling and Disaster Case Management must be
provided by disability culturally competent providers, and must be
equally effective for all people with communication disabilities.
Crisis Counseling and Disaster Case Management must be provided without
interruption and gaps. Auxiliary aids and services to make
communication equally effective include sign language interpreters,
real-time captions, CART, plain language, easy read, Braille, large
print, screen reader and other alternative formats. Alternative and
augmentative communication is used by many people with disabilities to
meet their daily communication needs. For people with COVID-19 whose
ability to communicate may be temporarily affected, equal access to
crisis counseling can be provided by utilizing auxiliary aids and
services to meet their urgent crisis communication needs.
Amendment to Stafford Act--Use of Disaster Response and
Recovery Funds
Fund certain ``nonprofit entities'' in Category B
language--amended to define funding for a training & technical
assistance center.
Funding for disability-led organizations providing life
saving and life sustaining assistance in a federally declared, Stafford
Act eligible disaster or emergency.
Fund state, local, tribal and territorial government
entities to track the displacement of people with disabilities into
skilled nursing facilities (SNF) and other institutions with or without
the use of a CMS 1135 Blanket Waiver.
Require and fund federal, state, local, tribal, and
territorial government entities to ensure disability services and
supports are provided in the most integrated settings appropriate to
the person.
If the person is in an acute care setting, all reasonable
accessibility accommodations and modifications of policies and
practices are provided without interruption.
To maintain all reasonable accessibility accommodations
and modifications of policies and practices are provided without
interruption at home and throughout transition home from an acute care
or institutional setting.
Increase Home and Community Based Services (HCBS) funding
Expand funding for Money Follows the Person (MFP)
Fund federal entities to monitor recipients and
subrecipients of federal funds to ensure compliance throughout all
disaster-related placement decisions by recipients and subrecipients of
federal financial funds within 30 days, and with quarterly reports to
Congress.
Additional recommendations for legislative action are all drawn
from the 5/24/19 report from the National Council on Disability report
to President Trump: Preserving Our Freedom: Ending Institutionalization
of People with Disabilities During and After Disasters
Require CMS to establish a process for Medicaid
portability and continuity of services within states and among states,
tribes and territories during disasters and public health emergencies
to ensure uninterrupted health maintenance and medical care in the
least restrictive environment for Medicaid recipients.
Require that all recipients and subrecipients of federal
funds receive just-in-time training in the scope of their obligations
to people with disabilities. This training must be developed and
delivered by disability led organizations with knowledge, skills and
abilities. This training must include information advising that federal
funds may be revoked due to noncompliance with the obligation to
receive services in the most integrated setting appropriate and that
this obligation applies during disasters.
Training on the scope of the obligations of recipients
and subrecipients of federal financial assistance to people with
disabilities during the period of hospitalization and discharge for
individuals impacted by public health emergencies and disasters,
including those who have been abandoned during evacuation, sheltering,
and transition to long-term housing.
Funding will be provided to disability-led organizations
to deliver technical assistance to local, state, tribal, territorial
and federal agencies responsible for emergency preparedness, community
resilience, and disaster-related services, programs, supports, or
activities to engage with national, state, and local coalitions of
disability-led organizations and stakeholders.
Fund NCD to lead a review of the National Response
Framework, Emergency Support Function Annexes, and Federal Interagency
Operations Plans and all other applicable federal doctrine to determine
any required updates to specifically address responsibility for meeting
the equal access, health maintenance, safety, and independence needs of
children and adults with disabilities to prevent institutionalization.
Fund an organization with expertise in IDEA, ADA, Rehab
Act and Stafford Act to assess and make recommendations that disaster-
impacted students with disabilities are not excluded from distance
learning and returning to school with their peers and that all supports
and services included on their IEP or Section 504 plan are provided
without interruption. This includes providing services during school
closure and upon school reopening in order to meet their individualized
educational needs and to prevent institutionalization.
Fund a comprehensive assessment of with recommendations
for the establishment and execution of a seamless and integrated
process in Emergency Support Functions #6 and #8 to prioritize health
maintenance for children and adults with disabilities and seamlessly
deliver services and supports to people in the most integrated setting
throughout the evacuation, sheltering, hospitalization, temporary
housing, and disaster recovery. Recommendations must include actionable
steps for the HHS Secretary's Operations Center and the FEMA Emergency
Support Function Leadership Group to ensure the rights and needs of
people with disabilities are maintained throughout the period of a
declared public health emergency and disaster.
Establish a roster of federal agencies who must provide
senior leadership participation and active engagement in a community
led public private partnership with disability organizations with
specific expertise and involvement in national disability inclusive
emergency management policy and practice.
Authorize and appropriate funds for DHS and FEMA to
provide disaster preparedness grants specifically targeted to
organizations led by and serving marginalized communities, including
but not limited to people with disabilities experiencing poverty;
people with disabilities experiencing homelessness; women with
disabilities; people of color with disabilities; and members of the
LGBTQ community with disabilities.
Provide funding and quarterly reporting by DOJ, DHS and
HHS to monitor and enforce the obligation under both the ADA and the
Rehabilitation Act to serve people with disabilities in the most
integrated setting appropriate to their needs.
Fund the FCC to reestablish its Emergency Access Advisory
Committee to establish effective communication access requirements for
alerts, warnings and notification, including provision of American Sign
Language and other existing and new assistive technology. These
guidelines should be developed in consultation and collaboration with
DOJ, applying the requirements for equal effective communication
access. Implementation should include monitoring and enforcement by the
FCC and DOJ.
Fund immediate operations and research into solutions for
existing disability service providers (such as independent living
centers, paratransit service providers, meals on wheels, medical supply
providers, developmental disability service providers, personal
assistants, direct support professionals, birth to 3, ADRCs, AAA, sign
language interpreters, peer support, respite, etc to jointly plan for,
share information and meet the emergency and disaster needs of the
people one or more of them maintain in their database.
Fund research on HIPAA and Privacy Act laws to determine
if and how they need to be revised to allow providers to share
information and resources in emergencies and disasters. This is an
alternative to the use of ``special'' registries that repeatedly fail
to provide a solution for meeting the civil rights obligations the
government has to people with disabilities in emergencies and
disasters.
Fund NCD to review the Federal Mass Evacuation Plan, DRRA
and PKEMRA evacuation planning requirements, and any other plans that
use federal funding for evacuation be reviewed by the Department of
Justice, Department of Transportation, Department of Homeland Security,
and other federal agencies with a role in planning, implementing and/or
funding evacuation initiatives to ensure compliance with disability
civil rights obligations throughout disaster response and implement all
necessary corrective action immediately.
Fund HHS CMS to develop and implement within 30 days, a
comprehensive federal database in collaboration with all other federal
entities with admission and monitoring or funding and reimbursement
obligations to ensure that all admissions to hospitals and long-term
care facilities during and after disasters are monitored at every
admission and discharge and that people placed are provided with the
assistance needed to return to their community with all supports and
services they need to regain and maintain their independence. Reporting
to congress must begin NLT 60 days and must continue quarterly until
all admissions from the start of a declared emergency (including public
health emergency) and disaster have returned home (or died).
Fund DOJ and other federal entities with enforcement
authority to monitor and prohibit the automatic placement of
individuals with disabilities in hospital and nursing home settings and
direct state and local entities to immediately provide supports and
services in the most integrated setting appropriate to any person who
does not need this level of care. Monitor and enforce civil rights
compliance with Titles II and III of the ADA regarding sheltering.
Fund DOJ, DHS, and HUD to monitor and enforce compliance
with obligations for emergency sheltering in a disaster consistent with
emergency sheltering requirements under the Fair Housing Amendments
Act. Compliance should occur in transient and long-term emergency
shelters.
Congress funds all elements of the REAADI and DRMA Acts
not otherwise specified in these recommendations to ensure that the
rights of people with disabilities are protected and that the needs of
people with disabilities and older adults are met in concurrent and
future disasters.
This includes:
Establish a National Research Center to conduct
research and collect and analyze data to determine recommended
practices for including people with disabilities and older adults in
planning during and following disasters. Establish a ``projects of
national significance'' program to increase the involvement of people
with disabilities and older adults in the planning and response to
disasters.
Establish a National Commission on Disability Rights,
Aging and Disasters that will provide recommendations on how to ensure
effective emergency preparedness, disaster response, recovery, and
community resilience efforts for people with disabilities and older
adults.
Establish one national and 10 regional Training and
Technical Assistance Disability and Disaster Centers that provide
comprehensive training, technical assistance, development of funding
sources, and support to state, tribal, and local disaster relief;
public health entities; social service agencies; and stakeholder
groups.
Require and fund DOJ to create an oversight committee
that will review all ADA settlement continued agreements related to
disaster-response activities for the years 2005 to 2017.
Medicaid Relief for Disaster Survivors
Amending the Social Security Act to provide medical
assistance available to relief-eligible survivors of disasters during
relief coverage periods in accordance with section 1947.
Disaster Relief Medicaid for Survivors of Major
Disasters.
Promoting Effective and Innovative State Responses to
Increased Demand for Medical Assistance Following a Disaster.
HCBS Emergency Response Corps Grant Program.
Targeted Medicaid Relief for Direct Impact Areas.
Presumptive and Continuous Eligibility, No
Documentation Required.
Fund DOJ to provide pointed guidance to sister
federal agencies to address the issue of outdated regulations that
conflict with the Olmstead integration mandate.
Fund the University of Minnesota Institute on
Community Integration University Center on Excellence in Disabilities
Residential Information Systems Project (RISP) to expand their research
on institutionalization during and after disasters in all states and
territories to include people with all types of disabilities.
Fund DOJ to assess the equal access and non-
discrimination civil rights compliance performance of the American Red
Cross and other shelter and mass care providers in relation to actions
resulting in institutionalization of disaster survivors and issue
orders for immediate corrective actions as needed.
Fund DOJ to issue a fact sheet that defines
monitoring and enforcement obligations in order to ensure compliance
with civil rights requirements in the placement, as well as to track
and use of federal funds associated with emergency and disaster
sheltering of people with disabilities.
Fund Independent Living Centers and other affordable
and accessible housing experts to provide individual and household
disaster case management focused on the transition and permanent
housing needs of disaster-impacted people with disabilities.
Fund Independent Living Centers and other experts on
affordable and accessible housing to provide individual and household
disaster case management focused on the transition and permanent
housing needs of disaster-impacted people with disabilities during
concurrent and future disasters.
Fund HUD to establish metrics and measure the
nationwide availability of the ready supply of accessible, adaptable,
affordable, and disaster-resistant permanent and temporary housing.
Fund FEMA and HUD to create systems for collecting
and publishing all disaster recovery and mitigation expenditures for
housing that is subject to compliance with requirements under the
Rehabilitation Act, Fair Housing Amendments Act, and the ADA. This
reporting systems must measure and report compliance with accessibility
standards.
Fund DOJ to monitor and enforce civil rights
compliance throughout all phases of disaster response to: a. Prevent
abandonment on the part of government entities, such as National Guard
and other recipients and subrecipients of federal financial assistance.
b. Ensure compliance throughout all disaster related placement
decisions made by recipients and subrecipients of federal financial
assistance. c. Ensure compliance with Titles II and III of the ADA
pertaining to sheltering.
Fund FEMA to explore ways to modify their Individual
Assistance registration process expeditiously to curtail the incidence
of institutionalization of individuals with disabilities during
concurrent and future disasters.
Fund the DHS Office for Civil Rights and Civil
Liberties to lead and manage the 25-plus federal agencies included in
Executive Order 13347, which established the Interagency Coordinating
Council on Emergency Preparedness and Individuals with Disabilities
(ICC), to collaborate to ensure moving forward that emergency
preparedness plans incorporate the perspectives and needs of
individuals with disabilities, and that barriers to access, services,
and planning are removed.
Fund member agencies of the ICC to place disability
experts from their agency into the field during federally declared
disasters in all FEMA Joint Field Offices and Area Field Offices
throughout disaster operations. These experts must be qualified by
either the FEMA Qualification System or the National Qualification
System to ensure adequate expertise in guiding compliance with the
civil rights of disaster-impacted people with disabilities to prevent
institutionalization during concurrent and future disasters.
Fund HHS to establish a process for states and
territories to immediately loan and replace durable medical equipment,
consumable medical supplies, assistive technology, and disability
services and supports, well as disaster case management to disaster
survivors with disabilities, in order to provide equal access and non-
discrimination throughout emergency response to meet immediate health,
safety, and independence needs.
Fund the Veterans Administration and HHS to ensure
disaster-related services for veterans are integrated with all other
emergency and disaster services to address the current gap in
coordination between services for veterans with disabilities and
services for other people with disabilities.
Fund the immediate provision of experts on reasonable
accommodations for every disaster applicant until such time as
applicants with disabilities can request and receive these reasonable
accommodations through the FEMA application.
In Closing
One of my favorite sayings is associated with the Chinese symbols
for Crisis, Danger and Opportunity. ``Crisis is an opportunity riding
on a dangerous wind.''
In these very troubled times, we all face three choices. Do we go
back to what wasn't working before? Do we stay stuck right where we are
until the next catastrophic event forces us to scramble again, or do we
use this unprecedented opportunity to boldly move forward on the
dangerous wind that is blowing, all of us, to create and sustain a
resilient country that prioritizes the resilience of the people who
will once again be disproportionately impacted if we don't act. I
choose the bold commitment to resilience for all and I ask you to join
me in turning words into action.
Thank you for listening.
Ms. Titus. Well, thank you. Perhaps we can get to some of
those examples in the questions. We appreciate your testimony
very much.
Ms. Yentel?
Ms. Yentel. Yes, Chair Titus and Ranking Member Katko and
members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to
testify before you today. The National Low Income Housing
Coalition has worked on disaster housing recovery for 15 years
since Hurricane Katrina, and from this experience we have
reached a simple conclusion: America's disaster housing
recovery system is fundamentally broken.
It certainly exacerbates the housing crisis, solidifies
segregation and racial inequities, and deepens inequality. When
disasters strike, the lowest income and most marginalized
people are often hardest hit. They have the fewest resources,
and face the longest, steepest path to recovery. Yet these are
the households that are least likely to receive FEMA
assistance.
FEMA prioritizes protocol over outcomes, relies on programs
that are inefficient or unhelpful to low-income people, creates
unnecessary and arbitrary deadlines, and refuses to release
data on program requirements or outcomes.
FEMA has consistently failed to learn lessons from past
disasters, and to apply them to future efforts. A clear example
is FEMA's refusal to update the Disaster Housing Assistance
Program, or DHAP, which Republican and Democratic
administrations have upheld as a best practice to help families
find permanent housing solutions. Instead, FEMA relies on
programs that low-income and marginalized families struggle to
access and use. As a result, homelessness often increases in
communities impacted by disasters.
After Hurricane Maria, FEMA implemented arbitrary deadlines
that required Puerto Ricans that evacuated the island to leave
FEMA-funded hotels before they had alternate housing. As a
result, homelessness increased in communities with Puerto Rican
evacuees by 14 percent in Massachusetts, and 17 percent in
Connecticut. After Hurricane Harvey, homelessness increased in
Houston by 18 percent. Nearly 20 percent of people experiencing
homelessness in the city reported that they had become homeless
as a result of the disaster, a stunning indictment of the
failed disaster response.
FEMA-funded programs exacerbate racial inequities. After
Hurricane Harvey, nearly half of disaster survivors with the
lowest incomes, mostly people of color, were denied FEMA
assistance. The vast majority of higher income or mostly white
households were approved. The average white family in the
higher income neighborhoods received about $60,000 per person.
Black families in poorer neighborhoods received an average of
$84 per person.
FEMA frequently denies assistance to eligible survivors
because of inflexible requirements. For example, title
documentation rules bar low-income homeowners, residents of
manufactured housing, and renters without written leases from
receiving the assistance for which they are eligible. After
Hurricane Maria, FEMA denied assistance to at least 77,000
people because of otherwise accepted informal systems for
documenting homeownership.
Rural, historically black, or immigrant communities also
implement informal systems of home ownership. After Hurricane
Michael, FEMA denied assistance to as many as 50 percent of
applicants in certain parts of the panhandle due to title
issues. After California's wildfires, FEMA denied assistance to
70 percent of applicants due to title issues. In all cases,
FEMA refused to modify its programs to accommodate applicants
and needs.
FEMA has known this issue is a problem since 1995, and has
done little to remedy it. FEMA has a systemic lack of
transparency. The agency refuses to make information public
about its application and appeals processes, which leads to
higher and often shocking levels of denial rates for low-income
people.
People experiencing homelessness are often most at risk
during a disaster, and have the fewest resources to recover,
but they are denied FEMA assistance, even if all their
belongings were destroyed by a disaster. These are just some
examples of our country's broken disaster recovery system, and
the ways in which it neglects the people most in need of
assistance, and my written testimony has many more examples and
evidence.
Congress should rebuild a disaster housing recovery system
that is centered on the needs of the lowest income people.
Racial equity and equity for all marginalized and impacted
people should be a central and explicit goal of Federal
disaster policy. There must be opportunities for public
engagements, systemic transparency, full accountability, due
process, robust civil rights enforcement, fair mitigation
practices, and a focus on increased local capacity and
benefits. These priorities must be reflected in every stage of
disaster recovery and response. This work will take many years,
but Congress can take action immediately.
Congress should permanently authorize the DHAP program, and
activate it after every major disaster. Congress should require
FEMA to activate it now for those people experiencing
homelessness that have been moved to hotels to contain the
spread of COVID-19.
Congress should enact the Housing Survivors of Major
Disasters Act, which passed unanimously out of this committee,
and would help overcome documentation issues, and Congress
should require that FEMA provide basic, essential information
about its response and recovery efforts, including full
transparency on program eligibility, the application process,
reasons for denial of assistance and outcomes.
Decades of evidence makes clear that our country's disaster
housing system is fundamentally broken. Congress must develop a
new system that centers the housing needs of the lowest income
survivors, including people of color, people with disabilities,
and others. Thank you again for the opportunity to testify and
for holding this important hearing. I look forward to your
questions.
[Ms. Yentel's prepared statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Diane Yentel, President and Chief Executive
Officer, National Low Income Housing Coalition
Committee Chair DeFazio and Ranking Member Graves, Subcommittee
Chair Titus and Ranking Member Katko, and members of the subcommittee,
thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today on ways to
ensure that our nation's disaster housing recovery and response efforts
address the unique and often overlooked needs of low-income people,
people of color, people with disabilities, people experiencing
homelessness and other marginalized people.
The National Low Income Housing Coalition (NLIHC) is dedicated
solely to achieving socially just public policy that ensures people
with the lowest incomes in the United States have affordable and decent
homes. NLIHC leads the Disaster Housing Recovery Coalition of more than
850 national, state, and local organizations, including many working
directly with disaster-impacted communities and with first-hand
experience recovering after disasters. We work to ensure that federal
disaster recovery efforts prioritize the housing needs of the lowest-
income and most marginalized people in impacted areas.
NLIHC has worked on disaster housing recovery since Hurricane
Katrina, and from this experience, we have come to a simple conclusion:
America's disaster housing recovery system is fundamentally broken and
in need of major repair and reform. It is a system that was designed
for middle-class people and communities--a system that never
contemplated, and so does not address, the unique needs of the lowest-
income and most marginalized people. Because of this fundamental design
flaw, these families are consistently left behind in recovery and
rebuilding in disaster after disaster. The disaster recovery system not
only ignores the needs of the lowest-income people, but it exacerbates
many of the challenges they faced prior to the storm; disaster response
and recovery often worsens the housing crisis, solidifies segregation,
and deepens inequality.
When disasters strike, the lowest-income and most marginalized
survivors are often hardest hit. They have the fewest resources and
face the longest, steepest path to recovery. Despite the clear need,
federal efforts frequently leave these survivors without the assistance
needed to recover and leave their communities less resilient to future
disasters. Without this critical assistance, many of the lowest-income
and most marginalized survivors return to uninhabitable homes, sleep in
cars or at shelters, double- or triple-up with other low-income
families, or pay more than half of their limited incomes on rent,
putting them at increased risk of displacement, eviction, and, in worst
cases, homelessness.
The national coronavirus pandemic underscores the deep inequities
embedded in our nation's disaster housing response and recovery system
and the urgent need for reform. Black and Native people--who, even
before the pandemic, faced higher rates of homelessness and housing
instability due to decades of systemic racism in housing and other
systems--are most at risk of severe illness and death due to the
coronavirus, and Black and Latino people are disproportionately harmed
by the resulting economic impacts. Now their homes--and with it their
ability to keep themselves and their families safe--are at risk.
Without significant and immediate federal action, there will be a wave
of evictions and a spike in homelessness in the coming months and, once
again, Black and brown people will be most harmed.
In my testimony today, I will discuss key barriers to an equitable
and comprehensive disaster housing recovery and opportunities to reform
our country's disaster framework. These barriers and opportunities are
reflected in ``Fixing America's Broken Disaster Housing Recovery
System,'' a two-part report published by NLIHC and Fair Share Housing
Center of New Jersey.
These policy recommendations reflect nine core principles that
should guide our country's disaster housing response and recovery:
1. Recovery must be centered on survivors with the greatest needs
and ensure equity among survivors, especially for people of color, low-
income people, people with disabilities, immigrants, LGBTQ people, and
other marginalized people and communities;
2. Everyone should be fairly assisted to fully and promptly
recover through transparent and accountable programs and strict
compliance with civil rights laws, with survivors directing the way
assistance is provided;
3. Securing help from government must be accessible,
understandable, and timely;
4. Everyone in need should receive safe, accessible shelter and
temporary housing where they can reconnect with family and community;
5. Displaced people should have access to all the resources they
need for as long as they need to safely and quickly recover housing,
personal property and transportation;
6. Renters and anyone experiencing homelessness before the
disaster must quickly get quality, affordable, accessible rental
property in safe, quality neighborhoods of their choice;
7. All homeowners should be able to quickly rebuild in safe,
quality neighborhoods of their choice;
8. All neighborhoods should be free from environmental hazards,
have equal quality and accessible public infrastructure, and be safe
and resilient; and
9. Disaster rebuilding should result in local jobs and contracts
for local businesses and workers.
These core principles and the following policy recommendations
should serve as a guidepost for this committee and other federal
policymakers as you work to reform our nation's disaster housing
recovery framework.
Barriers to an Equitable Housing Recovery
After a disaster, displaced families must have a safe, accessible,
and affordable place to live while they recover. FEMA programs can
provide crucial assistance to help survivors recover from a disaster by
providing temporary shelter and financial assistance and making basic
structural repairs to homes. However, FEMA created unnecessary and
often insurmountable barriers to accessing these programs, leaving many
low-income survivors at increased risk of displacement, eviction, and,
in worst cases, homelessness.
FEMA programs are not designed to serve lower-income people with
the greatest needs; these households are consistently denied
assistance. For example, nearly half of disaster survivors with the
lowest incomes were denied FEMA Individual Assistance after Hurricane
Harvey. The vast majority of higher-income households were approved \1\
(see Figure 1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Adams, A. 2018. Low-income Households Disproportionately Denied
by FEMA Is a Sign of a System that is Failing the Most Vulnerable.
Retrieved from https://texashousers.org/2018/11/30/low-income-
households-disproportionately-denied-by-fema-is-a-sign-of-a-system-
that-is-failing-the-most-vulnerable/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Figure 1
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
FEMA's Failure to Address Housing Needs
Despite the clear need, FEMA housing programs neglect the housing
needs of America's lowest-income disaster survivors and exacerbate
housing insecurity. Without the affordable and accessible homes
survivors need, many return to uninhabitable homes, sleep in cars or
tents, stay at shelters, double- or triple-up with other low-income
families, or pay more than half of their limited incomes on rent,
putting them at increased risk of eviction and, in worst cases,
homelessness.
Research from NLIHC demonstrates that disasters exacerbate the
existing rental housing crisis for households with the lowest
incomes.\2\ After Hurricane Sandy, households already dealing with
housing instability were further destabilized through displacement and
increased rents. Two years after Sandy, few new affordable homes had
been completed yet survivors were no longer eligible for federal rental
assistance.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ National Low Income Housing Coalition. 2019. Long-term Recovery
of Rental Housing: A Case Study of Highly Impacted Communities in New
Jersey after Superstorm Sandy. Retrieved from https://nlihc.org/sites/
default/files/Sandy-Rental-Recovery-Report.pdf
\3\ Fair Share Housing Center, Latino Action Network & NAACP New
Jersey State Conference. 2015. The State of Sandy Recovery (Second
Annual Report). Retrieved from http://fairsharehousing.org/images/
uploads/State_of_Sandy_English_2015.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The impact of disasters on low-income people's housing needs is
made worse by FEMA's continued refusal to activate the Disaster Housing
Assistance Program (DHAP), rendering some survivors homeless.\4\ During
past disasters, both Republican \5\ and Democratic \6\ \7\
administrations upheld DHAP as a best practice for disaster housing
recovery. DHAP was created after hard-won lessons from Hurricane
Katrina, and it has been used successfully in some major disasters
since that time. Under DHAP, displaced families receive longer-term
direct rental assistance and case management services provided by local
housing professionals with extensive knowledge of the local housing
market. This assistance helps families find permanent housing
solutions, secure employment, and connect to public benefits as they
rebuild their lives.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ National Low Income Housing Coalition. 2018. Setting the Record
Straight: FEMA's Failure to Address Long-Term Housing Needs of
Survivors. Retrieved from https://nlihc.org/sites/default/files/
FEMA_Setting-The-Record-FEMA-TSA.PDF
\5\ Homeland Security and Counterterrorism. 2006. The Federal
Response to Hurricane Katrina: Lessons Learned. Retrieved from https://
permanent.access.gpo.gov/lps67263/katrina-lessons-learned.pdf
\6\ Federal Emergency Management Agency. 2009. National Disaster
Housing Strategy. Retrieved from https://www.fema.gov/media-library-
data/20130726-1819-25045-9288/ndhs_core.pdf
\7\ Federal Emergency Management Agency. 2011. National Disaster
Recovery Framework: Strengthening Disaster Recovery for the Nation.
Retrieved from https://www.fema.gov/pdf/recoveryframework/ndrf.pdf
\8\ National Low Income Housing Coalition. 2017. Disaster Housing
Assistance Program. Retrieved from https://nlihc.org/sites/default/
files/DAHP-Program.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
After recent disasters, FEMA has refused to activate the DHAP
program and instead relied on its Temporary Shelter Assistance (TSA)
program and other programs that are inaccessible to many low-income
survivors. TSA is intended to reduce the number of survivors in
congregate shelters by covering the cost of staying in an approved
hotel or motel for an initial period of up to 14 days. Once again, this
is a program better suited to middle-class households than to low-
income people.
Low-income families are often unable to access TSA motels due to
financial and other barriers, including the practice of motels charging
daily ``resort'' fees and requiring security deposits or credit cards.
Because TSA must be renewed every 14 days, those disaster survivors who
are able to access the program face arbitrary deadlines that cause them
to scramble to submit required paperwork or leave the motel before
finding a permanent housing solution. While FEMA is authorized to
provide TSA for at least 18 months, the Trump administration abruptly
terminated \9\ the program for nearly 2,000 Puerto Rican families
displaced to the mainland after Hurricane Maria, forcing them to find
alternative housing or to return to their uninhabitable homes on the
island with just a few hours' notice. Without DHAP, states that
received large numbers of displaced Puerto Rican survivors--including
Massachusetts and Connecticut--saw increased homelessness by 14 percent
and 17 percent respectively.\10\ \11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ National Low Income Housing Coalition. 2018. NLIHC's Response
to Court Ruling Allowing FEMA to Move Forward on Evicting Hurricane
Maria Survivors. Retrieved from https://nlihc.org/news/nlihcs-response-
court-ruling-allowing-fema-move-forward-evicting-hurricane-maria-
survivors
\10\ Martin, T. 2019. After a Long Road, Hurricane Maria Evacuees
Settle in Massachusetts. Retrieved from https://www.wgbh.org/news/
local-news/2019/01/23/after-a-long-road-hurricane-maria-evacuees-
settle-in-massachusetts
\11\ Skahill, P. 2018. Hurricane Maria Drives Up Connecticut's
Homelessness Numbers. Retrieved from https://www.wnpr.org/post/
hurricane-maria-drives-connecticuts-homelessness-numbers
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FEMA's other temporary housing assistance programs--Rental
Assistance and Direct Temporary Housing Assistance--are also
problematic for low-income families. Through its Rental Assistance
program, FEMA provides financial assistance to survivors to rent
temporary housing. The amount of assistance provided to survivors is
based on the impacted area's Fair Market Rent (FMR), which is often
considerably less than rental costs in the area to which survivors have
been displaced. Moreover, FEMA rental assistance covers rent and
utilities for only two months, which is too short a timeframe for many
of the lowest-income survivors. Many landlords are unwilling to enter
into leases with survivors when only two months of rental assistance is
assured.
Under FEMA's Direct Lease program, FEMA enters into lease
agreements with property owners to provide rent assistance for
survivors. A similar program, the Multi-Family Lease and Repair
program, allows FEMA to enter into lease agreements with multifamily
housing property owners and to make repairs to provide temporary
housing. Both programs, however, have extremely low rates of
participation by property owners and are inadequate to meet post-
disaster rental needs.
After Hurricane Harvey, FEMA piloted a program where states take on
the responsibility of implementing and managing temporary housing
programs. These state-run disaster housing programs face significant
delays and do not address the full scale of housing needs because FEMA
continues to retain control over eligibility and the program-assignment
process. According to FEMA, only a few hundred families were served
under state-administered housing programs following Hurricanes Harvey
and Irma, despite damage to or destruction of more than 307,000 homes
in Texas \12\ and 27,649 homes in the Florida Keys alone.\13\ Other
state-administered programs like Multifamily Lease and Repair were
wholly unsuccessful because property owners declined to participate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ CBS News. 2019. We're Still Here: Volunteers Rebuilding Homes
2 Years After Hurricane Harvey. Retrieved from https://www.cbsnews.com/
news/hurricane-harvey-houston-meet-the-volunteers-rebuilding-homes-all-
hands-hearts-2019-08-24/
\13\ Monroe County, Florida Government. 2017. Approximate Damage
Assessment Results. Retrieved from http://www.monroecounty-fl.gov/
DocumentCenter/View/12459/Approximate-Damage-Assessment-Results?bidId=
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Due to the lack of housing assistance, one year after Hurricane
Harvey nearly 20% of individuals experiencing homelessness in Houston
reported that they became homeless as a result of the disaster.\14\
Without DHAP, homelessness increased in Houston by 18%.\15\ This is a
colossal failure of the federal government's disaster recovery efforts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ Vigh, E. 2019. Hurricane Harvey Caused Homelessness Lingers in
Harris County 2 Years Later. Community Impact. Retrieved from https://
bit.ly/3hEvKHW
\15\ Ward, A. 2018. Homeless after Harvey: For Some, the Historic
Flooding in Houston Washed Away Shelter and Security. Retrieved from
https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-weather/hurricaneharvey/
article/Homeless-after-Harvey-For-some-the-historic-13171309.php
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
During the current COVID-19 pandemic, FEMA should have activated
DHAP to provide housing and shelter for people experiencing
homelessness. DHAP could have been used to quickly move people out of
congregate shelters or encampments and into affordable homes, where
they can more easily keep themselves and their neighbors healthy.
Instead, FEMA has worked with some states and localities under its
Public Assistance program to place a very limited number of people
experiencing homelessness into temporary motels for self-quarantine and
self-isolation.
Before Public Assistance funding for these motels end, FEMA should
activate DHAP to help transition these individuals into permanent
housing, rather than allowing individuals to be pushed back into
homelessness as is already beginning to happen. For example, after
funding for a hotel voucher program in Fort Lauderdale, Florida ran out
on July 17, over 70 people experiencing homelessness who had been
temporarily residing at a Rodeway Inn & Suites were forced to leave,
even if they did not have a permanent housing plan.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ Kelley, E. 2020. Fort Lauderdale Ending Program to House
Homeless in Hotels This Weekend. Retrieved from https://www.sun-
sentinel.com/coronavirus/fl-ne-fort-lauderdale-evicts-homeless-
20200717-h5vjhwlndnf6batks4rgegk3va-story.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FEMA Neglects the Needs of Marginalized Populations
People Experiencing Homelessness
People experiencing homelessness are often most at risk during a
disaster and have the fewest resources to recover. People experiencing
homelessness are unlikely to have the resources needed to adequately
prepare for or evacuate prior to a disaster, and their unique needs are
often overlooked by emergency managers when planning for disasters.
During the recovery, homelessness resources are stretched thin to
accommodate those households that became housing insecure as a result
of the disaster and resources for pre-disaster homeless populations are
deprioritized. Communities are often unable to return to the level of
care provided to people experiencing homelessness before the disaster.
Despite the clear need, people experiencing homelessness are often
excluded from or face additional barriers to FEMA resources, including
mass shelters and individual assistance. Following Hurricane Irma,
there were reports of FEMA requiring people experiencing homelessness
to wear armbands and be separated from other disaster survivors.\17\
Pre-disaster homeless populations are often denied FEMA assistance,
even if all their belongings were destroyed in the disaster.\18\ These
actions further stigmatize people experiencing homelessness and often
prevent them from accessing the resources they need to stay safe.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ Dearen, J., & Kennedy, K. 2017. Yellow Wristbands, Segregation
for Florida Homeless in Irma. Retrieved from https://www.usnews.com/
news/us/articles/2017-09-29/yellow-wristbands-segregation-for-florida-
homeless-in-irma
\18\ Ehrlich, A. 2019. After Wildfires, Homeless People Left Out of
Federal Disaster Aid Programs, Oregon Public Broadcasting. Retrieved
from https://www.opb.org/news/article/fema-disaster-aid-wildfires-
homeless-people/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
During the current COVID-19 pandemic, people experiencing
homelessness are particularly at risk of severe illness and death from
coronavirus, yet many of these individuals have been unable to access
the assistance they need to self-isolate and self-quarantine.
Narrow eligibility criteria for FEMA reimbursement, however, have
created significant barriers to moving people experiencing homelessness
to safety in hotels and motels. In San Francisco, for example, people
experiencing homelessness must be over the age of 60 or have documented
underlying health conditions in order to be deemed eligible. This
narrow interpretation of eligibility criteria has limited the
efficiency of San Francisco's hotel program.\19\ Additionally, FEMA
reimbursement of non-congregate shelter for people experiencing
homelessness is only made available if a Governor requests it; people
who are homeless in states with governors who do not prioritize their
needs are left with no assistance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ Karlis, N. 2020. How Bureaucracy Kept the Bay Area from
Housing the Houseless. Retrieved from https://www.salon.com/2020/06/21/
how-bureaucracy-kept-the-bay-area-from-housing-the-houseless/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Seniors and People with Disabilities
People with disabilities also face barriers to assistance. They are
two to four times more likely to die or sustain a critical injury
during a disaster than people without disabilities.\20\ Despite an
increased risk of death and injury, many emergency plans do not address
how local officials can reach those with disabilities during a
disaster. People with disabilities are often diverted to ``special
needs'' or ``medical shelters,'' even if they do not require the level
of care provided there. This practice fosters forced
institutionalization and places people with disabilities at greater
risk of injury or death.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ Timmons, P. ``Disaster Preparedness and Response: The Special
Needs of Older Americans,'' Statement for the Record, Special Committee
on Aging, U.S. Senate, September 20, 2017, available at https://
www.aging.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/SCA_Timmons_09_20_17.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
During Hurricane Harvey, elderly residents in a Galveston, Texas
nursing home were photographed with floodwaters up to their waists,\21\
and 14 nursing home residents in the largely unregulated state nursing
home industry died in 2017 from heat exhaustion when their facility
lost power in Hurricane Irma.\22\ The COVID-19 pandemic has devastated
people residing and working in nursing homes, psychiatric hospitals,
and other congregate settings for people with disabilities. People
living in these settings comprise less than 1% of the U.S. population,
but nearly 50% of coronavirus deaths.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ Ferguson, J. W. 2017. Eighteen People Rescued from Flooded
Assisted Living Facility. Retrieved from https://www.galvnews.com/news/
free/article_e1ffff8e-435d-5c78-ab46-57d6bc7dc6a5.html
\22\ CNN. 2017. Husband and Wife Among 14 Dead After Florida
Nursing Home Lost A/C. Retrieved from https://www.cnn.com/2017/10/09/
health/florida-irma-nursing-home-deaths-wife/index.html
\23\ Mizner, S. 2020. COVID-19 Deaths in Nursing Homes are not
Unavoidable--They are the Result of Deadly Discrimination. Retrieved
from https://www.aclu.org/news/disability-rights/covid-19-deaths-in-
nursing-homes-are-not-unavoidable-they-are-the-result-of-deadly-
discrimination/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Immigrants
Individuals with limited English proficiency often face difficulty
in accessing FEMA resources. For example, in Puerto Rico, FEMA
struggled to find translators or provide basic information in Spanish,
which is the predominant language on the island.\24\ While FEMA's
regulations require that such documents are produced, advocates
commonly express concern that the agency and its grantees regularly
distribute forms only in English or with limited translated versions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ Davidson, J. 2020. How a lack of diversity at federal agencies
can have serious consequences. Retrieved from https://
www.washingtonpost.com/politics/how-a-lack-of-diversity-at-federal-
agencies-can-have-serious-consequences/2020/02/29/ceec904e-5a65-11ea-
8753-73d96000faae_story.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Onerous Title Documentation Requirements
Eligible applicants often do not receive FEMA assistance due to
inflexible and arbitrary requirements, rigid interpretations of rules,
and confusing and bureaucratic processes. FEMA's rigid title
documentation requirements, for example, have barred low-income
survivors from FEMA assistance.
FEMA consistently requires disaster survivors to provide title
documentation in order to prove eligibility for the agency's Individual
Assistance (IA) \25\ program and other recovery aid, even though its
own guidance on Individual and Household Assistance allows alternative
documentation of ownership. Low-income homeowners, residents of
manufactured housing, renters without written leases, and other
individuals frequently lack such documentation or the ability to
quickly procure proper documents. FEMA's rigid and unnecessary policy
has harmed low-income disaster survivors since at least 1995, but FEMA
has done little to resolve the problems.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ Individual Assistance (IA) programs provide financial and
program assistance directly to disaster survivors, as opposed to
governments or eligible nonprofits. See: https://www.fema.gov/media-
library-data/1565194429982-5674cd81399feaeb00cc72ab7fc4d84f/
FACTSHEETIndividualAssistanceProgram.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
After Hurricane Maria, FEMA denied assistance to at least 77,000
survivors due to title documentation issues.\26\ For months, NLIHC's
Disaster Housing Recovery Coalition pushed FEMA to remove this
unnecessary obstacle to low-income Puerto Ricans receiving needed
assistance. Finally, FEMA's Office of Chief Counsel engaged and worked
with DHRC members Ayuda Legal Huracan Maria, Fundacion Fondo de Accesso
a la Justicia, and Servicios Legales de Puerto Rico to prepare a
``sworn statement'' that would allow Puerto Rican homeowners without
title documents to prove ownership of their homes so that they can
receive the assistance to which they are entitled.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ National Low Income Housing Coalition. 2019. Impact of
Hurricane Maria. Retrieved from https://nlihc.org/sites/default/files/
Hurricane-Impact-Maria.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
But FEMA refuses to provide the sworn statement to survivors or
even to make it available on FEMA's website, social media, or at
Disaster Recovery Centers, greatly limiting the ability of survivors to
make use of this new resource. FEMA has told congressional offices that
it is not allowed to share such documents unless they have been
approved by the Office of Management and Budget, but FEMA has not taken
any steps to get the appropriate approval. FEMA staff have now
indicated that rather than formally adopting a sworn statement, the
agency may instead simply refuse to create such documents after future
disasters, doubling down on a clearly flawed and failed policy.
These same issues occurred in the continental U.S. In North
Carolina and other parts of the American South, rural, historically
African American communities often do not use title systems, instead
implementing informal systems like those used in Puerto Rico. After
Hurricane Katrina, thousands of poor Alabamians were denied assistance
due to lack of formal title on their damaged homes. After Hurricane
Michael, FEMA denied assistance to as many as 50% of applicants in
certain parts of the panhandle largely due to elderly households and
mobile homeowners lacking FEMA-required title documentation.\27\ After
California's wildfires, FEMA denied assistance to 70% of applicants due
to title issues.\28\ Those denied were predominantly rural mobile home
owners, many of them farmworkers or other low-income workers, who do
not have title to their homes. In all cases, FEMA refused to modify its
programs to accommodate the situation, choosing instead to deny
eligible applicants needed assistance to which they were entitled.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ National Low Income Housing Coalition. 2019. Impact of
Hurricane Michael. Retrieved from https://nlihc.org/sites/default/
files/Hurricane-Impact-Michael.pdf
\28\ National Low Income Housing Coalition. 2019. Impact of the
2018 California Wildfires. Retrieved from https://nlihc.org/sites/
default/files/Califonia-Wildfire-2018.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disincentives to apply for assistance and high denial rates not
only limit immediate assistance for low-income survivors, but these
factors also distort the entire disaster recovery process because IA
application data is used to make funding determinations throughout the
federal disaster recovery process.
FEMA's Systemic Lack of Transparency
FEMA has consistently refused to clarify or make public important
information about its aid application process. By not releasing this
information, FEMA makes it difficult, if not impossible, to determine
who is eligible to receive assistance and why assistance is denied. A
confusing appeals process leads to higher denial rates for low-income
disaster survivors.
While FEMA, SBA, and HUD offer assistance programs to disaster
survivors, basic information on program eligibility is not made
publicly available. Without such information, disaster survivors often
apply to all programs with the hopes that at least some assistance will
be provided. For low-income individuals who may lack internet or phone
access or who may need special accommodations to allow them to apply,
completing multiple applications can be especially problematic. As a
result, many of the disaster survivors with the lowest incomes forgo
applying for assistance all together, despite their need.
FEMA has consistently refused to give reasons upfront for denials
or opportunities for applicants to correct errors or provide more
information. Instead of receiving guidelines or clarification from
FEMA, survivors and advocates must work through a lengthy
administrative process in order to be given a reason for their denial.
The lack of clarity makes it more difficult for assistance
organizations attempting to inform and assist low-income survivors
after a disaster. As a result, appeals take longer and are more costly.
The FEMA appeals process is confusing and difficult. A denied
applicant must first submit a form explaining the dispute and providing
supporting documentation. FEMA denial letters, however, provide only
very vague reasons for the initial denial of assistance. The denied
applicant must refute all possible interpretations of the reason, or
they will lose their appeal. As a result, low-income survivors with
little access to legal representation or the money for a protracted
legal fight simply do not appeal at all.
It is extremely difficult to access basic data about FEMA programs
and processes. Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests to FEMA often
go months or years without being answered. NLIHC filed a FOIA request
in December 2018 requesting basic materials, including FEMA's
application for assistance, procedure manuals for determining
eligibility, and data sharing agreements with HUD and other federal
agencies. To date, FEMA has not provided these materials. In other
cases, FEMA refuses to provide basic information, claiming grounds of
privilege. In recent years, some progress has been made with the
release of data after major disasters through FEMA's OpenFEMA portal.
These changes, while a welcome development, are not enough and may not
be continued.
FEMA's Inflexibility and Inability to Adjust to New Conditions
Climate change means disasters are more destructive, more frequent,
and impact a broader geographic scope, posing new challenges for FEMA
and disaster recovery efforts. FEMA is not adapting its thinking or its
programs to respond to these challenges, instead sticking to a rigid
system of disaster aid and recovery based on responding to contained
local disasters. FEMA has little capacity to effectively deal with both
large, regional disasters and the unique circumstances and needs of a
specific community impacted by a disaster.
FEMA has a rigid allegiance to protocol over outcomes, a stubborn
reliance on programs inaccessible to low-income survivors and
repeatedly refuses to release important data on recovery outcomes. FEMA
relies heavily on protocol written in Washington, D.C. and not on what
the agency hears from advocates, survivors, FEMA employees in the
field, and other stakeholders. FEMA systems are not designed to adapt
to situations on the ground. As a result, predictable issues repeatedly
arise after each disaster and go unaddressed by the agency, further
harming low-income survivors.
FEMA has consistently failed to learn larger lessons from past
disasters and apply them to future disaster recovery efforts. FEMA's
own internal watchdog, the Department of Homeland Security Office of
the Inspector General, removed criticisms from reports on the agency's
disaster response and replaced them with success stories, praising
FEMA's work.\29\ As a result of this lack of internal critique and
self-adjustment, FEMA repeats the same mistakes, and does similar harm,
disaster after disaster.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ U.S. Department of Homeland Security Office of Homeland
Security. 2019. Special Report: Review Regarding DHS OIG's Retraction
of Thirteen Reports Evaluating FEMA's Initial Response to Disasters.
Retrieved from https://www.oversight.gov/sites/default/files/oig-
reports/OIG-19-41-May19.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FEMA's Response to COVID-19
People who are homeless and contract coronavirus are twice as
likely to be hospitalized, two to four times as likely to require
critical care, and two to three times as likely to die than others in
the general public. If unchecked, as many as 20,000 people who are
homeless could require hospitalization and nearly 3,500 could die.\30\
During COVID-19, congregate sheltering poses a severe risk to people
experiencing homelessness and people with disabilities, who are more
likely to have pre-existing medical conditions than the general public.
The only way to reduce this risk is to move these individuals to safer
non-congregate sheltering.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ https://endhomelessness.org/resource/estimated-emergency-and-
observational-quarantine-bed-need-for-the-us-homeless-population-
related-to-covid-19-exposure-by-county-projected-hospitalizations-
intensive-care-units-and-mortality/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Congress provided critical resources in the ``Coronavirus Aid,
Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act,'' including FEMA Public
Assistance (PA) funds, to address the critical need to move people
experiencing homelessness to non-congregate settings. Despite
congressional efforts, many states, local governments, and homeless
service providers continue to face barriers to effectively and
efficiently using FEMA resources. FEMA failed to release clear guidance
regarding program rules, including rules related to reimbursement
eligibility, the use of matching funds, and the duplication of
benefits. The lack of clarity led to delays among county and local
decisionmakers who fear they will be unable to secure FEMA
reimbursements for the cost of moving people to safety.
In North Carolina, for example, the state's guidance vaguely
implied that all individuals residing at shelters were eligible for
reimbursable non-congregate sheltering. However, FEMA initially failed
to clarify the guidelines, and many local officials refused to
recognize requests to shelter members of the broader homeless
population.\31\ Lack of clear guidance from FEMA and distrust of its
reimbursement process also impacted San Francisco's participation in
Project Roomkey--a California plan to utilize hotel rooms to shelter
thousands of individuals experiencing homelessness. Concerns about
whether FEMA would reimburse the costs of hotels and FEMA's requirement
that governments spend the money first have contributed to the Bay
Area's ``slow, piecemeal response'' to housing people experiencing
homelessness in non-congregate settings.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ National Low Income Housing Coalition. 2020. Getting to Yes:
Working with FEMA to Fund Non-Congregate Shelter During COVID-19.
Retrieved from https://nlihc.org/sites/default/files/Guidance_Working-
with-FEMA.pdf
\32\ Karlis, N. 2020. How Bureaucracy Kept the Bay Area from
Housing the Houseless. Retrieved from https://www.salon.com/2020/06/21/
how-bureaucracy-kept-the-bay-area-from-housing-the-houseless/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Housing and homeless shelter and service providers working directly
with impacted populations often lack the critical information needed
from FEMA to plan and interface with the PA program, such as expiration
dates and application processes. FEMA should ensure that all
documentation surrounding the request, approval, and justification of
non-congregate sheltering reimbursement is made publicly available
online. This would improve transparency and the ability of housing and
homeless service providers to utilize the PA program to the most
effective extent possible.
Moreover, FEMA has neglected to authorize its full range of
assistance programs to address the pandemic. As authorized by the
Stafford Act, FEMA can administer a wider suite of disaster assistance
programs designed to be deployed rapidly to the wide range of
challenges faced by individuals during and after a disaster, including
housing instability, financial stress, and the need for legal services.
To help address the broad health, housing, and economic impacts of the
coronavirus pandemic, FEMA should activate its IA programs, including
the Transitional Shelter Assistance (TSA), Individual and Households
(IHP) assistance, and Disaster Legal Services (DLS) program, to ensure
that low-income households can remain stably housed. Although not
originally created for pandemic response, these programs could be
quickly deployed to serve households in need as a result of the
coronavirus pandemic, rather than requiring overburdened state and
local governments to quickly design and stand up new programs.
Equitable Solutions Centered on the Needs of Survivors
A reformed disaster housing recovery system that is centered on the
needs of the lowest-income and most marginalized survivors and their
communities must ensure opportunities for resident and public
engagement, systemic transparency, full accountability and due process,
robust equity and civil rights enforcement, fair mitigation practices,
and a focus on increased local capacity and benefit. These priorities
must be reflected in every stage of disaster recovery and response,
from pre-disaster emergency planning through long-term recovery and
post-recovery mitigation, to help address the systemic racism and
classism that have resulted in our broken current disaster housing
system.
resident and public participation
A reformed disaster housing recovery and response framework must
ensure robust, ongoing, and timely opportunities for public engagement
through structured collaboration with stakeholders beginning with
emergency planning and response and continuing through the closeout of
recovery and mitigation programs. Residents must be empowered to make
decisions for themselves and their communities, and their input must be
given substantial weight.
Current disaster housing response and recovery efforts effectively
limit opportunities for impacted residents to meaningfully engage and
contribute to the rebuilding of their communities after a disaster.
State officials are under enormous pressure to respond and rebuild as
quickly as possible, often making any public input process rushed and
ineffective. Engagement is often limited because residents are unaware
of emergency response, rebuilding, and mitigation plans, whether
because state officials fail to announce public meetings or because
materials are provided only in English or in formats that are not
accessible, including to people with disabilities. Moreover, plans
often do not include essential information--including information about
how funds will be spent and who will be eligible for which funds--that
is needed for the public to engage effectively. Opportunities for
engagement are limited, irregular, and occur too late in the process.
systemic transparency
Basic, essential information about federal disaster response and
recovery efforts must be made publicly available in a timely manner.
This transparency must be systemized, so that it is not provided on an
ad hoc basis. Data transparency is critical to ensuring informed public
policy decisions, allowing greater public participation in disaster
recovery efforts, and helping public and private entities better
recognize gaps in services and identify reforms needed for future
disaster recovery efforts.
The current federal disaster response and recovery, however,
suffers from a systemic lack of data transparency. After past
disasters, this failure to provide basic transparency--ranging from
damage assessments, determination of unmet needs, program design and
implementation, grantee and subgrantee performance, and how federal
dollars are spent--has hampered efforts to effectively target and
distribute aid to those most in need.
full accountability and due process
Accountability and due process must be central in any reformed
disaster housing recovery and response framework. Federal efforts must
ensure that all eligible survivors receive the assistance needed to get
back on their feet.
The daunting application process for disaster aid discourages
survivors from applying for assistance. The application and appeals
processes are confusing, time-consuming, and frustrating. As a result,
low-income survivors--especially seniors, people with disabilities, and
people with limited English proficiency, and other individuals--face
high, unnecessary, and counterproductive barriers to receiving federal
disaster housing recovery assistance and many forgo applying for
assistance altogether. By not providing full accountability,
transparency, and due process to applicants, the federal government has
made it difficult--if not impossible--to determine who is eligible to
receive assistance and why assistance was denied, leading to higher
denial rates for low-income disaster survivors.
robust equity and civil rights enforcement
Equity must be a central and explicit goal of federal disaster
housing response and recovery efforts, and each stage of the response
and recovery must be examined and reformed to ensure that federal,
state, and local efforts actively dismantle systems of oppression. All
emergency response, long-term recovery, and mitigation actions must be
designed and pursued in a manner that addresses and prioritizes the
needs of the lowest-income survivors, people of color, seniors, people
with disabilities, immigrants, and other protected classes. All such
actions must also be explicitly anti-racist: analyzed to determine if
they exacerbate, leave in place, or ameliorate existing or historic
patterns of segregation and discrimination in housing and
infrastructure, and remedied accordingly.
fair mitigation practices
All emergency response, long-term recovery, and mitigation efforts
must be designed and pursued in a manner that provides survivors with
the choice to relocate or rebuild their communities resiliently,
minimizing displacement. As the climate changes, disasters will be both
more frequent and more destructive. In response, local and state
officials have begun to focus on mitigation and infrastructure
improvement. Too often, such upgrades go to more affluent communities,
while the needs of lower-income people and people of color are ignored.
Moreover, federal, state, and local recovery efforts may actively
contribute to displacement by failing to provide survivors with
meaningful choices to rebuild resiliently, relocate, or improve
infrastructure (such as storm drainage, floodplain management, and
other common mitigation measures) in their disaster-affected
communities. This effectively leaves low-income survivors at greater
risk for future disasters than they were prior to the disaster.
increased local capacity and benefit
All emergency response, long-term recovery and mitigation efforts
must maximize the engagement of local contractors and workers and build
the capacity of local community-based organizations, putting as much
federal resources as possible into the impacted economy and impacted
survivors.
Local community-based organizations and networks are in the best
position to engage with and have intimate awareness of the unique needs
of the lowest-income survivors. These local organizations often do not
receive the support needed to build capacity to scale up efforts
quickly after a disaster. By relying on out-of-town contractors for
everything from debris removal to repair of electrical grids, state and
local governments miss an opportunity provide employment, job training,
and contracting opportunities to low-income local workers and small-
and minority-controlled businesses, who often are in severe need of
work as a result of disasters' disruption to local business.
First Steps to Fix America's Broken Disaster Housing Recovery System
The ``Fixing America's Broken Disaster Housing Recovery System''
report provides specific policy recommendations to reimagine and
redesign a new disaster housing recovery framework that is centered on
the needs of the lowest-income and most marginalized survivors. This
work will take many years. However, there are a number of actions
Congress can take to immediately address some of the biggest challenges
facing survivors.
permanently authorize and automatically activate the disaster housing
assistance program (dhap)
Congress should permanently authorize DHAP and automatically
activate it after every major disaster to provide longer-term housing
assistance and wrap-around services to low-income survivors. Such
assistance should be provided to eligible survivors until the long-term
housing recovery--including the rebuilding of affordable rental housing
stock--is complete.
enact the ``housing survivors of major disasters act''
Congress should enact the ``Housing Survivors of Major Disasters
Act,'' (H.R. 2914) \33\ introduced by Representative Adriano Espaillat
(D-NY). The bill, which passed unanimously out of the House
Transportation and Infrastructure Committee in February 2020, contains
critically needed reforms to ensure that the lowest-income and most
marginalized survivors can access the housing assistance they need to
rebuild their lives. I thank the Committee for your work on this bill
and ask that you help move it to the floor for a vote.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\ H.R. 2914, ``Housing Survivors of Major Disasters Act of
2019.'' Retrieved from https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/
house-bill/2914
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The ``Housing Survivors of Major Disasters Act'' would address the
significant title-documentation challenges that have resulted in tens
of thousands of eligible disaster survivors being wrongfully denied
FEMA assistance. The bill would reform FEMA's application process and
allow survivors to more easily navigate this process. It would provide
a new framework to make it easier for disaster survivors to prove
residency in disaster-impacted areas, either by completing a
``declarative statement'' form or by submitting a broader range of
acceptable documents such as utility bills, credit card statements, pay
stubs, and school registration in lieu of a formal title to property or
leases.
ensure equity is an explicit policy goal
Congress must ensure that equity is a central and explicit goal of
federal disaster housing response and recovery efforts. Our current
disaster housing recovery framework exacerbates and reinforces racial,
income, and accessibility inequities at each stage of response and
recovery. Survivors of color and communities of color are
disproportionately harmed by the current disaster housing recovery
system.
Federal disaster housing response and recovery efforts must address
and prioritize the needs of the lowest-income and most marginalized
survivors, including people of color, people with disabilities,
immigrants, and other protected classes. All actions must be explicitly
anti-racist: analyzed to determine if they exacerbate, leave in place,
or ameliorate existing or historic patterns of segregation and
discrimination in housing and infrastructure and remedied accordingly.
Congress must ensure that disaster housing recovery efforts undo
the racial, income, and accessibility inequities embedded in our
current disaster housing recovery framework. Disaster recovery
efforts--which often include significant, robust funds--represent a
unique opportunity to rebuild in a way that addresses, rather than
entrenches, these disparities.
require full transparency
Congress should require that FEMA provide basic, essential
information about federal disaster response and recovery efforts,
including damage assessments, determination of unmet needs, program
design and implementation, grantee and subgrantee performance, and how
federal dollars are spent. Congress should require FEMA to provide full
transparency on program eligibility, the aid application process, and
reasons for denials of assistance. Data collected by the government
must be open and accessible at the most granular and comprehensive
level, while protecting personally identifiable information. This
information must be made publicly available in a timely manner and this
transparency must be systemized, so that it is not only provided on an
ad hoc basis.
Data transparency allows policymakers and advocates to be informed
about program results and make policy improvements and incorporate best
practices into future activities. Issues of equity clearly exist in the
disaster recovery process, and Congress must require FEMA to implement
better transparency practices so the problems can be identified and
rectified.
ensure survivor-centered approaches to assistance
Congress must ensure that every survivor receives assistance to
which they are entitled. FEMA maintains a culture of rigid allegiance
to narrowly defined protocol over outcomes; as a result, many disaster
survivors, including many of the lowest-income survivors, are
wrongfully denied needed assistance. Congress should require FEMA to
prioritize categorical eligibility, simplify the application and
appeals process, and track and report on outcomes to ensure recovery
aid reaches those in need.
Rather than creating and implementing numerous categories of
ineligibility, disaster assistance programs should employ broad-based
categories of eligibility, with the aim that every survivor receives
the recovery assistance to which they are entitled. Through the use of
damage assessments, geographic information, and other data, a reformed
federal disaster housing recovery system can provide categorical
eligibility to survivors in disaster-impacted areas. With a shift in
emphasis to categorical eligibility, many of the convoluted rules and
requirements employed by recovery assistance programs will no longer be
necessary, allowing for an easier, quicker, and more flexible
application process.
FEMA should allow for a flexible system of documentation for
distributing disaster recovery assistance. Applying the least
restrictive guidance regarding alternative documentation--and doing so
consistently across all jurisdictions--would cut down on wasted time
and confusion on the parts of both applicants and advocates alike. In
order to employ full categorical eligibility, there must be a system in
place that permits alternative documentation to ensure all survivors
can receive assistance.
Congress should also require FEMA, HUD, and other federal agencies
involved in disaster recovery efforts to work together and create a
single, universal application for aid to make the process easier,
quicker, and more flexible, reducing the administrative burden and
speeding the process.
address the unique needs of people experiencing homelessness
Congress should enact legislation to ensure equitable treatment of
individuals experiencing homelessness through the response and recovery
effort. Pre-disaster homeless populations are often denied FEMA
assistance. Even if they lost all of their belongs in the disaster,
FEMA will often deny survivors any benefits once their status as pre-
disaster homeless is established.\34\ With no resources to adequately
prepare or recover from a disaster, people experiencing homelessness
are among the most harmed disaster survivors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ Ehrlich, A. 2019. After Wildfires, Homeless People Left Out of
Federal Disaster Aid Programs, Oregon Public Broadcasting. Retrieved
from https://www.opb.org/news/article/fema-disaster-aid-wildfires-
homeless-people/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FEMA has interpreted current law to deny assistance to people
experiencing homelessness prior to a disaster, despite their
exceptional needs. Congress should enact clarifying legislation to
ensure that people experiencing homelessness prior to the disaster have
access to the same emergency shelter and disaster relief assistance as
other survivors, including rental assistance.
meet the urgent health and housing needs of people experiencing
homelessness during the pandemic
Congress must take every action to save lives and prevent outbreaks
of coronavirus among people experiencing homelessness and other
individuals living in congregate settings. Congress should direct FEMA
to provide full reimbursement to state and local governments for Public
Assistance (PA) emergency protective measures. These provisions would
cover all eligible PA costs and allow FEMA to provide assistance in
advance rather than requiring states to be reimbursed later.
In addition, Congress should require FEMA to immediately issue
guidance regarding compliance with federal duplication of benefit
requirements. FEMA's failure to release such guidance has unnecessarily
slowed down the best efforts by state and local governments and
homeless service providers to use the flexible federal resources
provided in the CARES Act--including FEMA PA grants, HUD Emergency
Solutions Grants and Community Development Block Grants, Treasury-
administered Coronavirus Relief Funds--to move people experiencing
homelessness out of shelters or encampments and into non-congregate
spaces. FEMA guidance should clearly provide the broadest flexibility
possible to combine federal CARES Act resources. Overly rigid
duplication of benefits requirements will prevent critical resources
from reaching survivors with the most acute needs.
Congress should require full transparency from FEMA on all
materials related to state reimbursements for non-congregate
sheltering. At a minimum, FEMA should be required to make publicly
available on a monthly basis the number of people currently housed in
FEMA-reimbursable hotels and other non-congregate shelters by state;
the number of people who were previously experiencing homelessness
prior to participation in the non-congregate shelter program by state;
and copies of every state request for non-congregate shelter and every
letter of approval and/or denial by FEMA. The agency should be directed
to develop and make publicly available plans to ensure that individuals
have permanent, stable housing prior to ending FEMA assistance.
Requiring FEMA to report this data will help policymakers and service
providers better understand FEMA's role in providing non-congregate
shelter to individuals experiencing homelessness.
Conclusion
Our country must develop a new disaster housing recovery system
that centers the housing needs of the lowest-income survivors,
including people of color, people with disabilities, and others. In
addition to addressing immediate housing needs caused by the pandemic,
Congress should address our nation's pervasive structural and racial
inequities and reform federal disaster planning and response efforts to
be inclusive and intersectional. We must reform existing programs by
centering racial equity and equity for all historically marginalized
people to ensure that affordable housing investments and federal
disaster recovery resources reach all impacted households.
Thank you again for the opportunity to testify today. I look
forward to your questions.
Ms. Titus. Thank you, Ms. Yentel, and thank all of you for
excellent testimony laying out the statistics of how this
community is affected, and also some of the reasons why it's so
affected. We will now move on to Member questions. Each Member
will be recognized for 5 minutes, and I'll start by recognizing
myself.
This committee did some good work expanding FEMA assistance
for the disabled community and the Disaster Recovery Reform
Act, but based on your testimony, there is clearly additional
room for enhancements to have FEMA evaluate its disaster aid
for vulnerable communities. Mr. Brown, you said that you had
some suggestions, and we heard some others mention, but I'm
wondering if you all would speak directly to what can be done,
and put it in the context of, is it a problem of law, is it a
problem of policy, or is it a problem of politics? Does it
change depending on who is the Administrator, or what those
priorities of the administration are? Start with you, Mr.
Brown?
Mr. Brown. Thank you, Chairwoman. You know, our perspective
is that these problems are systemic, so they are a problem of
law and policy and also implementation. Equity has to be fully
integrated throughout the entire process, and especially
implementation when a disaster occurs.
So, one of my recommendations as part of my written
testimony is a full and thorough vetting of all of FEMA's
policy practices and grant programs to look at how we can
integrate equity and prioritize the needs of the most
vulnerable, and cut through the redtape and the delays that
disproportionately impact the communities that are most at risk
and most in need when a disaster strikes.
So just to answer your question, I think it's systemic.
It's deeply rooted over many years in time, and in order to
change the trend that we see continuously, we need some
intentional efforts, aligned with investment and focus, and we
also need a diverse profession. We also need to add diversity
into the field and add additional perspectives to commit to
long-term change.
Ms. Titus. I notice that in the field of emergency
management, there's not much representation from people of
color, from women, from people with disabilities especially at
the top levels of management, and do you think if we were more
open in our recruiting and in our promotion within the agencies
that deal with these problems, that might have some impact?
Mr. Brown. Yes, Chairwoman. That's vitally important at all
levels, and throughout the emergency management enterprise. To
your point, the field is not diverse, but it is growing.
There's a unique opportunity here to diversify the field of
emergency management, more women, more people of color,
especially in positions of leadership. We've been working with
Historically Black Colleges and Universities, as well as
minority-served institutions to increase the number of students
who are interested in the field. We need to look critically at
the skillsets needed in the field. We need to bring in folks
who understand a human-centered approach to disasters and
understand the communities that are most impacted, and I think
we can get the best bang for our buck if we do that.
Right now we have a field that is not diverse, who cannot
fully understand the unique experiences of the communities that
are most impacted. And so, yes, that is a huge part of the
problem, but diversity and inclusion is a part of the solution.
Ms. Titus. Thank you. Ms. Roth?
Ms. Roth. Yes, there are so many opportunities for
improvement. First and foremost, we have got to resolve who has
the responsibility for monitoring and enforcing Federal laws
that are now 30 years old. Thank you for recognizing the ADA
anniversary, and almost 50 years old with regard to the
Rehabilitation Act, which applies to the use of every Federal
dollar, whether it's expended by the Government, or whether
it's granted or sub-granted.
And so, you know, we address many of these shortfalls,
failures, and unfortunately those with dire outcomes. We
address those in the REAADI for Disasters Act, and the Disaster
Relief Medicaid Act. The issues at FEMA are quite honestly
baffling.
We had hired 175, 185 disability integration advocates to
deploy out into the field of disasters to support the
Governors, support States, support disability organizations, to
navigate the complexities of FEMA's programs. Most of those
were people with disabilities, and unfortunately, most of those
are no longer working.
Ms. Titus. Thank you. I'm afraid I've got to cut you off.
My time is up, but I would like to come back to that if we
could. Thank you.
Ms. Roth. Great.
Ms. Titus. Mr. Katko?
Mr. Katko. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you all for
your testimony today, and I just--a quick example. I met a
young woman on the--in my district years ago who had Down
syndrome, and I had her come down to speak at an event. She did
such a good job that she became the first person with Down
syndrome to be registered as a lobbyist for the National Down
Syndrome Society.
The point is, is that when they get an opportunity, that's
often all they need, and we got to keep that in mind, and so,
opportunities is what the name of the game is as far as I'm
concerned. So, I credit all of you--all your advocacy and what
you're saying in that regard.
Mr. Higdon, the Central New York Food Bank, just in a 4-
month period, from March to June of this year, has distributed
over 8.4 million pounds of food, or over 7 million meals, had
73 mobile food pantry distributions, received over 4,000
requests for assistance, and pre-screened 3,400 households for
assistance. It accomplished this with 445 volunteers and 27,000
staff hours devoted to their COVID efforts.
Food banks are critical to addressing food insecurity, as
you know, and what is the best way, Mr. Higdon, that we can
continue to ensure food banks like yours and in central New
York have what they need to continue to meet the needs in these
very trying times?
Mr. Higdon. Yes, Ranking Member. I appreciate your comments
and support of the food bank. They spoke very highly of your
efforts to kind of stay plugged in with what they're doing.
But you know, for us, we've seen a lot of success with our
mobile pantry distributions. It's really been an opportunity
for us to do drive-through distributions so individuals don't
get asked to get out of their cars. You're seeing this across
the country. It's very--a lot of dignity provided in--through
those opportunities where, you know, we're not doing a lot of
income intake.
We have a lot of opportunities with food that's been
provided to us right now. And so, for us, really, the support
that's been most helpful in order for us to increase our
distributions has been use of the National Guard.
We have been blessed with--you know, there's been a lot of
private donors who have responded and been helpful, and support
from the Government and things of--are happening, and who knows
how long this is going to go, and what's needed to really
support the needs long term, because some of these programs
will run out, but you know, for now, it seems like we're doing
a good job of trying to keep up, and dealing with adversity and
trying to keep our doors open and reach as many people as we
can, and I think one thing that our Feeding America Network
really has is that opportunity to provide coverage throughout
the country.
Every county in the United States is covered, and we have
established multiple pantries in every county that that we
serve. And so, really just through our reach and opportunity,
we're trying to reach as many people as we can, and the support
we've seen from the Federal Government has really enabled us to
get out there and help keep meeting the needs through
everything that's going on right now.
Mr. Katko. Thank you, Mr. Higdon. I'm glad you mentioned
the National Guard, and I didn't know you were going to do
that, of course, but my son is a lieutenant in the National
Guard called up to Active Duty, and he was serving
underprivileged communities, and it was quite an education for
him, and then he commanded a testing site.
So, I can testify firsthand to you that the National Guard
was a great help, and I'm glad you mentioned that. Switching
gears here to all the other witnesses, I want to note that this
committee has worked over the years to ensure the emergency
management system works for all people hit by disaster, with a
particular focus on the most vulnerable. Ultimately we must
make sure what assistance is valuable is clear and communicated
effectively, and that the process itself does not revictimize
the victim. That means removing unnecessary redtape and
hurdles.
I appreciate all of your included recommendations in your
testimony, but what I want to do in the time that's left is to
try and get at least one or two of you on the record telling us
what would be your top one or two actions you would recommend.
The top one or two, briefly, that would improve delivery of
assistance in vulnerable populations, and we can start with Ms.
Roth.
Ms. Roth. My top one or two would be ensuring that the
monitoring and enforcement of the Federal laws is occurring
without interruption, and as well that the local disability-led
organizations are able to provide services before, during, and
after disasters, and be appropriately funded for them.
At this point, we have independent living centers across
the country who are providing their services without
reimbursement, not because they wouldn't be eligible for that
reimbursement, but because they are dependent on their States
to facilitate the process. So we need to correct that in the
Public Assistance emergency protective measures.
Mr. Katko. Thank you very much. We're out of time, but for
the other witnesses, I would ask that you just--if you could
just submit something in writing, I would really appreciate it
because I wanted to know what we need to prioritize and what
you believe the priorities are, and sorry I couldn't get to you
all, but we ran out of time, and I yield back, Madam Chair.
Ms. Titus. Thank you. We will now go to Ms. Mucarsel-
Powell.
Ms. Mucarsel-Powell. Yes. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank
you to all the witnesses for coming this morning. Ms. Yentel, I
wanted to start with a question about housing. As you know, the
moratorium on evictions is about to end, and that means that
many Floridians will find themselves without proper housing
through no fault of their own. I would imagine this would
seriously exacerbate the tragedies in south Florida if it's hit
by a strong hurricane, and just this morning I saw that there's
already a tropical depression that may be hitting us in 5 days.
So, can you please speak on how this will affect people's
ability to get FEMA assistance?
Ms. Yentel. Absolutely. It's a tremendous concern. The
Federal eviction moratorium has expired, as you say. State and
local eviction moratoriums are expiring rapidly. Where State
and local officials have been able to cobble together emergency
rental assistance programs, they too have been depleted very
quickly, and many communities like in Florida were suffering
from a severe shortage of affordable homes even before COVID-19
came.
So, the potential for an eviction wave in a State with a
severe lack of affordable housing available as a hurricane
approaches is devastating and could be catastrophic, and I
think it points to both the need for immediate congressional
action to prevent this wave of evictions through a Federal
moratorium on evictions through $100 billion in emergency
rental assistance, through assistance to homeless shelters and
service providers.
And it also points to the need for those households who
were homeless before COVID-19 and have been moved into hotels
through FEMA's reimbursement for noncongregate shelter. We have
to ensure that as those programs end that we are moving people
from hotels into permanent housing, not back onto sidewalks or
encampments or in homeless shelters, again, which would be
devastating in the middle of a storm.
Ms. Mucarsel-Powell. Mm-hmm. Yeah, thank you, Ms. Yentel,
and as you know, we actually passed the Heroes Act, including
that rent and mortgage relief to prevent evictions and the
Senate Republicans came back without including those provisions
which just seems cruel, especially in my State where we have
such a serious crisis where people are facing evictions now.
Thank you so much.
And Ms. Roth, I wanted to highlight the fact that 2 days
ago, July 26th, was the 30th anniversary of the Americans with
Disabilities Act becoming law. Over the past three decades,
this law has made a world of difference for so many of my
constituents and people across this country, but we still have
so much work to do to ensure that individuals with disabilities
are treated fairly, that they have access to everything that
our communities have to offer, and receive sufficient
protections and assistance when disasters strike.
And we all know someone with a disability, whether it's a
family member that has had a disability since they were born,
or a friend who got into an accident, and then was faced with a
disability. Ms. Roth, approximately, like you said, 26 percent
of the U.S. population has a disability. One-quarter of our
population. But somehow, this fact is far too often overlooked.
My nephew Charlie, who is so close to me, has serious
disabilities that require him to live in a special group home,
and they provide him with expert care. His caregivers,
actually, I have to say are angels. I've had several
conversations with them about how they're dealing with this
pandemic.
They've told me that they can't get the proper testing for
their residents because they're bed-bound, or are in
wheelchairs. They fear the day when a hurricane forces them to
evacuate. They feel forgotten. In fact, the owner and general
manager of the organization that cares for my nephew stated,
and I quote, ``nobody thought about group homes.''
Ms. Roth, as you know, CMS has instituted strict reporting
requirements for nursing homes. COVID cases must be reported to
all residents and families as well as directly to the CDC and
State and local officials. This data is important to stop the
spread of COVID.
Do these same reporting requirements apply to facilities
that care for individuals with intellectual disabilities or
psychiatric residential treatment facilities, or substance use
disorder treatment facilities?
Ms. Roth. Thank you so much for those questions, and
unfortunately, even where there are now finally some
requirements, we're still not getting accurate information. It
is just completely baffling to me that we cannot identify where
this virus is emerging in hotspots, and make sure that
everyone, including people with disabilities, have what they
need in order to protect themselves. Just yesterday, the Senate
bill completely left out any home- and community-based services
funding.
It is that kind of funding that makes it possible for
people with disabilities and their families to have the support
and services that they need, and to keep them out of the
congregate facilities that are unable to keep people safe.
Ms. Mucarsel-Powell. Yes, Ms. Roth, it's so troubling that
now, when we need that support the most, we're facing those
cuts. How does the lack of data and the lack----
Ms. Titus. I'm sorry----
Ms. Mucarsel-Powell [continuing]. Of transparency affect
the emergent----
Ms. Titus. I think your time----
Ms. Mucarsel-Powell [continuing]. Standards, or----
Ms. Titus. We're going to have to move on to the next
person.
Ms. Mucarsel-Powell. Oh, Madam Chair----
Ms. Titus. But we'll have a--maybe have a second round.
Ms. Mucarsel-Powell. Yeah, I couldn't see the clock.
Ms. Titus. It's OK.
Ms. Mucarsel-Powell. I couldn't see the clock, but thank
you so much. I yield back.
Ms. Titus. Thank you. Mrs. Miller?
Mrs. Miller. Thank you, Chairwoman Titus and Ranking Member
Katko, and thank you all for being here today. This hearing is
extremely relevant to my State of West Virginia. We have people
living among the hills and hollers high up, down in valleys,
along flood plains. Many of our people are low-income
individuals, and we have a high population of the elderly and
disabled.
I cannot express how pleased I am to see you here today,
because we need to address and improve these longstanding
issues that will touch my State for generations to come. Mr.
Brown, when working with your State, you mentioned that you
examined at-risk communities that may not have applied for
assistance.
How do we ensure, for example, that the rural at-risk
communities can receive the proper outreach education with the
paperwork, the application requirements, and the eligibility
status?
Mr. Brown. Thank you, Congresswoman. I think we need to
look at what the word ``equity'' really means, and it means
that not all of us need the same amount. It's not equality.
It's giving what people need.
There are some communities that need more. And so, when it
comes to rural communities, a lot of the rules or regulations
associated with assistance or applying for grants takes a lot
of work, and they have limited staff and capabilities to do
that. We need to adjust those rules and regulations to be
equitable, and to provide the necessary support and funding to
support those rural communities that have unique issues.
A lot of the communities are spread out. We've had rural
communities that needed additional resources in terms of masks
and hand sanitizers, for instance, related to COVID-19. So
we've dedicated supplies specifically for these communities,
and created a program to deliver those right at people's doors
to----
Mrs. Miller. Who----
Mr. Brown [continuing]. Get it right to the most vulnerable
communities. And so, I really think we need to change our
practices in order to provide additional resources and support
to those rural communities.
Mrs. Miller. Well, who do you think is best positioned to
do this, and do you think State and local emergency managers
should have a great role?
Mr. Brown. Yes. I think State and local emergency managers
should be given additional resources, and the ability to do
that, but again, when we look at how to dramatically change the
issues related to integrating equity in emergency management,
it takes all levels of Government in order to do that
effectively, and to stem the current trend of disasters with a
disproportionate impact on underserved communities.
Mrs. Miller. OK, Mr. Higdon, 37 of the 55 counties in West
Virginia are classified as either at-risk or distressed. These
counties rank in the worst 25 percent of the Nation's counties
according to economic status indicators. I am so proud of our
food banks in my State and the work that they do. We also have
used the National Guard, and we just always are trying to
improve. From your experience, what lessons could you share
today that might be helpful to some food banks?
Mr. Higdon. You know, one of the things we do very well--
and I really appreciate the time, Congresswoman--is
collaboration. You know when we look at our network, we get
together often.
We have a lot of--well, right now--virtual conferences
happening this week, and we're learning from each other and
understanding, you know, dealing with food banks that have had
a staff member test positive, or trying to manage volunteers
throughout this process, and I think you know, we're all
figuring everything out as we go, and it's--we're learning on
the fly, and this is going to--we're continuing to get better,
and we're going to [inaudible] because of this, unfortunately,
but you know, really when we look at what's happening, I think
when I [inaudible] one of those food banks in Missouri, the
ones we haven't been using as much of the National Guard, and
have volunteers, we're seeing a decline of volunteers
[inaudible] that product, and some of our first [inaudible] we
have logistic limitations with our food pantries, and there's
not enough of refrigeration and coolers.
Mrs. Miller. OK, I'm going to have to move on. I'm so
sorry. I have a question for----
Mr. Higdon. OK.
Mrs. Miller [continuing]. Ms. Roth.
Mr. Higdon. OK.
Mrs. Miller. From my understanding, FEMA operates a system
called IPAWS, which is the Integrated Public Alert and Warning
System. For example, that technology alerts to include not just
texts but pictures or data or even signals. How do we continue
to implement and modernize emergency management systems like
IPAWS for our vulnerable population?
Ms. Roth. Thank you for that question. I think you know,
first and foremost, all of the Federal agencies need to be
providing information in accessible formats. It is their legal
obligation, and it is imperative that people have information
in formats that are accessible to them. Information that is not
accessible is not actionable.
So for instance, we have been trying for a very long time
to get NOAA to caption their videos, to audio describe
emergency information so that people are in a position to make
decisions about their safety, the safety of their family, and
their neighborhood. We have some real basic work that's been in
the law for many, many years, and needs to be implemented.
IPAWS goes a very long way in modernizing a system that is now
almost 60 years old, and it really needed to be modernized, and
it was very important to be inclusive of a variety of
information delivery systems. For [inaudible] that's being--is
actionable, we are still going to be able to give the whole
community information that they can use in times of disaster.
Ms. Titus. Thank you.
Mrs. Miller. Thank you. I yield back.
Ms. Titus. Thank you. Communication does seem to be an
issue that we need to address, whether it's another language,
whether it's for sight impaired, whether it's lack of internet
in rural parts of the State. If you can't get the information
out, then you can't provide the service, because people don't
know what's available. We certainly do need to work on that.
Ms. Norton? I recognize Ms. Norton for 5 minutes.
Ms. Norton. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I very much
appreciate this hearing, which is raising issues that have been
arching below the surface. My first question is, I believe, for
Ms. Yentel, because in preparing for this hearing, I was
surprised to find that there is actually a regulation that says
unless people were made homeless by a declared disaster, they
were not eligible for Stafford Act relief. One, I'm wondering,
is that still the regulation, and two, what happens to homeless
people who were homeless anyway during a disaster?
Ms. Yentel. Yes, thank you for the question. FEMA believes
and implements programs that assume that people who are
experiencing homelessness prior to a disaster are not eligible
for any FEMA assistance after the disaster. That's even in the
case of a person who was experiencing homelessness, maybe
living in an encampment, and maybe a hurricane destroyed all of
their belongings. They lost their belongings as a result of the
hurricane. Still, FEMA would say they are not eligible for
assistance, and very often, they receive none.
In some cases, FEMA has taken that so far as to say that
people who are experiencing homelessness prior to a storm are
not eligible for emergency shelter during, and that was the
case in the California wildfires, where people were literally
in the path of fire and destruction, and FEMA interpreted the
law to say, you were homeless before the wildfire. You couldn't
go to emergency shelters for safety.
Now, it's especially important to note that FEMA is now
interpreting the law differently, and is finding that due to
COVID-19, people who were homeless prior to the epidemic can be
eligible for nonprorated shelters, and it could be more, but it
shows that they can interpret the law much more broadly than
they do to apply to all people before and after a disaster.
Ms. Norton. I appreciate that answer, but Madam Chair, I
believe that this committee should make clear that the
regulation, which they--apparently the pandemic has forced them
to broadly interpret--does in fact interpret this bill with
respect to homelessness, period.
Ms. Roth, another surprise I found by looking at what the
GAO had--has--this is for Ms. Roth. That the registration
process for--FEMA's legislation process does not ask as an
initial question directly it--an individual if that individual
has a disability, or if they would like to request an
accommodation for completing the question. That surprised me to
read about that. Could you explain what--if that is true, and
what should be done about it?
Ms. Roth. Sure. For many years, that was absolutely the
case. Happily, it--about 1\1/2\ years ago, the GAO listened to
those of us who were repeating this concern, and many Members
of the House and Senate asked the GAO to take a look at this.
FEMA has subsequently made a small change in the wording of the
application. This in fact used the disability--it gives some
additional [inaudible]. But those are very inadequate, and
there is still no way a person should [inaudible] in
allocation, FEMA resists it.
So, if you need an accommodation to get through the
application process, there is [inaudible] you get a sign
language interpreter to come out when your house is inspected.
The only way you can ask for that is to pick up the phone to
call to ask for the notes to get a sign language interpreter,
and then maybe a sign language interpreter will be there when
the inspection is conducted. Having this, I have been told this
process is too hard, because the Paperwork Reduction Act made
it--this--required question, and through--whenever we
[inaudible].
Ms. Titus. Thank you. Thank you.
Ms. Norton. Thank you, Madam Chair. Again, if I could ask
that--that FEMA be required or asked to ask the question. If
they won't ask the question directly, they aren't likely to get
a response. Thank you very much.
Ms. Titus. No, thank you, Ms. Norton. Next, we'll have Mr.
Palmer.
Mr. Palmer. Thank you, Madam Chairman. I'm not sure we can
hear all of Ms. Roth's answers, but I do appreciate her concern
for the elderly people who are in nursing homes and other
facilities like that, and I just wonder if your organization
has made any attempt to investigate or work with Governors and
other officials where we've had a disproportionately high
number of deaths.
I mean, there's five eastern States, Pennsylvania,
Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, and New York, that
account for almost half of all of the nursing home deaths. We
know the controversy involving Governor Cuomo in New York and
sending recovering COVID-19 patients back into nursing homes
and not having them tested. You add in Illinois and Michigan to
that, and that's well over half of all of the COVID-19 deaths
in the nursing homes. Has your organization looked into that
and raised any concerns with any of those administrations in
those States?
Ms. Roth. Thank you for that question. We are part of a
national coalition with folks active in not only every State,
but just about every congressional district, and we have
approached the Governors, we've recently--under the leadership
of the Association of Programs for Rural Independent Living,
sent a letter to the National Governors Association; we haven't
yet had a response.
We had as early as March 3rd sent out a call to action that
was signed by 192 organizations that called on the Federal
Government and the State governments to act immediately to
protect people with disabilities, older adults, other people
who were identified as having underlying conditions.
Mr. Palmer. Well, we're not--ma'am, let me cut you off
there. I just want to make sure that we have a proper focus on
the States where there's been a disproportionate number of
elderly die under the administrations of these seven States.
Ms. Yentel, as you point out in your testimony, community-
based organizations and local businesses are usually positioned
to know the unique needs of a community they serve, and can
assist in a number of areas, employment in the area that's been
hit by a disaster. How do we assure assistance and contracting
takes this into account, and again, specifically, community-
based organizations and private nonprofits?
Ms. Yentel. Sure, thank you for the question. If FEMA were
to require that any kind of contracting tak into account and go
first to local businesses and especially businesses owned by
women and people of color and be embedded in the community,
then that would have the benefit of supporting those local
small businesses, and also ensuring that the assistance that
those contracts are providing are actually meeting the local
need, because those local nonprofits and local businesses will
be best equipped to know what their neighbors need.
Mr. Palmer. Both you and Mr. Brown, your testimony
obviously places a high value on inclusion when it comes to
disaster relief. Do you have representatives from groups with
stellar reputations in disaster relief, such as Samaritan's
Purse, and the Southern Baptist and Catholic charities that are
faith-based? Are there any things that would preclude utilizing
those organizations, and what is the greatest importance to
you, inclusiveness or effectiveness in meeting the needs of
victims of a disaster?
Mr. Brown. Thank you, Congressman. I think we cannot be
effective unless we're inclusive and equitable. So, I think----
Mr. Palmer. So, you don't think----
Mr. Brown [continuing]. The hole in emergency----
Mr. Palmer [continuing]. You can be effective----
Mr. Brown [continuing]. Management----
Mr. Palmer [continuing]. You don't think you can be
effective--you--what I'm asking is, do you have any animus
toward any organizations like Samaritan's Purse and Southern
Baptists? We saw that particularly in New York with Samaritan's
Purse, and certain groups didn't want them there because of
their beliefs.
Mr. Brown. I don't have any animus towards any group that
wants to help, but I think every group that comes in to help
needs to respect and understand the community and be inclusive
and equitable, and this is where diversity, equity, inclusion
training is so important in order to be effective when it comes
to disaster response, and that's whether it's a Federal, State,
local, nonprofit, or private entity.
Mr. Palmer. Well, that 5 minutes went fast.
Ms. Yentel. And I would just add if I could----
Mr. Palmer. I think----
Ms. Yentel. I would just----
Mr. Palmer [continuing]. My time has expired, ma'am.
Ms. Yentel. OK.
Mr. Palmer. You can answer the question though if you'd
like, Ms. Yentel, I think that----
Ms. Yentel. OK. I would just--I would just add if I could,
I don't know the specific organizations, and certainly have no
animus towards faith-based organizations and their value in
disaster assistance and recovery. And would just say----
Mr. Palmer. You're not familiar with Samaritan's Purse or
the Southern Baptist relief? I mean, they're the largest relief
organization I think in the country, or they were at one time.
Ms. Yentel. I know. I'm familiar with the national
organizations, but not the local chapters, which I thought was
what you were asking about, but I would just say that
assistance has to be available to everybody who needs it
without requirements put on that assistance, and there have
been cases, especially when it comes to people experiencing
homelessness, where faith-based organizations may want to put
additional requirements on the assistance, and in our view,
that's not acceptable.
Ms. Titus. Thank you.
Mr. Palmer. I yield back.
Ms. Titus. Mr. Carbajal?
Mr. Carbajal. Thank you, Madam Chair. First, I'd like to
ask for unanimous consent to insert this statement from the
Foodbank of Santa Barbara County into the record. My staff will
also email it appropriately.
[The statement from the Foodbank of Santa Barbara County
follows:]
Statement of Erik Talkin, Chief Executive Officer, Foodbank of Santa
Barbara County, Submitted for the Record by Hon. Salud O. Carbajal
Since COVID-19 safety measures took effect, the Foodbank of Santa
Barbara County, California, has seen unprecedented demand--dwarfing
what we have experienced in previous disasters and economic downturns.
The Foodbank of Santa Barbara County (FBSBC) has tripled the amount of
food it normally provides to community members facing food hunger and
food insecurity, and that demand has yet to decrease.
FBSBC's Response to Demand
Doubled our Safe Home Grocery Delivery to Seniors
program--from 1,500 before the pandemic to over 3,500 seniors
Operating 22 new, no-contact drive-thru sites
Volunteers are packing 6,000 grocery bags per week at our
50 SAFE food distribution sites
Assisting our food distribution partners that are seeing
a more-than-double increase--from 200 families to now over 450 families
requesting food support
Added two additional warehouses to our two existing
warehouses in order to meet demand and accommodate safety protocols for
staff and volunteers
Have needed to utilize 20 National Guard personnel to
help meet demand and replace our traditional volunteer pool that
largely consists of those now classified as a COVID-19 vulnerable
population
Guard presence has been decreasing each month and will
likely be phased out entirely by September 1, regardless of whether
community need has declined.
Have led a community effort over the past 18 months to
create a Disaster Feeding Plan in collaboration with disaster and
emergency response agencies in the government, healthcare, education,
and nonprofit sectors. Such a plan ensures everyone in Santa Barbara
County can be fed in case of a large-scale disaster
FEMA Support and Challenges
State and federal support has been critical in helping to replace
food donations that, for various reasons, have decreased
significantly--and to meet increased demand. Emergency food boxes via
TEFAP, increased SNAP benefits, and the potential for food purchase and
distribution reimbursement to our county through FEMA Coronavirus
Pandemic Public Assistance funds have all increased the likelihood that
community members in need of food can receive it.
However, the FEMA component, particularly around a lack of
coordinated response and guidance, has created significant challenges
for food banks--particularly those in California, including ours.
Issues with Reimbursement Criteria
Certainly, the COVID-19 pandemic is a medical emergency, but it
absolutely is also an economic crisis affecting millions of Americans
who lost their jobs due to the COVID-19-required shut downs--to be
further exacerbated if unemployment benefits are not extended beyond
July 31, 2020. Food banks across the country have seen the number of
people requiring food assistance rise exponentially and continue at
those extreme levels since March. Despite this, FEMA does not allow for
reimbursement of food purchase and distribution (FPD) expenses tied to
feeding people who need food assistance singularly due to economic
necessity.
As currently required by FEMA (through the conduit of the
California Governor's Office of Emergency Services--CalOES), food banks
can only request reimbursement for services for those who have tested
positive for COVID-19, are presumed positive and awaiting a result, or
who under CDC guidance are at high risk for the negative health impacts
of the virus. Guidance from FEMA on exactly which populations are
eligible for reimbursement are vague to the point that county
partners--the entities through which food banks must apply for
reimbursement--are afraid to risk submitting a claim that will be
rejected. Many counties have chosen to forego attempts to secure FEMA
reimbursement, altogether.
Apparent Inconsistencies Across FEMA Regions
FEMA has not communicated clearly and consistently about the degree
to which FPD expenses are reimbursable. It appears that in some regions
of the country, FEMA has different interpretations and allowances for
the reimbursement of those expenses. It has taken months for us in
California to figure out whether traditional food bank activities and
expenses are eligible for FEMA reimbursement at all. Only now, after
months of providing services do we have some semblance of clarity on
the matter, but questions remain.
We are told by CalOES that FEMA Region 9 staff have communicated a
prohibition on reimbursement of FPD expenses that are tied to serving
anyone who receives any other form of government food assistance (i.e.
duplication of benefits).
FEMA's interpretation that this `duplication' means anyone who
receives FEMA reimbursed food cannot receive any other federally-funded
food aid--including SNAP--has resulted in significant delay or the
complete derailment of food banks' efforts to access this much-needed
resource.\1\ A reasonable person likely would interpret that language
to mean no duplication of federal funding for the same food (e.g. A
TEFAP/USDA food box not also paid for by FEMA).\2\ Yet, CalOES reports
that FEMA has still not provided clarification on the intent of the
language.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Unfortunately, this interpretation is reflected in a CalOES
document on the issue: ``Food Purchase & Distribution Eligible for
Public Assistance.''
\2\ This interpretation is neither supported by current policy nor
underlying regulations or statute: FEMA Policy FP 104-010-03; FEMA PA
Guide; Stafford Act SEC 312 (p.18).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consequences of Such Inconsistencies in Language
The economic crisis from this pandemic is extreme and will be long-
lasting. Government assistance programs alone are not enough for people
to survive. Entire families are enduring the economic calamity of this
pandemic.
This interpretation of ``duplication'' places a significant
administrative burden on food banks to safely collect the data
necessary to ensure that each person served does not receive government
food assistance. It also presents dignity issues for recipients as well
as staff and volunteers. No-one should be shamed for being hungry.
We have thousands of people showing up at distribution sites in
Santa Barbara County--lines of cars in some cases that shut down
streets and require police presence for traffic control. We have to get
people in and out as quickly as possible in order for our small crews
of volunteers and staff to stay safe and get through the line
efficiently. It has required enormous additional effort to figure out a
system in which volunteers can safely interrogate every person who
shows up for food assistance to a) determine whether they are receiving
any of the various safety net benefits and b) log those
interactions.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See the LA Times article on how the Great Plates program
excludes low-income seniors, as a result of FEMA's policy
interpretation: https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-06-20/
senior-meals-program
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Clarity Is Needed
People who don't need food support, don't show up at food bank
distribution sites. And the people who do show up, truly need the help.
As a country, in a disaster like this with so many millions of people
suffering, we should take it as a given that feeding people who are
hungry and don't have food should be a national priority worthy of as
much reimbursementfrom FEMA as possible.
Whether this requirement is a regional interpretation or one that
FEMA supports nationwide, it's deserving of review and clarification.
Feeding hungry people is a threshold value that we, as Americans,
should embody and reflect in our federal response to disaster. Barring
counties and food banks from receiving reimbursement for food given to
a senior who also gets a meals on wheels delivery, or a family that is
getting the maximum SNAP benefit but it still not able to feed the full
family, is unconscionable. Such a requirement is antithetical to what
food banks stand for and it also goes against how our country should
treat its residents during times of crisis.
We can and must do better.
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
California Governor's Office of Emergency Services
Food Purchase and Distribution Eligible for Public Assistance
Frequently Asked Questions
overview
The April 11, 2020 FEMA policy for Purchase and Distribution of
Food Eligible for Public Assistance (FP 104-010-03) policy defines the
framework, policy details, and requirements for determining eligible
work and costs for the purchase and distribution of food in response to
the COVID-19 Public Health Emergency to ensure consistent and
appropriate implementation across all COVID-19 emergency and major
disaster declarations.
frequently asked questions (faqs)
Who can apply for the reimbursement?
State, local, tribal or territorial (SLTT) governments are eligible
to apply for FEMA Public Assistance (PA) under this policy. A SLTT
entity may enter into an agreement or contract with a local private
organization, including Private Non-profit organizations such as a food
bank, to provide the food purchase and distribution in response to the
COVID-19 pandemic emergency. A Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)
template is available to the SLTT to use with private non-profit
organizations.
The SLTT should apply for Public Assistance as soon as possible and
begin working to submit their Streamlined Project Application through
FEMA's Grants Portal to request Public Assistance (https://
grantee.fema.gov/) and to submit the Streamlined Project Application,
which also has step by step instructions on how to move through the
application process.
Can food be purchased and distributed for any purpose?
Unfortunately, no. For FEMA reimbursement purposes, the SLTT must
demonstrate the need for the purchase and distribution of food due to
the COVID-19 pandemic emergency. Examples of need includes decreased
mobility of the population due to government actions (i.e., Stay-at-
Home Order) that restrict certain populations from accessing food,
significant increase or atypical demand for food resources, and/or
disruption on the food supply chain in the local area.
Which populations are eligible to receive food under FP 104-010-03?
Population affected by the COVID-19 Pandemic is defined by those
who contracted or were exposed to COVID-19 (as documented by a medical
professional), or those deemed high-risk according to the CDC. In
addition, the appropriate local Public Health Official is able to
identify additional populations in their local jurisdictions that may
be eligible based on their inability to access food as a result to the
COVID-19 pandemic emergency.
The FEMA PA policy requires any food purchased and distributed
under another state or federally funded program is not eligible for
reimbursement.
What types of costs are reimbursable?
The policy allows costs associated with purchasing, packaging and
preparing food and delivering food when the severity of conditions
disallow easily accessible food for purchase for the defined eligible
populations. Leasing distribution and storage space, vehicles and
necessary equipment related to the purchase and distribution of the
food are eligible. Non-food related commodities are not covered under
this special Food Purchase and Distribution policy.
Legally responsible SLTT governments may enter into formal
agreements or contracts with private organizations, including private
nonprofit (PNP) organizations, such as food banks, to purchase and
distribute food when necessary as an emergency protective measure in
response to the COVID-19 pandemic emergency. In these cases, PA funding
is provided to the legally responsible SLTT government entity, which
would then reimburse the private organization for the cost of providing
those services under the agreement or contract.
What documentation is required?
Examples of documentation include population numbers of those
impacted by COVID-19 in the jurisdiction, the percent increase in
demand for food assistance by the private or PNP organization due to
the COVID-19 emergency, and the various state and local funding sources
received by the private or PNP organization for food assistance.
Additionally, the SLTT must document the number of individuals served,
length of time the services are provided and needed, costs per
individual for service delivery, and ``overhead'' costs such as
transportation. Documentation should match the specific parameters
defined by the SLTT who is eligible to receive food assistance under
this policy.
The SLTT should work with their Cal OES/FEMA Point of Contact to
determine the most reasonable and acceptable type and level of
documentation needed.
How is this policy different from Great Plates Delivered Program?
The Food Purchase and Distribution FEMA Policy eligible for public
assistance is an adaption of the standard FEMA PA process for the
COVID-19 pandemic emergency. The additional guidelines provided adapt
the regular program to the current COVID-19 circumstance. Great Plates
Delivered is a special program to serve a specific portion of the
population. No individual enrollment is needed under this policy. Any
services provided under the Food Purchase and Distribution should not
overlap with Great Plates Delivered. Populations receiving food
assistance under Great Plates Delivered are ineligible for food
assistance under this FEMA PA policy.
Coronavirus (COVID-19) Pandemic: Purchase and Distribution of Food
Eligible for Public Assistance
FEMA Policy FP 104-010-03
background
Under the President's March 13, 2020, COVID-19 emergency
declaration \1\ and subsequent major disaster declarations for COVID-
19, state, local, tribal, and territorial (SLTT) government entities
and certain private non-profit (PNP) organizations are eligible to
apply for assistance under the FEMA Public Assistance (PA) Program.
This policy is applicable to eligible PA applicants only and is
exclusive to emergency and major disaster declarations for the COVID-19
pandemic.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Proclamation 9994 of March 13, 85 FR 15337 (Mar. 18, 2020); see
also www.fema.gov/news-release/2020/03/13/covid-19-emergency-
declaration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As of April 9, 2020, 51 states and territories had ``stay at home''
orders in place.\2\ The population at high-risk for severe illness from
COVID-19 includes people 65 years and older and people of any age who
have serious underlying medical conditions, including people with
chronic lung disease or moderate to severe asthma, people with serious
heart conditions, people who are immunocompromised (e.g., those
undergoing cancer treatment, smokers, those with HIV or AIDs), and
people with severe obesity, diabetes, or liver disease, and people
undergoing kidney dialysis.\3\ Due to the impact of the COVID-19
pandemic, there may be areas where it will be necessary as an emergency
protective measure to provide food to meet the immediate needs of those
who do not have access to food as a result of COVID-19 and to protect
the public from the spread of the virus.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ https://www.nga.org/coronavirus/#states
\3\ https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/need-extra-
precautions/groups-at-higher-risk.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
purpose
This policy defines the framework, policy details, and requirements
for determining eligible work and costs for the purchase and
distribution of food in response to the COVID-19 Public Health
Emergency to ensure consistent and appropriate implementation across
all COVID-19 emergency and major disaster declarations. Except where
specifically stated otherwise in this policy, assistance is subject to
PA Program requirements as defined in Version 3.1 of the Public
Assistance Program and Policy Guide (PAPPG).\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The current version of the Public Assistance Program and Policy
Guide (PAPPG), Version 3.1, is available on the FEMA website at
www.fema.gov/media-library/assets/documents/111781.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
principles
A. FEMA will provide flexibility to applicants to protect the
health and safety of impacted communities in response to the COVID-19
Public Health Emergency through the purchase and distribution of food.
B. FEMA will responsibly implement this policy and any assistance
provided in a consistent manner through informed decision-making and
accountable documentation.
C. FEMA will engage with interagency partners, including the U.S.
Department of Agriculture (USDA), the U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services (HHS), and U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD), to ensure this assistance does not duplicate other
available assistance. Engagement with USDA will include coordination
with USDA's efforts on food bank response.
requirements
A. Applicability
Outcome: To establish the parameters of this policy and ensure it is
implemented in a manner consistent with program authorities and
appropriate to the needs of the COVID-19 Public Health Emergency.
1. This policy applies to:
a. All Presidential emergency and major disaster declarations
under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance
Act (Stafford Act), as amended, issued for the COVID-19 Public Health
Emergency.
b. Eligible PA applicants under the COVID-19 emergency
declaration or any subsequent COVID-19 major disaster declaration.
c. This policy does not apply to any other emergency or major
disaster declaration.
B. General Eligibility Considerations
Outcome: To define the overarching eligibility framework for purchasing
and distributing food in response to COVID-19 declarations.
1. Legal Responsibility.
a. To be eligible for PA, an item of work must be the legal
responsibility of an eligible applicant.\5\ Measures to protect life,
public health, and safety are generally the responsibility of state,
local, tribal, and territorial (SLTT) governments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ 44 CFR Sec. 206.223.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
b. Legally responsible SLTT governments may enter into formal
agreements or contracts with private organizations, including private
nonprofit (PNP) organizations such as food banks, to purchase and
distribute food when necessary as an emergency protective measure in
response to the COVID-19 Public Health Emergency. In these cases, PA
funding is provided to the legally responsible government entity, which
would then reimburse the private organization for the cost of providing
those services under the agreement or contract.
2. Work Eligibility.
a. In accordance with sections 403 and 502 of the Robert T.
Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121
et seq. (the ``Stafford Act''), emergency protective measures necessary
to save lives and protect public health and safety, including the
purchase and distribution of food, may be reimbursed under the PA
program.
b. When necessary as an emergency protective measure, eligible
work related to the purchase and distribution of food in response to
the COVID-19 pandemic includes:
i. Purchasing, packaging, and/or preparing food, including
food commodities, fresh foods, shelf-stable food products, and prepared
meals;
ii. Delivering food, including hot and cold meals if
necessary, to distribution points and/or individuals, when conditions
constitute a level of severity that food is not easily accessible for
purchase; and
iii. Leasing distribution and storage space, vehicles, and
necessary equipment.
c. Several indicators may demonstrate the need to purchase and
distribute food in response to the COVID-19 pandemic:
i. Reduced mobility of people in need due to government-
imposed restrictions, including ``stay-at-home'' orders, which prevent
certain populations from accessing food;
ii. Marked increase or atypical demand for feeding resources;
or
iii. Disruptions to the typical food supply chain within a
given jurisdiction.
d. Populations in an impacted community that may need the
provision of food as a lifesaving and life-sustaining commodity, may
include:
i. Those who test positive for COVID-19 or have been exposed
to COVID-19, but who do not require hospitalization; \6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Any collection or handling of information with regard to the
health status of individuals must be compliance with applicable privacy
laws, including the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act
of 1996. FEMA will not be collecting any health information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
ii. High-risk individuals, such as people over 65 or with
certain underlying health conditions; \7\ and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ The distribution of supplies and other relief and assistance
activities shall be accomplished without discrimination on the grounds
of race, color, religion, nationality, sex, age, disability, English
proficiency, or economic status. Section 308 of the Stafford Act, 42
U.S.C. Sec. 5151, as amended.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
iii. Other populations based on the direction or guidance of
the appropriate public health official.
3. Cost Eligibility.
a. All claimed costs must be necessary and reasonable in order
to respond to the COVID-19 Public Health Emergency and are subject to
standard program eligibility and other Federal requirements, including
the prevailing cost-share for the respective declaration.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ In certain circumstances, the Regional Administrator may
require the submission of an internal control plan, pursuant to 2 CFR
Sec. 200.303, in particular when the SLTT government is implementing
residential delivery of meals to targeted groups of individuals who are
need of such assistance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
b. Applicants must follow applicable cost principles and
procurement requirements.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See. COVID-19 Guidance: Procurements Under Grants During
Periods of Exigent or Emergency Circumstances, March 17, 2020. (https:/
/www.fema.gov/media-library/assets/documents/186350.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
i. Costs claimed by SLTT governments must be reasonable
pursuant to Federal regulations and Federal cost principles.\10\ A cost
is considered reasonable if, in its nature and amount, it does not
exceed that which would be incurred by a prudent person under the
circumstances prevailing at the time the decision was made to incur the
cost.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ 2 CFR Sec. 200.404; OMB Circular 87.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
ii. States and territorial governments are required to follow
their own procurement procedures, comply with 2 CFR Sec. 200.322, and
include any clauses required by 2 CFR Sec. 200.326. Local and tribal
governments must follow their own procedures and comply with 2 CFR
Sec. 200.318.
iii. In accordance with the March 17, 2020, memorandum from
David Bibo, Acting Associate Administrator for the Office of Response
and Recovery, and Bridget E. Bean, Assistant Administrator for the
Grants Program Directorate, for the duration of the Public Health
Emergency, as determined by U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS), local governments, tribal governments, PNPs, and other
non-state entities may proceed with new and existing non-competitively
procured contracts. The March 17, 2020 memorandum and other information
related to procurement specific to COVID-19 declarations are available
on the FEMA website at www.fema.gov/media-library/assets/documents/
186350.
c. Pursuant to Section 312 of the Stafford Act, FEMA is
prohibited from providing financial assistance where such assistance
would duplicate funding available from another program, insurance, or
any other source for the same costs.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ 42 U.S.C. Sec. 5155.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Time Limitations.
a. FEMA may provide funding for an initial 30-day time period.
b. SLTT governments may request a 30-day time extension from the
Regional Administrator (RA) with documentation showing continued need.
c. Work may not extend beyond the duration of the COVID-19
Public Health Emergency, as determined by HHS.
Keith Turi,
Assistant Administrator, Recovery Directorate.
April 11, 2020.
additional information
Review Cycle
This policy will be reviewed periodically during the COVID-19
Public Health Emergency. The Assistant Administrator of Recovery is
responsible for authorizing any changes or updates. This policy will
sunset with the closure of the national emergency for COVID-19 and any
subsequent major disaster declarations for COVID-19.
Authorities and References
Authorities
Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency
Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. Sec. 5121, et seq., as amended
Title 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 206,
Subparts G and H
References
Public Assistance Program and Policy Guide, Version 3.1
Monitoring And Evaluation
FEMA will closely monitor the implementation of this policy through
close coordination with regional and field staff, as appropriate, as
well as interagency partners and SLTT stakeholders. Various planning
calls are conducted daily related to COVID-19 declarations.
Additionally, FEMA has set up a mailbox for COVID-19 questions and
concerns at [email protected].
Questions
Direct questions to [email protected].
Mr. Carbajal. Mr. Higdon, first of all, I want to thank you
and everyone else on this panel for the incredible work that
you have done to help those most in need, and remember the
145,000 lives that have been lost during this pandemic.
As this public health crisis continues, we are seeing more
and more people lose their jobs and struggle to put food on the
table. The Hamilton Project estimates that rates of households
facing food insecurity have effectively doubled. I know the
administration has taken some steps to address some of these
challenges.
For example, earlier this year, FEMA issued guidance that
made some emergency dollars available to feed hungry Americans.
Has this been enough, and has the guidance been clear? And two,
how can we partner with you and other food banks across the
country to make sure no child or senior citizen goes hungry
because of language or mobility barriers?
Mr. Higdon. Thank you, Congressman. I actually asked for
feedback from the food bank in Santa Clara. It seems like
especially in California there was some miscommunication in
terms of FEMA providing Public Assistance and then claiming any
kind of food distribution expense reimbursement, and whether
families would, whether they were SNAP participants or received
Federal commodities, or whether they would be eligible to
receive some of the food purchased through Federal assistance
funds. So, I think there could be some better communication and
clarity on how some of those programs work.
I know here in Missouri we have a lot of confusion in terms
of, we heard that you had to sign an MOU with a local
government entity to receive reimbursement for food expense,
but there really wasn't clear guidance. So, we were trying to
see if the State emergency management agency would actually do
a statewide partnership with our food bank State association,
and that never really came to fruition.
There's a lot of uncertainty as to whether we can claim
reimbursement or what expenses are eligible and how it ties to
other Federal programs that we operate. So, we do have one MOU
with the local county government, but haven't really tried to
seek reimbursement for any of that. So I think there could be
better clarity in terms of what's happening, and really my
concerns are what's going to happen long term with some of
these other--you know, the CFAP program is going to end at some
point, and pandemic SNAP is going, and other benefits are going
to start to run out, and there's still a lot of people out of
work, and unemployment is still going to be high, so as those
people lose some of the assistance they're receiving, are they
going to need additional assistance.
So, you know, we are trying to best plan and prepare for
the long term, and right now, we're getting a lot of support.
It's hard to tell what the future needs are going to be, and
how that response is going to be sustained.
Mr. Carbajal. Well, I hope in the future when we're able to
we can reflect back and enumerate all these challenges so that
we could work to resolve them so that we can avoid these
challenges in the future.
Ms. Yentel, thank you for your testimony today. You know
firsthand the barriers Latinos, other communities of color,
those with disabilities, and seniors face during disasters.
In my district, we learned this when a debris flow killed
23 people and nearly half of them were immigrants. There were
language barriers, equity issues, and redtape that survivors
had to navigate. From your perspective, what are some
recommendations this committee can help implement to address
equity issues and reduce the amount of redtape families face in
trying to access the help they need following a disaster? And
two, are there changes we can make to FEMA to ensure we are
learning from past disasters?
Ms. Yentel. Yes, thank you for the question. So I think two
of the most important things that you can do immediately to
eliminate some of the challenges that low-income people face
when they're trying to access resources is, one, require that
FEMA provide full transparency for its programs to have
publicly available information, what programs are available,
and who is eligible, how they determine eligibility, how they
determine acceptance or denial, and what the process for
appeals is. It's shocking to me that this basic information is
not available from FEMA now.
In fact, the National Low Income Housing Coalition
submitted an FOIA request 1\1/2\ years ago asking for some of
this very basic application information, and we still have not
received it, and the fact that that information is not publicly
available makes it very difficult for low-income people who are
denied assistance to know why they were denied, and to have a
process in place for them to appeal that denial, and ultimately
get the assistance to which they are entitled.
Another tremendous challenge for low-income people,
especially in rural areas, especially people of color, is this
title documentation issue, and FEMA has been unnecessarily
rigid for decades on requiring this formal title documentation
from low-income homeowners in order for them to receive the
assistance, even in communities like Puerto Rico, or like in
many black and brown rural communities where informal
documentation is what's typically used and accepted in all
other cases. As an example in Puerto Rico, 77,000 low-income
homeowners were denied assistance. Many of them have still not
received assistance because they don't have formal title, which
the island of Puerto Rico does not require for any other
purpose, and FEMA was willing to work with some advocates in
Puerto Rico, especially Ayuda Legal, to create what they called
a sworn declaration so that Puerto Ricans could prove that they
owned their home. But now FEMA has refused to use that sworn
declaration in any meaningful way. They won't post it on their
website. They won't send it to people who were denied
assistance.
So, these are two really essential and I think very basic
things that the committee can and should require FEMA to do:
full transparency of program, data, and outcomes, and to fix
the title documentation requirements. Other things to consider,
that the committee and Congress should require FEMA to
implement the Disaster Housing Assistance Program, or DHAP.
Both Republican and Democratic administrations in the past
have pointed out this program as a best practice for longer
term housing needs for low-income renters, and FEMA under this
administration has consistently refused to use this program to
the detriment and harm of low-income communities.
Mr. Carbajal. Thank you, Ms. Yentel. My time has expired. I
yield back.
Ms. Titus. Thank you. Mr. Pence?
Mr. Pence. Chairwoman Titus and Ranking Member Katko, thank
you for holding this hearing, and thank you to the witnesses
for being here today. I would also like to thank FEMA for the
incredible support they have shown to local and State
governments during the COVID-19 pandemic. The most recent
numbers show that FEMA has delivered over 1.5 million N95
respirators, 860,000 gloves, 187 face shields, and 440,000
surgical masks to frontline workers in my home State of
Indiana.
In my district, we're proud to have a Second Harvest Food
Bank in Delaware County. As the region's largest hunger relief
organization, Second Harvest Food Bank has worked with local,
State, Federal, and corporate partners to ensure that all
Hoosiers have access to nutritious meals. Mr. Higdon, as you
mentioned in your testimony, FEMA supported the delivery of
meals for approximately 6 weeks as donations decreased at this
facility in Muncie.
Overall, FEMA has obligated to our State over $55.5 million
in Federal support for Hoosiers in need, mainly in at-risk
communities. Back in April, several of our local food pantries
joined forces at Lucas Oil Stadium in Indianapolis to
distribute 40,000 meals per week to hungry Hoosiers, and this
would not have been possible without this critical FEMA
funding. While COVID-19 presents unique challenges, I applaud
FEMA for swiftly moving resources to protect our public health
and safety. Thank you, FEMA, for being there and showing up
during the pandemic, and Madam Chair, I yield back.
Ms. Titus. Thank you, Mr. Pence. Is Mr. Garamendi with us?
No? OK, well then we'll go to Mr. Garcia.
Mr. Garcia of California. Thank you, Madam Chair and
Ranking Member Katko for that very warm welcome. I appreciate
it. I'm honored and humbled to be here in this committee during
this very important time in our Nation's history. I want to
thank you all for your collective testimony. As a Federal
agency, obviously FEMA has a lot of opportunity to get better.
It has a lot of opportunity to improve its efficacy, to improve
its efficiencies, and also to improve itself and evolve with
more diversity inclusion.
So this is a very important topic. It's a topic that we all
benefit from. It's not just the individuals, but the
organization and the country as a whole when we involve more
people, when we have more diversity not only in demographics
but also in thoughts. So, a very noble topic to be addressing
today.
Mr. Brown, I look forward to your leadership in the
emergency management position that you're in. As a minority
myself, both in the military and in the corporate world and now
in Congress, I recognize the value of having role models to
look up to, those to inspire us, to also develop new talent, to
advocate and promote within, and I have no doubt that you'll be
successful in that matter.
Mr. Higdon, thank you for leading this noble cause. I
believe personally that we can't solve all of our problems on
the back of the Federal Government, State, or local
governments, that it does require the nonprofits to be
organized, to be effective, to raise money, and also be engaged
in local communities, and your partnership with the National
Guard is a testimony to a very successful effort, and I look
forward to learning more about the organization, but I do
believe firmly that the nonprofits, churches, and the charities
in our communities are just as effective in many cases as
Government entities. So, I applaud your efforts there.
Ms. Roth, I'd just like to simply echo Mr. Palmer's earlier
comment about the decision by many of our Governors. I come
from California where roughly 40 percent or so--nearly half of
the deaths in our State were related to a decision by our
Governor to place senior citizens back in nursing homes after
they were already either diagnosed or had symptoms of COVID-19.
I resonate with the comment that you made that the folks in
nursing homes aren't there because they're old. They're there
because they have disabilities, and it's probably aggravated by
their age or mental health challenges that they also have.
So that end, and we'll do our research as well, and we'll
continue to press, but I would love to have your support and
partnership in our pursuit to hold the Governors accountable
for these decisions. They really did make decisions that cost
the lives of many folks that didn't need to die.
So I look forward to not only offering my support for your
organization, but also soliciting your support as we look into
these decisions that were made. I'll get to my question now.
It's pretty simple, and frankly it's a yes or no question. With
all Federal agencies, like I said, we have opportunities to get
better. With all nonprofit organizations or any organization
for that matter, we have opportunities to get better.
Are you all taking the time to document the lessons learned
that you're experiencing as we all collectively navigate
through these uncharted waters called COVID, this will probably
unfortunately not be the last time we have to deal with
something like this, so my question--and it really is just a
yes or no answer, are you taking the time to make sure that
you're evolving your respective organizations, and making
observations of the organizations around you and also of those
that you partner with to make sure that next time we're faced
with this, we're baking in these new lessons learned, we're
evolving as a country, as an organization, and as Americans,
and I guess Mr. Brown, we'll start with you.
Mr. Brown. Yes. Yes, Congressman. Baking in the lessons
learned, I think they'll help us with the next disaster, but
they also will help us with recovery, because it's very
important that we recover equitably from this unprecedented
disaster as well.
Mr. Garcia of California. Thank you. Mr. Higdon?
Mr. Higdon. Yeah. Absolutely we are. Thank you.
Mr. Garcia of California. Thank you. Ms. Roth?
Ms. Roth. Thanks for the question. The Partnership for
Inclusive Disaster Strategies, who I am very involved with, has
been working on a report. We don't call them lessons learned
reports, because apparently we're not learning too many
lessons. So these are after-action reports that are full of
recommendations.
The Partnership for Inclusive Disaster Strategies has been
bringing folks together from across the country every single
day, 7 days a week, since February 28th, and we've documented
every bit of what we've been doing together. Hundreds and
hundreds of disability organizations have been working together
to try to make the changes that we can't quite seem to get the
Government to make.
Mr. Garcia of California. Yeah, and that's the crux of the
issue that I'm getting at here, and I look forward to seeing
all of the data on the backside, and Ms. Yentel, I'm assuming
that you are doing the same?
Ms. Yentel. We are, as we have for every disaster since
2005, and documenting the evidence of what's working and what's
not. Our challenge is that FEMA rarely implements or takes into
account any of the best practices or lessons learned, and
that's where I think we need Congress to really require that
they better embed the lessons learned so that moving forward we
don't continue to make the same mistakes.
Mr. Garcia of California. Thank you all. We'll stay in
contact. Madam Chair, thank you.
Ms. Titus. Thank you. And it's interesting we've heard
several of the States mentioned in the need to do better in
nursing homes. We haven't heard about Florida, Texas, and
Arizona, however, who also have a large number of seniors, and
they have the highest rates of the COVID, so let's keep in mind
how we might be able to help those populations as well. We'll
now go to Miss Gonzalez-Colon.
Miss Gonzalez-Colon. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you
all the members of the panel. I need to first, Chairwoman, ask
unanimous consent that the report ``Preserving Our Freedom:
Ending Institutionalization of People with Disabilities During
and After Disasters'' issued by the National Council on
Disability be entered into the record.
Ms. Titus. Without objection.
[The report follows:]
Report, ``Preserving Our Freedom: Ending Institutionalization of People
with Disabilities During and After Disasters,'' May 24, 2019, National
Council on Disability, Submitted for the Record by Hon. Jenniffer
Gonzalez-Colon
The 107-page report is retained in committee files and is available
online at https://ncd.gov/publications/2019/preserving-our-freedom.
Miss Gonzalez-Colon. Thank you, Madam Chair. And now,
having said that, I need to ask Ms. Roth, will you say that
this report is an accurate assessment, or better to put it, a
comprehensive best practices for care for individuals with
disabilities during and post-disaster?
Ms. Roth. In the interest of full disclosure, I was the
principle investigator for that report.
Miss Gonzalez-Colon. OK.
Ms. Roth. And yes.
Miss Gonzalez-Colon. I assume the answer is yes.
Ms. Roth. I--this----
Miss Gonzalez-Colon. The reason I ask this question, and in
the case of Puerto Rico specifically, 38 percent of the island
are--we have people with disabilities, and that's 12 percent
higher than the average in the Nation. In having been affected
by hurricanes, earthquakes, and now the pandemic, this
population has been affected directly many times, and that was
the reason of my question. What are the top challenges you see
for seniors? Now, I'm adding seniors, and people with
disabilities following a disaster. Can you name five of them
off the top of your head?
Ms. Roth. Greatest challenges are, number one, personal
assistance services, home- and community-based services to keep
people out of institutions. Number two, failures of monitoring
and enforcing the laws that were designed to protect the rights
of all of these people. Number three, accessible, affordable
housing that makes it possible for people to be able to protect
themselves, and that accessible, affordable housing needs to be
hardened so that people can stay safe in disasters. Number
four, we must engage the disability organizations as partners,
the aging organizations as partners.
FEMA had not had a meeting with national disability leaders
since 2017. They had a first meeting with us last week,
celebrating the Americans with Disabilities Act, but still
couldn't tell us how FEMA is going to assist us in our call to
get people relocated from dangerous congregate facilities.
So, we were glad to finally bring FEMA to the table, but we
need--so, number five, and in some ways that's number one, we
need an immediate directive of guidance to the States of how
they can take actions to relocate people to save their lives--
--
Miss Gonzalez-Colon. OK.
Ms. Roth [continuing]. Right now, using the category B
emergency protective measures that exist.
Miss Gonzalez-Colon. Thank you, Ms. Roth. The issue in the
case of Puerto Rico, we're talking about all the natural
disasters we just mentioned, but currently, FEMA has, with
COVID, over 600 open disasters, and is preparing for potential
disasters.
In the case of the eastern coast, we're in the hurricane
season as well. So that means that all the resources may be
spread thin, and putting more requirements to FEMA also means
that all those new regulations may imply more difficulties for
the Territories and the States for applying for assistance, and
we saw that during the last 2 years, and I need to say that in
the case of Puerto Rico, FEMA has been doing an enormous and
big change in how it works in the beginning.
Now it's a direct communication with the municipalities,
and a lot of those issues have been solved. Still, there are a
lot of challenges on the island regarding housing, the titles,
and many others. So, I know my time is near to expire, but I
just need to say to Mr. Higdon, there are 3.2 million
constituents in my district that are serviced by just 1 food
bank, the Puerto Rican food bank.
We managed to include some provisions during the
supplemental, but we do not participate in SNAP. We participate
in just NAT, which is the program for Nutritional Assistance in
the Territories. So, how--and my last question, how can
organizations like yours be boosted, have more sources or
provisions to enable more people to use it instead of having
the Government doing that?
Mr. Higdon. That's a great question, and I did hear back
from the food bank in Puerto Rico, and just said FEMA's been
doing a tremendous job supporting them through the hurricane
and the earthquake, and you know, when we look at what the
Federal Government can do with SNAP assistance, it really, when
you look at our service territory, it equates to about 12 times
the amount of volume that the food bank does. And so, it is a
collaborative effort, and we're certainly here, and I think we
all have a role, and we're all chipping in. We can't do without
tremendous partners. It really does take a village in the sense
of all the pieces coming together plays a part--the individuals
dealing with food insecurity.
Miss Gonzalez-Colon. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Ms. Roth. May I ask one--may I add one----
Miss Gonzalez-Colon. My time expired, so Madam Chair will--
--
Ms. Titus. Go ahead, Ms. Roth.
Miss Gonzalez-Colon. OK.
Ms. Titus. Briefly.
Ms. Roth. Thank you. I just want to give appreciation to
the congresswoman, and the work that has been done in Puerto
Rico, the Center for Independent Living, mosques, and the
University of Puerto Rico, the university-affiliated center
there, have done a tremendous job, and are a real example of
good and promising practices for the rest of the country, and I
just want to give a shout out to that partnership, public and
private.
Miss Gonzalez-Colon. Thank you, Ms. Roth, and thank you,
Madam Chair. I yield back.
Ms. Titus. Thank you. Are there any further questions from
members of the subcommittee? Mr. Katko?
Mr. Katko. No, but I do want to thank the chairwoman for
this hearing. I want to thank the witnesses as well. I think
this was a very good discussion, and a lot to chew on here, and
a lot to act on. So, thank you very much for your appearance,
and I yield back.
Ms. Titus. Thank you, Mr. Katko. Just before we close, I
want to be sure. Is Mr. Garamendi with us? Does he have a
question, or has he stepped away? Well, I guess he's stepped
away or having technical difficulties, so we'll bring the
hearing to a close.
I too want to thank each of the witnesses today. Your
contribution to our discussion was really informative and
helpful, and we want to move some legislation out of this
committee. Ms. Roth, I think you mentioned a couple of the
bills, so we will stay in touch with you as we move forward and
seek your wise counsel, because you're obviously the experts
and the people we want to hear from as we do that.
I ask unanimous consent that the record of today's hearing
remain open until such time as our witnesses have provided
answers to any questions that may have been submitted in
writing or that we didn't have a chance to fully answer or
explore. I also ask unanimous consent that the record remain
open for 15 days for any additional comments and information
submitted by Members or witnesses to be included in the record
of today's hearing. Without objection, so ordered.
If no other Members have anything to add, the subcommittee
stands adjourned. Thank you.
[Whereupon, at 11:44 a.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
Submissions for the Record
----------
Prepared Statement of Hon. Peter A. DeFazio, a Representative in
Congress from the State of Oregon, and Chairman, Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure
Thank you Chair Titus, and thank you to our witnesses for being
here today.
I've said this before and it continues to be true: we are
simultaneously recovering from an unprecedented number of major
disasters.
But when so many Americans are struggling with financial hardship
and health concerns due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Federal
government must ensure that our nation's most vulnerable communities
receive the assistance they need.
From communication of alerts and warnings of anticipated disasters
to the financial assistance available to survivors to repair their
homes or temporarily shelter, every American, regardless of age, race,
mental or physical ability, or economic background, deserves equal
opportunity to access the resources available in the wake of disaster.
Part of the challenge is monitoring and enforcing compliance with
the legal obligations of the Federal government to administer these
resources.
When Members of the Committee visited Puerto Rico after the
earthquakes in February, we were told by local emergency managers that
survivors were having difficulty certifying their home ownership to
receive assistance from FEMA.
Outdated land-titling record-keeping and a non-traditional system
of passing home ownership in Puerto Rico highlighted some of the
inequities faced by individuals who may have lost documentation and
those who live in rental, or non-traditional, properties.
As Chair Titus mentioned earlier, many of these issues were raised
with FEMA Administrator Gaynor when he testified before this
Subcommittee back in March.
Administrator Gaynor made assurances that self-certification of
home ownership was being allowed in Puerto Rico, but I'm hearing that
the approval rate of Individual Assistance in the wake of the ongoing
earthquakes is still quite low.
As GAO recently found, FEMA needs to do more to support vulnerable
populations and address their specific needs.
It is fitting that we're holding this hearing today since July 26th
was the 30th anniversary of the Americans with Disabilities Act. That
legislation was an important achievement that ushered in changes to
make things so many of us take for granted that much more accessible.
But 30 years later, more work remains.
I look forward to hearing from our witnesses about how we might
help make disaster assistance more inclusive, as well.
Thank you.
Prepared Statement of Hon. Sam Graves, a Representative in Congress
from the State of Missouri, and Ranking Member, Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure
Thank you, Chair Titus.
I want to welcome our witnesses today, including Chad Higdon.
Mr. Higdon is CEO of Second Harvest Community Food Bank--a non-
profit food distribution organization serving fifteen counties in
Northwest Missouri and four counties in Northeast Kansas.
The work of Second Harvest and other food banks is critical to
getting food to those most in need.
I have had the opportunity to tour Second Harvest a number of times
and have seen first hand the service they provide to the region. I want
to thank Chad for the important work that he and Second Harvest do in
my district.
I have actually known Chad for nearly 20 years, including ten when
he served on my staff. He has been a tremendous resource to St. Joseph
and northwest Missouri in both positions, and I am proud of the work
that he has done to serve the community in both capacities.
This Committee has a long track record for reforming our emergency
management system to ensure the right assistance gets to the people
that need it most.
Whether it's protecting our seniors, those with disabilities, or
low income communities, we know we need to ensure our response and
recovery actions save lives and help people recover quickly.
That is also why I introduced the Preventing Disaster
Revictimization Act earlier this year--a bill that helps ensure the
federal government can't claw back disaster assistance it mistakenly
awards to victims who applied for help in good faith.
But, more needs to be done.
The current redtape and bureaucracy alone creates hurdles for
people and small community organizations helping to respond.
If we work towards a more simplified, streamlined process for
disaster assistance, it would not only make the process faster and
easier for disaster victims but would ultimately reduce the costs of
recovery.
I look forward to hearing from our witnesses today.
I yield back.
Appendix
----------
Questions from Hon. Peter A. DeFazio and Hon. Dina Titus to Curtis
Brown, State Coordinator of Emergency Management, Virginia Department
of Emergency Management, testifying on behalf of the Institute for
Diversity and Inclusion in Emergency Management
Question 1. This Committee did some good work in expanding FEMA
assistance for the disability community in the Disaster Recovery Reform
Act, but there's clearly additional room for enhancements to how FEMA
evaluates disaster aid for vulnerable communities.
First, can you speak at all to the effects, if any, from FEMA
additional limits in the IHP program to provide repair and replacement
for those needing appropriate access to their homes?
Second, can you each discuss how you think FEMA has been engaging
with the disability and access and functional needs community in recent
disasters and emergencies and has the Agency's posture shifted given
the frequent turnover in the role of Administrator?
Answer. The increase in IHP Program assistance to provide repair
and replacement for those needing appropriate access to their homes is
a positive step to promote more equitable recovery, but more can be
done to more equitably provide assistance given the continued
disproportionate impact of disasters on vulnerable communities that
lack resources. The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic disaster has left
millions of unemployed American families (disproportionately
communities of color) on the verge of homelessness, especially those
who rent apartments and homes. Several studies have demonstrated that
numerous Federal recovery programs exclude those most in-need by
creating narrow eligibility requirements that favors more privileged
communities. Prioritizing equity in disaster recovery programs requires
conducting research to remove the barriers for supporting the disaster
survivors that have the least resources, which are disproportionately
communities of color and low-income individuals. Further efforts should
be made to better support at-risk communities and remove inequitable
program requirements. Additionally, the excuse of eliminating waste,
fraud, and abuse is often used for establishing numerous complex
recovery processes that inequitably keeps those most in need without
the resources to recover due inequitable bureaucratic red-tape. I would
encourage further investigation on how administrative oversight
contributes to the establishment of inequitable policies that
negatively impacts vulnerable communities.
FEMA's Office of Civil Rights released guidance documents and held
webinars that have been helpful for educating on the Emergency
Management Enterprise on integrating the needs of people with access
and function needs during disaster response. But more must be done
given the continued disproportionate impact of disasters on people with
access and functional needs. It is important to listen to people with
disabilities and disaster equity experts who lead organizations
supporting people with access and functional needs. I-DIEM supports the
recommendations provided by Marcie Roth, representing the World
Institute of Disability, during the Hearing on July 28. Her written
testimony for the July 28 hearing provides recommendations that include
but are not limited to:
``(FEMA) modify its Individual Assistance registration
process to curtail the incidence of institutionalization of individuals
with disabilities.''
``DHS/FEMA and HHS/Administration for Community Living
(ACL) provide grant funds to support Independent Living Centers in
supporting disaster-impacted people with disabilities in their
community.''
``(Crisis counseling and Disaster Case Management for
people with disabilities, eligible as a result of Federal Disaster
Declarations. Crisis counseling and Disaster Case Management must be
provided by disability culturally competent providers, and must be
equally effective for all people with communication disabilities.''
``Authorize and appropriate funds for DHS and FEMA to
provide disaster preparedness grants specifically targeted to
organizations led by and serving marginalized communities, including
but not limited to people with disabilities experiencing poverty;
people with disabilities experiencing homelessness; women with
disabilities; people of color with disabilities; and members of the
LGBTQ community with disabilities.'' (Marcie Roth, https://
transportation.house.gov/imo/media/doc/Roth%20Testimony.pdf)
Question 2. We know that public communication is a vital component
of emergency response, whether a hurricane, a no-notice event, or
during a global pandemic with a novel, invisible, and deadly virus.
The ability to effectively communicate the threats to vulnerable
communities and provide guidance on what prevention steps can be taken
could be the difference between life and death.
What public communication issues have you seen as it relates to
either the COVID-19 response and other disasters, specifically directed
to vulnerable communities?
Answer. Political leaders, policy-makers, and emergency management
officials have a responsibility to integrate equity into preparedness
and response to disasters by understanding the unique vulnerabilities
and limitations of at-risk communities. The must speak honestly and
openly about the threats and communicate the best preparedness and
mitigation efforts. But preparedness efforts prior to COVID-19's
onslaught in the United States were slow and disjointed. Clear and
accurate emergency information regarding the seriousness of the threat
was lacking. Several Federal elected and appointed officials minimized
the seriousness and potential deadly impact of a Global Pandemic
earlier in the year. This is exactly when bold mitigation efforts of
could have saved lives. This is completely unacceptable and directly
resulted in the large and growing death toll in America.
Black and brown communities have legitimate reasons to distrust
government officials due to years of racist and inequitable policies
and mistreatment. Building trust, especially during an emergency should
start with honest conversations and accurate information being shared.
Trust of the message and the messenger are vitally important when
communicating with communities of color. Instead of partnering with
community and faith leaders to ``sound the alarm'' regarding COVID-19
and providing resources to vulnerable communities and frontline workers
(who are disproportionately people of color), efforts were taken by
national leaders to downplay potential negative impacts and there major
delay with taking action. Though the disaster feels like it has lasted
years, it was as recent as early March that senior government officials
were projecting COVID-19's severity and potential death toll to be
minimal, at worst. That was approximately 6 months ago, when nationally
there were only 500 COVID-19 cases and 22 deaths. The number of U.S.
COVID-19 cases has now swelled to over 1.25 million cases and caused
close to 200,000 deaths with thousand more expected. Disaster impact
data that was finally collected and made publicly available confirms
that black and brown communities have once again suffered
disproportionate disaster impacts. The number of African American and
Latinx deaths far outpace their overall population percentage. In some
cities, 70% to 80% of cases and fatalities are black and brown people.
COVID-19 response has exacerbated inequities for people of color, low-
income individuals, people with disabilities, and other vulnerable and
marginalized groups. Sadly, the failure to effectively communicate with
the public has contributed to these inequitable outcomes, once again.
Question 3. Generally speaking, the field of emergency management
lacks representation from women and people of color, especially in
positions of leadership. Do you feel this lack of representation
impacts the ability for Emergency Management agencies to effectively
respond to large-scale disasters? If so, in what ways?
Answer. The profession of emergency management's lack of diversity
with representation of people of color within its ranks prevents the
field from rising to the great disaster challenges of the present and
tomorrow. Research indicates that an overwhelming number of individuals
designated as ``Emergency Managers'' are white males. The lack of
diversity of those that make-up the emergency management enterprise
(federal, state, local, non-profit, and private) contributes to
continuous failure to integrate equity into emergency management and
improve disaster outcomes in communities of color.
Several studies have been released over the last decade that
confirms the positive impact of diversity on organizational
performance. Private sector companies increase profits with more women
and people of color throughout their organization, especially in
positions in leadership. Though not studied as much, the impact of
diversity in public service positions, such as emergency management,
produces similar positive results. Racial diversity within the
workforce improves decision-making, reduces ``blind spot'' errors by
leveraging new perspectives, and results in better performance and
improved outcomes. Within emergency management, a more diverse
workforce would ensure that emergency operation and preparedness plans
are inclusive and equitably consider the unique needs of communities of
color. More representation of people of color in emergency management
would increase the likelihood for investing greater mitigation funding
into communities that have historically been divested in which has
contributed to increased vulnerability. A more diverse network of
emergency managers at the decision-making table and in senior roles
would promote better response decision such as allocating equitable
resources to communities most in need. Short-term and long-term
recovery would be improved by the participation of people of color that
have a connection to the communities most impacted. Simply put,
diversity in emergency management will help to reverse the existing
failure to enact equitable practices before, during, and after
disasters.
Question 4. What steps could federal, state, and local emergency
management leaders take to build a more diverse workforce of emergency
management professionals and leaders and also take into considerations
as to ensure equities of vulnerable populations are taken into
consideration during all phases of the emergency management cycle?
Answer. Federal, state, and local emergency management agencies
need to make a commitment to diversifying the workforce by setting bold
goals, innovating recruitment strategies, and increasing outreach to
young people in colleges, high schools, secondary and primary schools.
Data collection and dissemination would be a great first step for
increasing diversity within the Federal, state, and local emergency
workforce. All entities receiving Federal funding should be required to
submit workforce diversity data annually. This information is useful
for transparency and tracking whether new programs are working.
Additionally, emergency management organizations should create and
regularly update Workforce Diversity Plan that includes strategies for
promoting increased diversity in the field. In support of this plan,
emergency management agencies should partner with Minority Serving
Institutions (MSI) to develop program to recruitment students of color
to internship and entry-level positions in emergency management.
Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU), Asian American and
Pacific Islander (AAPI) Serving Institutions, Hispanic-Serving
Institutions (HSI), and Alaskan Native- or Native Hawaiian-Serving
Institutions (ANNHI) have talented students who are interested in
starting careers in emergency management but they have not been engaged
or provide opportunities.
Internally, the profession needs to create more inclusive
workplaces that no longer confine emergency professionals who are women
and/or people of color to ``second class'' status. There are numerous
racially diverse emergency management professions that should be
provide the opportunity to excel in executive and senior positions
directing emergency management efforts. FEMA's workforce data and the
larger Emergency Management Enterprise indicates that more diversity is
needed at the senior levels or emergency management agencies. 2020 and
the ongoing historic disaster of the COVID-19 Pandemic may indicate the
start of new period of mega disasters that will continue to test and
disproportionately impact our most at-risk communities of color.
Integrating equity into emergency management and diversifying the
field are realistic goals that can be achieved through investment and
sustained action. U.S. Department of Labor statistics indicates that
field of emergency management is a ``hot job'' with expansion expected
through this decade and into the next. There are numerous emergency
managers at or near retirement age. So no, we do not have to choose
diversity by eliminating existing professionals. But we do have to
create an inclusive environment that will attract people of color to
the field of emergency management which is in dire need of more diverse
talent. The increasing diversity of the United States further confirms
that there is no excuse for the profession to take action. African
American women represent the most educated demographic in the United
States. Emergency management should commit to leveraging their
expertise by adding them to the ranks of emergency managers.
Opportunities abound for emergency management to become a more diverse
profession if action is taken now. Failure to do so is synonymous to
professional malpractice; greater racial diversity will help the field
build the capacity and leverage the expertise needed to meet our
disaster challenges. The solution is clear, emergency management must
better reflect the diversity of the communities it serves. Or it must
be held accountable for the mounting negative impacts of neglecting to
integrate diverse talent.
Question 5. The COVID-19 disaster has been unprecedented in terms
of deaths and other negative impacts, disproportionately to communities
of color and people with disabilities. Researchers have stated that the
potential for future pandemics and extreme weather events caused by
climate change will exacerbate existing vulnerabilities in communities
across the United States.
How can the profession of Emergency Management identify innovative
ways to build resilience with our most vulnerable communities in order
to reduce the number of lives lost, property destroyed and
disproportionate negative impacts?
Answer. Innovative strategies to promote equity in emergency
management requires for the field to leverage the expertise of
diversity, equity, and inclusion experts who can dissect existing
policies, plans, and programs to identify inequities and propose
solutions. Currently, the field of emergency management does not
provide training on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) as a key
knowledge, skill, and ability area of the profession. The solutions for
integrating equity and prioritizing the needs of the those most at-risk
of disasters requires better engagement with the communities of color
and other marginalized communities that are frontline and continue to
experience disproportionate impacts. It also requires engaging the DEI
experts who understand the key issues, history, and data (quantitative
and qualitative) that related systemic and structural racism and
inequities. They can support efforts to identify solutions to develop
more equitable policies and programs. There must be a continuous
investment to ensure sustainable support equity work throughout
Emergency Management. Emergency management needs to improve partnership
with public health, sociologist, researchers, environmental justice,
social justice, and urban planning professions to promote innovative
equitable resilience-building strategies focused on those most at-risk.
Question 6. What steps should emergency managers take to ensure
that diversity, inclusion and equity are integrated within each phase
of emergency management--planning, response, mitigation and recovery--
in order to address the disproportionate impacts of more frequent and
damaging disasters or sea level rise on communities of color, women,
people with disabilities, seniors and other vulnerable, under-served
communities?
Answer. The effort to integrate equity and prioritize the needs of
marginalized people is urgently important due to the challenges being
faced by the impacts climate change, sea level rise, and extreme
events. Produced by consensus from 13 federal agencies the Fourth
National Climate Assessment, Volume II Impacts, Risks, and Adaptation
in the United States found that communities of color will face
increasing disproportionate negative impacts of climate change and
extreme weather. The report states that ``prioritizing adaptation
actions for populations that face higher risks from climate change,
including low-income and marginalized communities, may prove more
equitable and lead, for instance, to improved infrastructure in their
communities and increased focus on efforts to promote community
resilience that can improve their capacity to prepare for, respond to,
and recover from disasters'' (Page 55). The rising threat of more
impactful natural disasters requires that emergency planners prioritize
the needs and tailor preparedness, mitigation, protection, response and
recovery approach for those with the least access and means.
Integrating diversity, equity, and inclusion as foundational goal
within emergency management requires a full re-examination of all
preparedness, mitigation, response and recovery programs. The review
will help identify how marginalized communities and people can be
prioritized as it relates to resource allocation, plans and programs.
Regularly updating social vulnerability assessments can help with
guiding where the needs exists which will assist in policy, program,
and funding decisions.
Question 7. The words and terms ``vulnerability'' and ``vulnerable
communities'' are frequently used in the field of emergency management
to describe communities of color and other under-served communities.
But context is usually not given to fully explain the root causes for
why the vulnerability exists in these communities.
While emergency managers are typically looked at as consequence
management professionals, another essential function they perform are
detailed after action reports that analyze response and recovery
operations, identify root causes, and learn from mistakes.
Based on your professional experience as both a practicing
emergency manager, but also the co-founder of the Institute for
Diversity and Inclusion in Emergency Management, what are the root
causes of these vulnerabilities and is there a role for FEMA, state,
local, tribal, or territorial EMs to address these root issues?
Answer. The effort to build resilience in the most at-risk
communities should start with recognizing that past inequities and
biases have created the vulnerability that currently exists in
communities of color and other marginalized communities. These
disasters continue to demonstrate the need for emergency planners and
key decision-makers to understand how historical and existing
exclusionary and discriminatory practices increase the risks and impact
of disasters on specific individuals and communities. Those most
vulnerable are consistently not prioritized in disaster planning or
allocated sufficient resources during recovery. Years of biased
``community development'' segregated communities of color to higher
risk areas have contributed to creating distrust in government.
Emergency management officials have a responsibility to integrate
equity into preparedness and response to disasters by understanding the
unique vulnerabilities and limitations of communities. There should be
a clear recognition that the vulnerability of the community was
heightened due to discriminatory policies and these communities will
need the more support during a disaster.
The COVID-19 disaster has once again brought to light the glaring
disparities that continue to entrap far too many communities of color
in a continuous cycle of tragedy and loss. Institutional racism serves
as the fuel that creates the inequities that combust when disasters
strike. Discriminatory economic and social policies are the root cause
for the vulnerability faced by marginalized communities. Decades of
divestments have created impoverished communities across the country
that lack basic necessities including affordable, safe, and adequate
housing. Federal and State guidance to ``socially distance'' to limit
the spread of COVID-19 is difficult when systemic racism has confined
impoverished families to occupy incredibly small living spaces.
Environmental injustices have located toxic facilities in and around
communities of color contributing to concentration of Black and Brown
people with the same ``underlining health conditions'' (asthma, cancer,
etc) that makes COVID-19 so fatal.
Question 8. This subcommittee has long been focused on mitigation--
the effort to reduce loss of life and property by lessening the impact
of disasters and with DRRA, we ensured that additional Federal dollars
are available for pre-disaster mitigation funding.
How do you believe pre-disaster mitigation funds could be more
equitably distributed given the increase in large-scale disasters
negatively impacting the most vulnerable communities? Do you think
there are steps FEMA should take to direct or re-direct mitigation
grant programs to communities most in need to ensure a more equitable
future?
Answer. The subcommittee's effort to provide additional pre-
disaster mitigation funding will support efforts to build disaster
resilience. The BRIC program's success should be measured byits ability
to build resilience in the most vulnerable and marginalized communities
which include communities of color, low-income, and rural. I-DIEM
provided FEMA with the list of recommendations below during the final
rulemaking Public Comment period. I-DIEM believes that these
recommendations will assist with ensuring equity is prioritized as a
guiding principle for allocating the BRIC Program's funding and
prioritizing marginalized individuals and communities.
Integrate Diversity, Inclusion, and Equity as
Foundational Goal of the BRIC Program;
FEMA commits to allocating the 6% BRIC of the overall/
total COVID-19 disaster funds spent this year;
Create performance measures to ensure that the BRIC
program's success is measured by equity supports communities with the
most vulnerability and the least resources;
Equitably dedicate the majority of funding to the most
vulnerable and resource constrained communities;
Add references to equity, disproportionate impact,
communities of color, marginalized communities in recognition that
those most vulnerable to disasters are being prioritized;
Conduct Social Vulnerability Assessments and leverage
equity related data to support the decision-making process.
Question 9. We are currently experiencing prolonged response to
COVID-19, which can greatly impact our eventual recovery.
How do you envision an equitable recovery from the devastating
impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic? How can we improve recovery planning
to counteract the disproportionate effects? What do you consider a
favorable timeline for equitable recovery and how would you approach
such a timeline?
Answer. After nature disasters with major infrastructure impacts
funding is provided to support both short-term and long-term recovery,
in order to rebuild communities. COVID-19 did not have cause
infrastructure impacts but the needs are even greater and resources
must be allocated to support the communities of colors that were
hardest impacted by this unprecedented disaster.
An equitable recovery from the unprecedented impacts of COVID-19
will focus on mitigating the root causes that have lead to
disproportionate impacts on in Black, Hispanic/Latino/x, and Indigenous
communities. Major recovery investments/funding is need to be made in
public health, housing, education, economic development, and every
other major policy area so that deeply rooted systemic and structural
racism and discrimination can get untangled. Systemic changes should
occur related to disaster preparedness, mitigation, response and
recovery. Over 200,000 people dying should promote a dramatic and
noticeable change within public health and emergency management with a
major focus on ensuring all efforts are rooted in equity.
Question 10. What immediate steps could FEMA and its Federal
partners involved in disaster relief take to promote equity and improve
disaster impacts for vulnerable populations? And, similarly, what steps
do you believe Congress must take?
Answer. Congress, FEMA, and the entire Emergency Management
Enterprise's immediate steps to promote equity and improve disaster
impacts for vulnerable populations should be to recognize that the
continuous disproportionate loss of life within communities of color
and other marginalized groups is completely unacceptable. These
unacceptable losses require dramatic and urgent changes that impact
every policy, program, and funding area within emergency management.
The ability to make bold changes that will have lasting impact requires
the acknowledgement that the current program, plans, and processes are
inequitable.
The question should be asked ``how does this program or legislation
support those most at-risk for disasters or have the least resource?''.
A full comprehensive equity assessment of emergency management policies
needs to occur conducted by outside experts. Finally, Congress and FEMA
need to commitment to providing the financial and human resources to
equity integration within emergency management. Funding should be
provided to support new equity programs for vulnerable populations,
equity-focused personnel, and financial support for environmental
justice, social justice, and community-serving organizations that are
working in the most at risk communities. Greater support of these
organization will have lasting benefits and will build the resilience
needed to end the continuing disproportionate impacts of disasters on
vulnerable populations.
Questions from Hon. Peter A. DeFazio and Hon. Dina Titus to Chad
Higdon, Chief Executive Officer, Second Harvest Community Food Bank
Question 1. We know that public communication is a vital component
of emergency response, whether a hurricane, a no-notice event, or
during a global pandemic with a novel, invisible, and deadly virus.
The ability to effectively communicate the threats to vulnerable
communities and provide guidance on what prevention steps can be taken
could be the difference between life and death.
What public communication issues have you seen as it relates to
either the COVID-19 response and other disasters, specifically directed
to vulnerable communities?
Answer. Our biggest challenge has been reaching rural communities
with limited media outlets. While a media outlet exists in each county
we serve, some of these outlets are print based and publish a physical
newspaper once per week. In addition, it is up to the individual
newspaper whether to run the information we submit as a news story at
no cost, or whether they view the information as an advertisement and
charge a fee to run information in their newspaper.
We do our best to reach individuals across our service territory
regarding distribution efforts and assistance we provide. We have a
text caster system that individuals can sign up to receive at no cost
which are disseminated daily. We submit information to media outlets
regularly in hopes they will help us reach vulnerable populations. We
share information with our network of partner agencies, as word of
mouth does seem to be an effective means to reach individuals in need.
And we continually update our website with current information for
individuals with access to the internet.
I believe the most effective means of communication is often direct
mail, which is too expensive and not an option for our food bank.
Therefore, we rely upon as many other outlets as we can in hopes that
we are able to reach as many individuals as possible. If there is one
area we believe could directly benefit our dissemination of information
it would be efforts to increase access to high speed internet
throughout our service territory, specifically in underserved rural
communities.
Question 2. What steps could federal, state, and local emergency
management leaders take to build a more diverse workforce of emergency
management professionals and leaders and also take into considerations
as to ensure equities of vulnerable populations are taken into
consideration during all phases of the emergency management cycle?
Answer. I struggle to identify a recommendation on how to encourage
individuals with diverse backgrounds to consider employment
opportunities in emergency management. I can't say that youth exploring
career paths and opportunities fully understand the career
opportunities in this profession. Perhaps encouraging federal, state,
and local emergency management leaders to work with community
organizations focused on workforce development could help increase
understanding of opportunities which do exist. Additionally, efforts to
reach high school students to promote career opportunities could help
attract prospects to this career path.
Efforts to ensure states are encouraging local jurisdictions to
include vulnerable populations and integrating planning for citizens
with access and functional needs into local emergency operations and
public health planning could also prove beneficial. Individuals with
mobility issues, vision impairments, hearing limitations, or cognitive
or intellectual disabilities would certainly be impacted in their
ability to understand the effects of or respond to an emergency. The
disability community's standard of ``nothing about us, without us'' is
a valuable rule in the planning process. Local emergency management
planners should be encouraged to include individuals with diverse
backgrounds and abilities in their planning efforts to provide
perspective and insight in how to best serve diverse communities.
Question 3. I've heard, as have all my colleagues about the
interplay of Federal assistance programs right now. What's been your
experience in working in the community to distribute essential
nutrition and trying to navigate any Federal help, whether it's FEMA's
Disaster Relief Fund, Treasury's Coronavirus Relief Fund, USDA
nutrition or commodity distribution, or the FEMA Emergency Food and
Shelter Program funds that are administered via the United Way?
Answer. I believe this has been a challenge for our organization to
understand what exactly is available and how to utilize and maximize
funding sources and doing so while adhering to Generally Accepted
Accounting Principles (GAAP). My guess is that this has been a
challenge for many small non-profit organizations across the country
which operate with limited staff and resources dedicated to financial
management of the organization's resources. In the next few paragraphs,
I will do my best to outline some specific examples and where I believe
this has been a challenge for our organization.
First I would like to point out that the support and assistance we
have received has been greatly appreciated, and many vulnerable
families would not have received the amount of nutrition assistance we
have been able to provide since March of this year if not for this
additional support. Our opportunities have primarily been available as
a result of Families First Coronavirus Relief Act (FFCRA) for food
purchase, increases in USDA commodity food distributions, the
Coronavirus Food Assistance Program (CFAP) and purchases of shelf-
stable food product through state emergency management agencies
utilizing federal sources. Additionally, we may be eligible to receive
reimbursement for services provided in response to the pandemic, from
federal funds made available through state and local government
entities. We are currently evaluating or in process of applying for
these funds.
One thing I have noticed, is the degree of difficulty for a small
organization to navigate these multiple funding sources. We can apply
costs related to coronavirus response to funding made available through
state, local and private funding sources. This often makes it confusing
and difficult in determining how to maximize these opportunities to
best meet our mission while doing so according to GAAP principles.
Another confusing process has been whether we are eligible to
receive FEMA reimbursement for emergency food distribution expenses.
After the presidential disaster declaration for COVID-19 had been made,
we heard we may be eligible for FEMA reimbursement for expenses related
to emergency food distribution. An appeal was made to the state
emergency management agency to work with food banks serving every
county in the state to make all food distribution activities eligible
for reimbursement. The state declined to pursue this, so we were
informed that we would need to sign an agreement with a local public
entity to be eligible for the reimbursement. Additional confusion
centered around whether having an agreement with one public entity
located in our service territory would qualify all eligible expenses
across multiple counties in the same state for reimbursement. We ended
up signing an MOU with our county with the largest population in
Missouri, unsure whether we would be able to submit reimbursement for
expenses associated with distributions only in that county, in all 15
counties we serve in the state, or if no expenses would be eligible for
reimbursement even with the MOU signed. To date we have not pursued any
reimbursement related to this agreement with the county government, but
again most eligible expenses are probably eligible for reimbursement
through other channels.
Another example of a lack of information relates to the USDA CFAP
program. Our financial auditors indicated they are awaiting additional
guidance in auditing this federal program. The food bank has not yet
received any funds related to this program, nor guidance on how to
track any food loss or distribution records. My question to our
auditors is how they plan to audit the federal guidance, when our
organization has not received much guidance in how we are to manage or
operate the program.
I completely understand the complexity in structuring the COVID-19
federal assistance and the difficulty in creating new programs in
response to COVID-19. In my opinion, the federal government should be
commended in their efforts to support vulnerable populations through
the pandemic, and I hope this feedback is helpful in working to make
these programs and response to future unforeseen events streamlined and
more efficient.
Question 4. This subcommittee has long been focused on mitigation--
the effort to reduce loss of life and property by lessening the impact
of disasters and with DRRA, we ensured that additional Federal dollars
are available for pre-disaster mitigation funding.
How do you believe pre-disaster mitigation funds could be more
equitably distributed given the increase in large-scale disasters
negatively impacting the most vulnerable communities? Do you think
there are steps FEMA should take to direct or re-direct mitigation
grant programs to communities most in need to ensure a more equitable
future?
Answer. I believed mitigation could be improved if we look at some
of the issues related to my response on question #3. During a disaster,
I believe it would behoove us to have existing plans in place prior to
a disaster, so that organizations like food banks are ready to respond
and meet the needs of the American citizens. Rather than drafting MOUs
on a whim or trying to navigate complex reimbursement process across
multiple agencies, my belief is that states could take a proactive
approach to work with emergency food providers in each state to have a
proactive agreement in place to be ready to respond during times of
disaster. The infrastructure is in place from a nationwide network of
food banks and emergency food providers and entities already equipped
to distribute USDA commodities. If agreements were in place prior to a
disaster between states and respected non-profit partners, when there
was a need for emergency food distributions the ability to respond
quickly could be met and efforts to support emergency food
distributions with reimbursement could be streamlined.
Question 5. We are currently experiencing prolonged response to
COVID-19, which can greatly impact our eventual recovery.
How do you envision an equitable recovery from the devastating
impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic? How can we improve recovery planning
to counteract the disproportionate effects? What do you consider a
favorable timeline for equitable recovery and how would you approach
such a timeline?
Answer. One thing I have witnessed is the role of hunger relief
efforts to support families through the pandemic. There is also much
uncertainty regarding the impact low-income families will experience as
the recovery timeline progresses. It is hard to anticipate what the
effects of utility shutoffs and housing evictions will have for
families when bills come due and they are unable to meet payment
obligations. As discussions resume on another stimulus package, perhaps
these are discussions worth having now to explore ways to help families
navigate these challenges. The USDA Supplemental Nutrition Assistance
Program (SNAP) is also a very effective mechanism to respond to changes
in the economy and is available to all who qualify. A temporary boost
in this program could help ensure food is one issue where relief could
be found, so that families are better able to address other challenges
they face.
Question 6. What immediate steps could FEMA and its Federal
partners involved in disaster relief take to promote equity and improve
disaster impacts for vulnerable populations? And, similarly, what steps
do you believe Congress must take?
Answer. While I struggle to offer any suggestions for immediate
action to promote equity and improve disaster impacts for vulnerable
populations, I will offer that the Feeding America network of food
banks has been a primary recipient of federal funds to support COVID-19
recovery efforts. For our food bank, we are in the early stages of
implementing diversity, equity and inclusion efforts to evaluate and
improve services offered. In addition to providing upcoming training
for our entire staff in this area, we are also working to form a
committee with a diverse makeup to develop recommendations for our
organization to improve in this area. Our goal is to make sure all
resources we receive, including support from federal sources, reaches
as many individuals in need, especially our most vulnerable and
underserved populations.
Questions from Hon. Henry C. ``Hank'' Johnson, Jr., to Chad Higdon,
Chief Executive Officer, Second Harvest Community Food Bank
Question 1. Your testimony speaks to the particular challenges in
addressing food insecurity during the COVID-19 pandemic, specifically
for black and brown families. Can you speak further to how food
insecurity is exacerbated for low-income communities during times of
crisis?
Answer. Unfortunately we do see disparate prevalence of poverty for
minority populations. In response to many recent events, Feeding
America took the initiative to evaluate the prevalence of poverty by
race in each food bank's service territory. Our service territory by
nature is not very diverse. An estimated 88% of our population is
White, 3.5% Black, 4% Latino, and .08% Native. But when you dive deep
into the estimated poverty of each demographic, 13% of our White
population lives in poverty, while 25% of our Black population, 28% of
our Native population, and 20% of our Latino population live in
poverty.
When I try to understand why this disparity exists as it does, we
can assume logical reasoning such as historical opportunities or lack
thereof for minority populations that have resulted in this unfortunate
circumstance. As a food bank, we are tasking ourselves to develop a
strategy to reduce these disparities. The challenge I find is that with
the nature of our large distributions with limited interactions with
the families we serve, it creates a situation that is challenging for
us to understand what we can do to better equip individuals who have
the ability to improve work skills toward a path out of poverty.
By no means is this an excuse to remain complacent. My personal
belief is that the path out of poverty is often through education and
developing an individual's personal and professional skills, and then
we hope that because employers must comply with labor laws that every
individual is then provided an equal opportunity to success, or that
employers will employ based on talent and skillsets without
discrimination because it is the right thing to do. You have presented
me with a very difficult question to answer in how we as a nation
remain fair to everyone in the opportunities we provide, when in
reality minority families have an uphill battle from the onset to break
historical trends and are faced with an increased likelihood they will
struggle with poverty issues.
Question 2. What are some of the greatest challenges food banks
face in meeting communities' needs? Is there a more robust, federal
response that could bolster the efforts of food banks?
Answer. On a personal level for the food bank, we are in the
process of developing a diversity committee aimed at listening to and
learning from our most disproportionately affected populations in terms
of what they need from the food bank. This committee will be tasked
with conducting a round table with members from Native American tribes
and other minority populations. Topics we will explore include
culturally appropriate food options, how to better reach underserved
populations and other issues affecting minority populations. A personal
long-range goal I have personally considered is how we better handle
client intake to understand the individual needs of the families we
serve. Senior populations have much different needs for service than
young families who have opportunities to improve work skills. I believe
our food bank could better serve all families if we could better
understand the varying needs of the individual families we serve.
In terms of a federal response which could bolster efforts of food
banks, I firmly believe food banks are a tremendous complement to the
SNAP program. SNAP can reach every family in need and is responsive to
changes in the economy. Our service is a tremendous complement and
together we can be extremely successful in meeting the food insecurity
needs of all vulnerable families.
Questions from Hon. John Garamendi to Chad Higdon, Chief Executive
Officer, Second Harvest Community Food Bank
Question 1. Mr. Higdon, your colleagues from the California
Association of Food Banks have told me that few foodbanks nationwide
will qualify for FEMA reimbursement (under Stafford Act's ``Pubic
Assistance''), despite scaling up to meet high demand for food
assistance during the current pandemic. The issue appears to be FEMA's
overly conservative interpretation of its ``duplication of benefits''
policy, which has made it operationally infeasible for food banks to
pursue FEMA reimbursement for food purchases and distribution.
As you likely know, FEMA ``public assistance'' reimbursements are
contingent upon demonstrating that participants do not receive other
federal food assistance, such as food stamps (SNAP), home-delivered
meals, WIC, etc. All these federal food assistance programs are
supplemental in nature, almost never providing more than 1 to 2 full
meals per day. It seems the ``duplication of benefits'' policy is
largely designed to prevent low-income households ending up with a
small reserve of food in the pantry or freezer during uncertain times
like now. We need to ask ourselves and FEMA, would that really be so
bad?
Answer. This has been an eye-opening process for food banks across
the country to utilize federal sources of funds for emergency food
distribution efforts. Simply stated, demonstrating individuals
receiving food assistance through FEMA public assistance do not receive
other benefits such as SNAP, WIC, USDA federal commodities or food
through other federal programs is an unrealistic expectation.
Our organization has received shelf-stable food purchased through
Kansas Department of Emergency Management utilizing FEMA public
assistance funding. Initially there was an expectation that food banks
would verify individuals were not receiving food from other federal
sources. However, officials at the state level were successful in
pushing back these expectations. With much of our food being
distributed through mobile pantry operations, our goal is to create
safe and streamlined distributions to reduce long lines of cars which
can create resentment of the services we are offering. One community we
had served has decided to discontinue their mobile pantry distribution,
because of complaints voiced by residents of cars blocking driveways
and other disruptions these events have caused. If we create processes
to verify recipients of the food purchased through FEMA public
assistance are not receiving other food from federal sources this would
simply create longer lines and additional frustrations and deter many
families from using these services entirely. The families we are
serving currently are in very high need of food assistance, and the
cumulative effort of multiple federal programs and private initiatives
to provide hunger relief is what is truly needed to address a prolonged
response to a pandemic.
Question 2. Mr. Higdon, can you please speak to the systemic
barriers foodbanks face in getting FEMA reimbursement? And do you agree
that the so-called problem FEMA's ``duplication of benefits'' policy
seeks to prevent is not a real-world problem about which we should
worry?
Answer. It is looking less and less likely that we will even seek
this reimbursement for our emergency food distribution efforts. We have
been able to apply for funding from other sources, such as CARES Act
funding passed through state and local governments, and there may not
even be a need to seek reimbursement from FEMA. But simply trying to
keep pools of funds separate and not seek reimbursement for the same
expense across multiple federal sources is a challenge and difficult to
navigate. I am of the belief that we are better off seeking other
sources for funding reimbursement and not utilizing FEMA public
assistance for our current response efforts.
Questions from Hon. Peter A. DeFazio and Hon. Dina Titus to Marcie
Roth, Executive Director and Chief Executive Officer, World Institute
on Disability
Question 1. This Committee did some good work in expanding FEMA
assistance for the disability community in the Disaster Recovery Reform
Act, but there's clearly additional room for enhancements to how FEMA
evaluates disaster aid for vulnerable communities.
First, can you speak at all to the effects, if any, from FEMA
additional limits in the IHP program to provide repair and replacement
for those needing appropriate access to their homes?
Second, can you each discuss how you think FEMA has been engaging
with the disability and access and functional needs community in recent
disasters and emergencies and has the Agency's posture shifted given
the frequent turnover in the role of Administrator?
Answer. A response was not received at the time of publication.
Question 2. We know that public communication is a vital component
of emergency response, whether a hurricane, a no-notice event, or
during a global pandemic with a novel, invisible, and deadly virus.
The ability to effectively communicate the threats to vulnerable
communities and provide guidance on what prevention steps can be taken
could be the difference between life and death.
What public communication issues have you seen as it relates to
either the COVID-19 response and other disasters, specifically directed
to vulnerable communities?
Answer. A response was not received at the time of publication.
Question 3. What steps could federal, state, and local emergency
management leaders take to build a more diverse workforce of emergency
management professionals and leaders and also take into considerations
as to ensure equities of vulnerable populations are taken into
consideration during all phases of the emergency management cycle?
Answer. A response was not received at the time of publication.
Question 4. The COVID-19 disaster has been unprecedented in terms
of deaths and other negative impacts, disproportionately to communities
of color and people with disabilities. Researchers have stated that the
potential for future pandemics and extreme weather events caused by
climate change will exacerbate existing vulnerabilities in communities
across the United States.
How can the profession of Emergency Management identify innovative
ways to build resilience with our most vulnerable communities in order
to reduce the number of lives lost, property destroyed and
disproportionate negative impacts?
Answer. A response was not received at the time of publication.
Question 5. This subcommittee has long been focused on mitigation--
the effort to reduce loss of life and property by lessening the impact
of disasters and with DRRA, we ensured that additional Federal dollars
are available for pre-disaster mitigation funding.
How do you believe pre-disaster mitigation funds could be more
equitably distributed given the increase in large-scale disasters
negatively impacting the most vulnerable communities? Do you think
there are steps FEMA should take to direct or re-direct mitigation
grant programs to communities most in need to ensure a more equitable
future?
Answer. A response was not received at the time of publication.
Question 6. We are currently experiencing prolonged response to
COVID-19, which can greatly impact our eventual recovery.
How do you envision an equitable recovery from the devastating
impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic? How can we improve recovery planning
to counteract the disproportionate effects? What do you consider a
favorable timeline for equitable recovery and how would you approach
such a timeline?
Answer. A response was not received at the time of publication.
Question 7. What immediate steps could FEMA and its Federal
partners involved in disaster relief take to promote equity and improve
disaster impacts for vulnerable populations? And, similarly, what steps
do you believe Congress must take?
Answer. A response was not received at the time of publication.
Questions from Hon. Peter A. DeFazio and Hon. Dina Titus to Diane
Yentel, President and Chief Executive Officer, National Low Income
Housing Coalition
Question 1. As you probably know all too well, housing insecurity
in Nevada is particularly acute, and that's pre-disaster.
In your opinion, what could FEMA do under the Stafford Act that it
isn't already doing, to ensure that assistance programs recognize these
challenges and ensure that those whose homes are impacted by disaster
do not face a red tape disaster when assistance programs end?
Answer. NLIHC research demonstrates that disasters exacerbate the
existing rental housing crisis for households with the lowest
incomes.\1\ The impact of disasters on low-income people's housing
needs is made worse by FEMA's continued refusal to activate the
Disaster Housing Assistance Program (DHAP). After recent disasters,
FEMA has refused to activate DHAP and instead relied on its Temporary
Shelter Assistance (TSA) program and other programs inaccessible to
many low-income survivors. Because TSA must be renewed every 14 days,
those disaster survivors who are able to access the program face
arbitrary deadlines that cause them to scramble to submit required
paperwork or leave the motel before finding a permanent housing
solution. While FEMA is authorized to provide TSA for at least 18
months, the Trump administration abruptly terminated \2\ the program
for nearly 2,000 Puerto Rican families displaced to the mainland after
Hurricane Maria, forcing them to find alternative housing or to return
to their uninhabitable homes on the island with just a few hours'
notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ National Low Income Housing Coalition. (2019). Long-term
Recovery of Rental Housing: A Case Study of Highly Impacted Communities
in New Jersey after Superstorm Sandy. Retrieved from https://nlihc.org/
sites/default/files/Sandy-Rental-Recovery-Report.pdf
\2\ National Low Income Housing Coalition. (2018). NLIHC's Response
to Court Ruling Allowing FEMA to Move Forward on Evicting Hurricane
Maria Survivors. Retrieved from https://nlihc.org/news/nlihcs-response-
courtruling-allowing-fema-move-forward-evicting-hurricane-maria-
survivors
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FEMA's other temporary housing assistance programs--Rental
Assistance and Direct Temporary Housing Assistance--are also
problematic for low-income families.\3\ FEMA should reform its existing
housing programs and activate DHAP after every major disaster to
provide longer-term housing assistance and wrap-around services to low-
income survivors. Such assistance should be provided to eligible
survivors until the long-term housing recovery--including the
rebuilding of affordable rental housing stock--is complete.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ National Low Income Housing Coalition. (2018). Setting the
Record Straight: Disaster Rental Assistance Programs at FEMA and HUD.
Retrieved from https://nlihc.org/sites/default/files/Rental-
Assistance_Setting-The-Record.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FEMA maintains a culture of rigid allegiance to narrowly defined
protocol over outcomes; as a result, many disaster survivors, including
many of the lowest-income survivors, are wrongfully denied needed
assistance. Rather than creating and implementing numerous categories
of ineligibility, disaster assistance programs should employ broad-
based categories of eligibility, with the aim that every survivor
receives the recovery assistance to which they are entitled. FEMA
should allow for a flexible system of documentation for distributing
disaster recovery assistance. Applying the least restrictive guidance
regarding alternative documentation--and doing so consistently across
all jurisdictions--would cut down on wasted time and confusion on the
parts of both applicants and advocates alike.
Question 1. (con't) Also, the example of FEMA refusing to provide
sheltering assistance to the pre-disaster homeless in communities that
were ravaged by wildfire seems inhumane; is it your opinion that FEMA
could have at least provided temporary sheltering assistance to those
survivors under its existing authority to get them out of harm's way?
Answer. FEMA frequently denies assistance to people experiencing
homelessness prior to a disaster, despite their exceptional needs.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, however, FEMA has interpreted the law
much more broadly, determining that people who were homeless prior to
the disaster are eligible for non-congregate shelter. This demonstrates
that FEMA could interpret the law more broadly to serve people
experiencing homelessness, but it chooses not to. Congress should enact
clarifying legislation to ensure that people experiencing homelessness
prior to the disaster have access to the same emergency shelter and
disaster relief assistance as other survivors, including rental
assistance.
Question 1. (con't) What are your other top priorities for reform?
Answer. A reformed disaster housing recovery system centered on the
needs of the lowest-income and most marginalized survivors and their
communities must ensure opportunities for resident and public
engagement, systemic transparency, full accountability and due process,
robust equity and civil rights enforcement, fair mitigation practices,
and a focus on increased local capacity and benefit. These priorities
must be reflected in every stage of disaster recovery and response,
from pre-disaster emergency planning through long-term recovery and
post-recovery mitigation, to help address the systemic racism and
classism that have resulted in our broken current disaster housing
system. NLIHC and the Fair Share Housing Center of New Jersey recently
released ``Fixing America's Broken Disaster Housing Recovery System
Part Two: Policy Framework Recommendations.'' \4\ The report identifies
specific local, state, and national policy recommendations to redesign
our national disaster housing response and recovery system to center
the needs of the lowest-income survivors and their communities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ National Low Income Housing Coalition. (2020). Fixing America's
Broken Disaster Housing Recovery System Part Two: Policy Framework
Recommendations. Retrieved from https://nlihc.org/sites/default/files/
Fixing-Americas-Broken-Disaster-Housing-Recovery-System_P2.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Congress should permanently authorize DHAP and automatically
activate it after every disaster. Congress should also enact the
``Housing Survivors of Major Disasters Act,'' (H.R. 2914) \5\
introduced by Representative Adriano Espaillat (D-NY). The bill, which
passed unanimously out of the House Transportation and Infrastructure
Committee in February 2020, contains critically needed reforms to
ensure the lowest-income and most marginalized survivors can access the
housing assistance they need to recover. The bill would address the
significant title documentation challenges that have resulted in
thousands of eligible disaster survivors being wrongfully denied FEMA
assistance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ H.R. 2914, ``Housing Survivors of Major Disasters Act of
2019.'' Retrieved from https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/
house-bill/2914
Question 2. We know that public communication is a vital component
of emergency response, whether a hurricane, a no-notice event, or
during a global pandemic with a novel, invisible, and deadly virus.
The ability to effectively communicate the threats to vulnerable
communities and provide guidance on what prevention steps can be taken
could be the difference between life and death.
What public communication issues have you seen as it relates to
either the COVID-19 response and other disasters, specifically directed
to vulnerable communities?
Answer. Emergency planning and implementation frequently assumes
that all residents have resources, education, and English language
proficiency, as well as physical and psychological capabilities to
acquire, understand, and perform necessary tasks during an emergency.
These expectations are simply not true for many of the lowest-income
and most marginalized households that live in under-resourced
communities, have a disability or limited English proficiency, or law
access to public information sources. FEMA has been inexplicably slow
to publish health and safety notices and instructions in any language
other than English. In Puerto Rico, FEMA struggled to find translators
or provide basic forms in Spanish, the predominant language on the
island, contributing to delayed disaster assistance after Hurricane
Maria.\6\ Although FEMA's internal regulations require the production
of such documents, advocates have expressed concern that forms
distributed by the agency and its grantees are provided only in English
or with few translated versions. Communication of emergencies to the
deaf and blind communities is often erratic despite requirements of the
law. Emergency broadcasts in some states and localities, for example,
feature no sign language interpreters or partially obscured
interpretation that makes it difficult for a viewer to fully understand
what information is being conveyed. Moreover, emergency communications
tend to be highly centralized through government channels, limiting at-
risk populations' access to critical information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Davidson, J. 2020. How a lack of diversity at federal agencies
can have serious consequences. Retrieved from https://
www.washingtonpost.com/politics/how-a-lack-of-diversity-at-federal-
agencies-can-have-serious-consequences/2020/02/29/ceec904e-5a65-11ea-
8753-73d96000faae_story.html
Question 3. What steps could federal, state, and local emergency
management leaders take to build a more diverse workforce of emergency
management professionals and leaders and also take into considerations
as to ensure equities of vulnerable populations are taken into
consideration during all phases of the emergency management cycle?
Answer. A response was not received at the time of publication.
Question 4. We're currently awaiting a GAO study regarding rates of
approval and denial for FEMA Individual Assistance, but understand that
your organization also leads a coalition of social and data scientists
to examine post-disaster housing outcomes--the Disaster Housing
Research Consortium.
Can you discuss some of the Consortium's findings regarding FEMA's
effectiveness in housing vulnerable populations post-disaster? How
collaborative has FEMA been with the Consortium?
Are there any statutory limitations on FEMA sharing this data with
Consortium researchers, or is this a policy decision by the Agency?
Further, what data collected or analyzed by FEMA should be made
publicly available or available to researchers?
Answer. Despite the clear need, FEMA often neglects the needs of
America's lowest-income disaster survivors and exacerbates housing
insecurity. FEMA creates unnecessary and often insurmountable barriers
to accessing its programs, leaving many low-income survivors at
increased risk of displacement, eviction, and, in worst cases,
homelessness. ``Fixing America's Broken Disaster Housing Recovery
System Part One: Barriers to a Complete and Equitable Recovery'' \7\
identifies how our country's disaster housing recovery framework
exacerbates and reinforces racial, income, and accessibility inequities
at each stage of response and recovery. This report is part of a two-
part series released by NLIHC and the Fair Share Housing Center of New
Jersey, with critical input from members of the NLIHC-led Disaster
Housing Recovery Coalition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ National Low Income Housing Coalition & the Fair Share Housing
Center of New Jersey. (2019). Fixing America's Broken Disaster Housing
Recovery System Part One: Barriers to a Complete and Equitable
Recovery. Available at: https://nlihc.org/sites/default/files/Fixing-
Americas-Broken-Disaster-Housing-Recovery-System_P1.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
After Hurricane Maria, FEMA denied nearly two-thirds \8\ of the
nearly 1.2 million applications filed in Puerto Rico for individual
assistance--twice the denial rate in Texas after Hurricane Harvey.\9\
At least 77,000 Puerto Rican households were denied assistance due to
title documentation issues. These same issues occurred after Hurricane
Katrina, Hurricane Michael,\10\ and the California wildfires.\11\ While
advocates worked with FEMA to create a new tool--a sworn statement--to
help survivors overcome title documentation barriers, FEMA has refused
to notify survivors affected by the issue nor has it made the resource
available on its website, at local Disaster Recovery Centers, or on
social media. FEMA staff have now indicated that rather than formally
adopting a sworn statement, the agency may instead simply refuse to
create such documents after future disasters, doubling down on a
clearly flawed and failed policy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Slate. (2018). FEMA has rejected 60 percent of assistance
requests in Puerto Rico. Why? Available at: https://slate.com/
technology/2018/06/hurricane-maria-aftermath-fema-rejects-60-percent-
of-assistance-requests.html
\9\ NPR. (2018). Unable to prove they own their homes, Puerto
Ricans denied FEMA help. Retrieved from https://www.npr.org/2018/03/20/
595240841/unable-to-prove-they-own-their-homes-puerto-ricans-denied-
fema-help
\10\ National Low Income Housing Coalition. (2019). Impact of
Hurricane Michael. Retrieved from https://nlihc.org/sites/default/
files/Hurricane-Impact-Michael.pdf
\11\ National Low Income Housing Coalition. (2019). Impact of the
2018 California Wildfires. Retrieved from https://nlihc.org/sites/
default/files/Califonia-Wildfire-2018.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
After past disasters, FEMA's failure to provide basic
transparency--ranging from damage assessments, determination of unmet
needs, program design and implementation, grantee and subgrantee
performance, and how federal dollars are spent--has hindered efforts to
effectively target and distribute aid to those most in need. FEMA has
consistently refused to clarify or make public important information
about its aid application process. This makes it difficult, if not
impossible, to determine who is eligible to receive assistance and why
assistance is denied. Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests to
FEMA often go months or years without being answered. NLIHC filed a
FOIA request in December 2018 requesting basic materials, including
FEMA's application for assistance, procedure manuals for determining
eligibility, and data sharing agreements with HUD and other federal
agencies. To date, FEMA has not provided these materials. In other
cases, FEMA refuses to provide basic information, claiming grounds of
privilege. In recent years, some progress has been made with the
release of data after major disasters through FEMA's OpenFEMA portal.
These changes, while a welcome development, are not enough and may not
be continued.
FEMA's leadership, unfortunately, has ignored the research
consortium's requests to allow deeper access to IA data for research
purposes, such as evaluating equity in FEMA's response to disasters.
FEMA's publicly available data simply identifies applicants by their
ZIP code. There is little ability for community groups, policy and
research organizations like NLIHC, and academic institutions to obtain
detailed data that would allow them to examine trends in specific
neighborhoods, such as identifying neighborhood disparities when it
comes to FEMA's response.
The Privacy Act requires federal agencies to protect the privacy of
individuals by ensuring the confidentiality of an individuals'
information. In our opinion, FEMA routinely hides behind this Act.
Other Federal agencies manage to share personally identifying
information (PII), like an applicant's address, with researchers and
organizations capable of managing and protecting such confidential
information. HUD, for example, requires those who wish access to PII
data to complete a Data License application that is reviewed by
headquarters. HUD's requirements are clear, unambiguous, and known by
anyone who wishes to apply. FEMA's process of PII-data sharing, in
contrast, appears to be arbitrary with little to no transparency. We
have encouraged FEMA to look to how other federal agencies, including
the Department of Homeland Security and HUD, have operationalized data
sharing for research purposes with entities capable of protecting this
data.
Basic, essential information about federal disaster response and
recovery efforts must be made publicly available in a timely manner.
Application and assistance outcomes should be tracked over the long-
term to enhance data collection and analysis capabilities for disaster
researchers and policymakers. Program enrollment data, de-enrollment
data, and other metrics showing the successes and failures of a
disaster recovery program should also be collected. This enhanced data
can be used to create best practices to be incorporated into future
disaster planning and response efforts.
Question 5. While FEMA has been denying an ability to provide
temporary sheltering for people in disaster areas who were experiencing
homelessness pre-disaster, we have seen instances during COVID response
where the Agency deemed such assistance--in the form of temporary and
non-congregate sheltering--to be an emergency protective measure and
thus reimbursable.
Now that we're more than four months into these declared events,
has this allowance from FEMA led to a significant demand for
reimbursement from the Disaster Relief Fund from organizations focused
on housing and sheltering disaster survivors or other organizations
focused on services for those experiencing homelessness?
Answer. People experiencing homelessness are among those
individuals who have been hardest hit by the pandemic, suffering from
high rates of severe illness and death from coronavirus. People who are
homeless and contract coronavirus are twice as likely to be
hospitalized, two to four times as likely to require critical care, and
two to three times as likely to die than others in the general public.
The only way to reduce this risk is to move these individuals to safer
non-congregate sheltering. While FEMA has worked with states and
localities under its Public Assistance (PA) program, a very limited
number of people experiencing homelessness have been able to move into
temporary motels for self-quarantine and self-isolation. States, local
governments, and homeless service providers report high barriers to
using FEMA funds to effectively and efficiently moving people
experiencing homelessness into hotels.
Housing and homeless shelter and service providers working directly
with impacted populations often lack the critical information needed
from FEMA to plan and interface with the PA program. FEMA failed to
release clear guidance regarding program rules, including rules related
to reimbursement eligibility and the use of matching funds. This lack
of guidance and distrust of FEMA's reimbursement process led to delays
in housing people experiencing homelessness in hotels. FEMA's rigid and
narrow interpretations of eligibility unnecessarily complicate the
assistance process and, in many instances, prevent people experiencing
homelessness from accessing assistance altogether.\12\ As authorized by
the Stafford Act, FEMA can administer a wider suite of disaster
assistance programs designed to be deployed rapidly to address the
broad range of challenges faced by individuals during and after a
disaster, including housing instability, financial stress, and the need
for legal services. Rather than activate existing programs to serve
people experiencing homelessness amid the public health crisis, FEMA
placed the responsibility of quickly designing and establishing new
programs on overburdened state and local governments. As a result,
state and local governments have reported significant challenges
negotiating leases, operating hotel programs, and overcoming resistance
to the programs from local officials and community members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ Karlis, N. (2020). How bureaucracy kept the Bay Area from
housing the homeless. Retrieved from https://www.salon.com/2020/06/21/
how-bureaucracy-kept-the-bay-area-from-housing-the-houseless/
Question 6. This subcommittee has long been focused on mitigation--
the effort to reduce loss of life and property by lessening the impact
of disasters and with DRRA, we ensured that additional Federal dollars
are available for pre-disaster mitigation funding.
How do you believe pre-disaster mitigation funds could be more
equitably distributed given the increase in large-scale disasters
negatively impacting the most vulnerable communities? Do you think
there are steps FEMA should take to direct or re-direct mitigation
grant programs to communities most in need to ensure a more equitable
future?
Answer. Mitigation efforts must be directed to areas directly
impacted by disasters before focusing on broader mitigation needs.
Above all else, mitigation goals should focus on bringing marginalized
and low-income communities up to a basic standard of infrastructure and
protection from future disasters, rather than on increasing local
revenue. One way to ensure mitigation projects are equitably
distributed is to tie funding for mitigation to the level of community
need. This would require that social vulnerability, housing, and other
needs are addressed during mitigation planning and implementation.\13\
When environmental reviews are required, for example, these reviews
should include an assessment of the social vulnerability of the
community.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See Flanagan et al., A Social Vulnerability Index for Disaster
Management, 8 Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management 1,
Article 3 (2011). Available at: https://bit.ly/3ePdXvh
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mitigation must become a standard part of evaluating federal funds
for other housing projects, across all federal agencies. For example,
at the renewal of HUD funding such as project-based rental assistance,
there should be a resident-informed evaluation of climate risk and
serious consideration of alternatives to continuing to fund
developments in harm's way. In addition, the creation and dissemination
of mitigation best practices should be a top priority for policymakers
and mitigation planners.
Question 7. We are currently experiencing prolonged response to
COVID-19, which can greatly impact our eventual recovery.
How do you envision an equitable recovery from the devastating
impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic? How can we improve recovery planning
to counteract the disproportionate effects? What do you consider a
favorable timeline for equitable recovery and how would you approach
such a timeline?
Answer. Beyond revealing the inequities of the national disaster
response and recovery system, the COVID-19 pandemic has exposed
structural failures that perpetuate discrimination rooted in both
racism and economic class. Black and Native people--who, even before
the pandemic, faced higher rates of homelessness and housing
instability--are most at risk of severe illness and death due to the
coronavirus, and Black and Latino people are disproportionately harmed
by the resulting economic impacts. Without significant federal action,
our nation will see a rise in evictions and homelessness, once again,
impacting Black and brown people the most. Congress must act to prevent
this tragic, costly, and entirely preventable outcome by passing a
relief package that includes the essential resources and protections
for America's lowest-income renters and people experiencing
homelessness included in the ``HEROES Act.'' Congress should also pass
the long-term solutions needed to address the underlying causes of
homelessness and housing instability that increase the risk of future
outbreaks: the severe shortage of affordable and accessible housing for
people with the lowest incomes.
The National Low Income Housing Coalition, the National Alliance to
End Homelessness, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, and
National Health Care for the Homeless Council have developed the
Framework for an Equitable COVID-19 Homelessness Response,\14\ which
provides guidance for how homelessness systems can leverage the CARES
Act and approval of other funding sources, such as FEMA PA, to
simultaneously conduct emergency protective measures and plan for
recovery-oriented uses of these funds. All components of the framework,
which will be continuously updated, include a racial justice and equity
lens.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ ``The Framework for an Equitable COVID-19 Homelessness
Response.'' Available at: https://endhomelessness.org/a-framework-for-
covid-19-homelessness-response-responding-to-the-intersecting-crises-
of-homelessness-and-covid-19/
Question 8. What immediate steps could FEMA and its Federal
partners involved in disaster relief take to promote equity and improve
disaster impacts for vulnerable populations? And, similarly, what steps
do you believe Congress must take?
Answer. A reformed disaster housing recovery system that is
centered on the needs of the lowest-income and most marginalized
survivors and their communities must ensure opportunities for resident
and public engagement, systemic transparency, full accountability and
due process, robust equity and civil rights enforcement, fair
mitigation practices, and a focus on increased local capacity and
benefit. The federal government must ensure that equity is a central
and explicit goal of federal disaster housing response and recovery
efforts.
FEMA should take immediate actions to ensure survivors with the
greatest needs have access to safe, decent homes while they get back on
their feet by activating the Disaster Housing Assistance Program
(DHAP), addressing financial barriers that prevent low-income survivors
from accessing FEMA's Transitional Sheltering Assistance (TSA) hotel
program, and ensuring that people experiencing homelessness prior to a
disaster are eligible for the same emergency shelter and housing
assistance available to impacted renters.
Congress can take several actions to improve disaster impacts for
marginalized communities. Congress should permanently authorize the
Disaster Housing Assistance Program and automatically activate it after
every major disaster to provide longer-term housing assistance and
wrap-around services to low-income survivors. Congress should also
enact the ``Housing Survivors of Major Disasters Act,'' (H.R. 2914),
introduced by Representative Adriano Espaillat (D-NY), which contains
critically needed reforms to ensure that the lowest-income and most
marginalized survivors can access essential housing assistance.
Congress should require that FEMA provide basic, essential
information about federal disaster response and recovery efforts,
including damage assessments, program design and implementation, how
federal dollars are spent, the aid application process, and other
important information.
Congress should require FEMA to prioritize categorical eligibility,
simplify the application and appeals process, and track and report on
outcomes to ensure recovery aid reaches those in need.
Congress should also require FEMA, HUD, and other federal agencies
involved in disaster recovery efforts to work together and create a
single, universal application for aid.
Finally, Congress should enact clarifying legislation to ensure
that people experiencing homelessness prior to the disaster have access
to the same emergency shelter and disaster relief assistance as other
survivors, including rental assistance.
Questions from Hon. Henry C. ``Hank'' Johnson, Jr., to Diane Yentel,
President and Chief Executive Officer, National Low Income Housing
Coalition
Question 1. Your testimony illuminates many of the barriers that
FEMA creates to equitable housing recovery, creating further evidence
that our systems continue to fail the most vulnerable among us.
Are you aware of instances where FEMA's inadequate housing response
has put people experiencing homelessness at greater risk of exposure to
COVID-19? What has FEMA's coordination looked like at the state level
to meet housing needs during the pandemic?
Answer. While FEMA has worked with states and localities under its
PA program, a very limited number of people experiencing homelessness
have been able to move into temporary motels for self-quarantine and
self-isolation. States, local governments, and homeless service
providers report high barriers to effectively and efficiently using
FEMA resources to address the health and housing needs of people
experiencing homelessness. These barriers include the agency's narrow
eligibility criteria, lack of clear guidance and systemic transparency,
refusal to activate its full range of programs, and failure to address
permanent housing needs.
Lack of clear guidance from FEMA regarding program rules, including
reimbursement eligibility and the use of matching funds, has
contributed to delays in moving people experiencing homelessness to
non-congregate settings. FEMA has neglected to authorize its full range
of assistance programs to address the pandemic, placing the
responsibility of quickly designing and establishing non-congregate
shelter programs on overburdened state and local governments. As a
result, state and local governments have reported significant
challenges with hotel negotiations, resistance from local officials and
community members, and capacity issues. FEMA has no measures in place
to ensure that individuals temporarily residing in hotels and motels
are transitioned into permanent housing before PA funding ends. As a
result, there is widespread concern that participants will be pushed
back into homelessness when FEMA ends its program--a crisis that is
preventable and predictable.
Question 2. Would you say that FEMA's neglect and mishandling of
housing relief and recovery worsens our nation's history of racist and
discriminatory housing practices? What would the implementation of
anti-racist and anti-class discriminatory housing practices from FEMA
look like?
Answer. Communities of color are disproportionately harmed by our
current disaster housing recovery framework. After disasters, people of
color, people with disabilities, and immigrants face increased
displacement from the dual threats of disinvestment and speculation,
which exacerbate the disparities created by segregation and
inequality.\15\ Many long-term recovery and mitigation efforts continue
a decades-long legacy of underinvesting in communities of color,
retrenching segregation and ensuring that these neighborhoods lack the
basic infrastructure to protect residents from disasters.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ Gretchen Frazee, ``How Natural Disasters Can Increase
Inequality,'' PBS, April 2019. Available at: https://to.pbs.org/3fwnisu
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is critical for disaster recovery planning to go hand in hand
with fair housing. Disaster recovery efforts, which often include
significant funding, represent a unique opportunity to rebuild in a way
that addresses rather than entrenches these disparities. All actions
must be explicitly anti-racist: analyzed to determine if they
exacerbate, leave in place, or ameliorate existing or historic patterns
of segregation and discrimination in housing and infrastructure and
remedied accordingly. Given the widespread nature of segregation and
inequality in the U.S., it is not enough to state the equitable intent
of a disaster recovery program. Explicit requirements for desegregation
and adherence to civil rights law must be included in both contractor
regulations and agreements with states, local governments, and federal
agencies. Making equity explicit strengthens the ability of protected
classes to seek legal redress at times when recovery is less than
equitable. Federal law should require compliance.
Question from Hon. John Garamendi to Diane Yentel, President and Chief
Executive Officer, National Low Income Housing Coalition
Question 1. Ms. Yentel, prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, my home
state of California was suffering from a severe lack of affordable
housing. As millions of Californians lose their livelihoods due to this
pandemic and face a systemic housing shortage, Congress must make
forward-looking investments in federal programs like the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development's ``HOME Investment
Partnerships Program,'' which supports a variety of affordable housing
activities including: rehabilitation of owner-occupied housing;
assistance to home buyers; acquisition, rehabilitation, or construction
of rental housing; and tenant-based rental assistance.
In June, I introduced the ``HOME Investment Partnerships
Reauthorization Act'' (H.R. 7312) to increase the authorized funding
level for the program from $2.2 billion to $6.1 billion annually. Will
the National Low Income Housing Coalition consider endorsing my bill?
Answer. NLIHC supports increased investments in affordable housing
through the national Housing Trust Fund, housing vouchers, and other
programs, including the HOME Investment Partnerships program. Before we
reauthorize HOME to significantly increase authorized funding, however,
we should look at ways to further improve the program so that resources
can better serve the lowest-income and most marginalized people and
communities. Given our nation's affordable housing crisis, which does
disproportionate harm to Black, Native, and Latino renters, we should
use any reauthorization bill to examine ways federal programs can
advance racial equity. We look forward to working with you to
strengthen your bill as it moves through Congress.
[all]