[House Hearing, 118 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

DISASTER READINESS: EXAMINING THE PRO-
PRIETY OF THE EXPANDED USE OF FEMA
RESOURCES

=======================================================================

(118-49)

HEARING

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, PUBLIC BUILDINGS, AND
EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON
TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

__________

MARCH 12, 2024

__________

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
56-540 PDF WASHINGTON : 2024

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE

Sam Graves, Missouri, Chairman
Rick Larsen, Washington, Ranking
Member

Eleanor Holmes Norton, Eric A. ``Rick'' Crawford,
District of Columbia Arkansas
Grace F. Napolitano, California Daniel Webster, Florida
Steve Cohen, Tennessee Thomas Massie, Kentucky
John Garamendi, California Scott Perry, Pennsylvania
Henry C. ``Hank'' Johnson, Jr., Georgiaian Babin, Texas
Andre Carson, Indiana Garret Graves, Louisiana
Dina Titus, Nevada David Rouzer, North Carolina
Jared Huffman, California Mike Bost, Illinois
Julia Brownley, California Doug LaMalfa, California
Frederica S. Wilson, Florida Bruce Westerman, Arkansas
Donald M. Payne, Jr., New Jersey Brian J. Mast, Florida
Mark DeSaulnier, California Jenniffer Gonzalez-Colon,
Salud O. Carbajal, California Puerto Rico
Greg Stanton, Arizona, Pete Stauber, Minnesota
Vice Ranking Member Tim Burchett, Tennessee
Colin Z. Allred, Texas Dusty Johnson, South Dakota
Sharice Davids, Kansas Jefferson Van Drew, New Jersey,
Jesus G. ``Chuy'' Garcia, Illinois Vice Chairman
Chris Pappas, New Hampshire Troy E. Nehls, Texas
Seth Moulton, Massachusetts Tracey Mann, Kansas
Jake Auchincloss, Massachusetts Burgess Owens, Utah
Marilyn Strickland, Washington Rudy Yakym III, Indiana
Troy A. Carter, Louisiana Lori Chavez-DeRemer, Oregon
Patrick Ryan, New York Thomas H. Kean, Jr., New Jersey
Mary Sattler Peltola, Alaska Anthony D'Esposito, New York
Robert Menendez, New Jersey Eric Burlison, Missouri
Val T. Hoyle, Oregon John James, Michigan
Emilia Strong Sykes, Ohio Derrick Van Orden, Wisconsin
Hillary J. Scholten, Michigan Brandon Williams, New York
Valerie P. Foushee, North Carolina Marcus J. Molinaro, New York
Mike Collins, Georgia
Mike Ezell, Mississippi
John S. Duarte, California
Aaron Bean, Florida
Celeste Maloy, Utah
Vacancy
------ 7

Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings, and
Emergency Management

Scott Perry, Pennsylvania,
Chairman
Dina Titus, Nevada, Ranking Member
Eleanor Holmes Norton, Garret Graves, Louisiana
District of Columbia Jenniffer Gonzalez-Colon,
Sharice Davids, Kansas, Puerto Rico
Vice Ranking Member Lori Chavez-DeRemer, Oregon,
Troy A. Carter, Louisiana Vice Chairman
Grace F. Napolitano, California Anthony D'Esposito, New York
John Garamendi, California Derrick Van Orden, Wisconsin
Jared Huffman, California Mike Ezell, Mississippi
Rick Larsen, Washington (Ex Officio) Celeste Maloy, Utah
Sam Graves, Missouri (Ex Officio)

CONTENTS

Page

Summary of Subject Matter........................................ v

STATEMENTS OF MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE

Hon. Scott Perry, a Representative in Congress from the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and Chairman, Subcommittee on
Economic Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency
Management, opening statement.................................. 1
Prepared statement........................................... 3
Hon. Sharice Davids, a Representative in Congress from the State
of Kansas, and Vice Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Economic
Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management,
opening statement.............................................. 4
Prepared statement........................................... 5
Hon. Rick Larsen, a Representative in Congress from the State of
Washington, and Ranking Member, Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure, opening statement.............................. 6
Prepared statement........................................... 7

WITNESSES

Hon. Deanne Criswell, Administrator, Federal Emergency Management
Agency, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, oral statement... 9
Prepared statement........................................... 11
Kristen D. Bernard, Deputy Inspector General for Audits, Office
of Inspector General, U.S. Department of Homeland Security,
oral statement................................................. 13
Prepared statement........................................... 15
Chris Currie, Director, Homeland Security and Justice Team, U.S.
Government Accountability Office, oral statement............... 19
Prepared statement........................................... 21

SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD

Letter to Members of Arizona's Congressional Delegation from the
Arizona Border Counties Coalition and Attached Pima County, AZ,
Southwest Border Executive Situational Report, Submitted for
the Record by Hon. Greg Stanton................................ 40

APPENDIX

Questions to Hon. Deanne Criswell, Administrator, Federal
Emergency Management Agency, U.S. Department of Homeland
Security, from:
Hon. Lori Chavez-DeRemer \\.......................... 59
Hon. Rick Larsen............................................. 60
Hon. Mike Ezell.............................................. 62
Question to Kristen D. Bernard, Deputy Inspector General for
Audits, Office of Inspector General, U.S. Department of
Homeland Security, from Hon. Rick Larsen....................... 68

----------
\\ Hon. Celeste Maloy of Utah submitted the same question to
Ms. Criswell as Hon. Lori Chavez-DeRemer. To avoid duplication, it is
not included here.

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

March 5, 2024

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 ``Disaster Readiness:
Examining the Propriety of the Expanded Use of FEMA Resources''
_______________________________________________________________________

I. PURPOSE

The Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings,
and Emergency Management of the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure will meet on Tuesday, March 12, 2024, at 10:00
a.m. ET in 2167 of the Rayburn House Office Building to receive
testimony at a hearing entitled, ``Disaster Readiness:
Examining the Propriety of the Expanded Use of FEMA
Resources.'' The hearing will examine if the expanded use of
resources is impacting the Federal Emergency Management
Agency's (FEMA's) ability to carry out its mission related to
disaster readiness. At the hearing, Members will receive
testimony from the FEMA Administrator, the Department of
Homeland Security (DHS) Deputy Inspector General for Audits,
and the Government Accountability Office (GAO).

II. BACKGROUND

FEMA'S MISSION

FEMA is the Federal Government's lead agency for preparing
for, mitigating against, responding to, and recovering from
disasters and emergencies related to all hazards--whether
natural or man-made.\1\ FEMA's primary authority in carrying
out these functions stems from the Robert T. Stafford Disaster
Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (Stafford Act) (P.L. 100-
707, as amended).\2\ The Stafford Act authorizes three types of
declarations: (1) major disaster declarations; (2) emergency
declarations; and (3) fire management grant (FMAG)
declarations.\3\ The Stafford Act authorizes the President to
approve states' requests for a Federal disaster declaration
when ``the situation is of such severity and magnitude that
effective response is beyond the capabilities of the state and
affected local governments.'' \4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ DHS, FEMA, (Feb. 3, 2023), available at https://www.dhs.gov/
employee-resources/federal-emergency-management-agency-fema.
\2\ Stafford Act, Pub. L. No. 100-707.
\3\ Id.
\4\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

THE CURRENT STATE OF DISASTERS

In 2023, FEMA provided assistance for 84 presidentially
declared emergencies and major disasters which included: the
Maui wildfire, Hurricane Lee, Typhoon Mawar, and multiple
tornados that impacted many southern and central states.\5\
While 2020 holds the all-time record for presidentially
declared emergencies and major disasters due to declarations
related to COVID-19, at 230, last year's disasters accounted
for an estimated $92.9 billion in damages.\6\ Between 2014 and
2021, FEMA's National Incident Management Assistance Team
(IMAT) was deployed twelve times for non-Stafford Act
disasters, events that have not been granted a fire management
assistance grant, emergency declaration or major disaster
declaration, but the President or DHS Secretary has directed
FEMA to assist with response efforts. Five of those deployments
occurred in 2021.\7\ In 2022 and 2023, FEMA was deployed eleven
times for non-Stafford Act disasters.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ FEMA, Declared Disasters, available at https://www.fema.gov/
disaster/declarations.
\6\ Adam B. Smith, 2023: A Historic Year of U.S. Billion-Dollar
Weather and Climate Disasters, NOAA, (Jan. 8, 2024), available at
https://www.climate.gov/news-features/blogs/beyond-data/2023-historic-
year-us-billion-dollar-weather-and-climate-disasters.
\7\ FEMA, FY 2023 Congressional Justification, Federal Buildings
Fund (2022), available at https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/2022-
03/Federal%20Emergency%20Management
%20Agency_Remediated.pdf.
\8\ Email from FEMA staff to Staff, H. Comm. on Transp. &
Infrastructure (Feb. 2, 2024, 10:38 am EST) (on file with Comm.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

THE FEMA WORKFORCE

Amidst the increasing demands placed on FEMA to respond to
non-Stafford Act disasters, FEMA is also currently facing a
workforce shortage. In March 2023, GAO published a report
entitled, FEMA Disaster Workforce: Actions Needed to Improve
Hiring Data and Address Staffing Gaps, which analyzed FEMA's
disaster workforce in Fiscal Years (FYs) 2019 through 2022.\9\
The report found that during that timeframe, FEMA consistently
had a staffing gap for its disaster workforce. In FY 2022,
FEMA's staffing target for disaster employees was 17,670. At
the time of GAO's report, FEMA had 11,400 disaster employees,
showing a staffing gap of 35 percent.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ GAO, GAO-23-105663, FEMA Disaster Workforce: Actions Needed To
Improve Hiring Data and Address Staffing Gaps (May 2023), available at
https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-23-105663.pdf.
\10\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In response to GAO's report, FEMA officials, ``attributed
recent staffing gaps to multiple factors. These included
additional responsibilities due to COVID-19 and managing the
rising disaster activity during the year, which increased
burnout and employee attrition.'' \11\ In conclusion, the
report found that while FEMA had taken steps to address the
staffing gap, GAO found it difficult to determine if those
efforts had been successful.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ Id.
\12\ Id.
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

NON-STAFFORD ACT NATIONAL INCIDENT MANAGEMENT ASSISTANCE TEAM (IMAT)

The President's Budget Request for FY 2023 highlights the
increasing pressure being put on FEMA to respond to non-
Stafford Act disasters. The request included $4.3 million for
FEMA to establish a non-Stafford Act National Incident
Management Assistance Team (IMAT).\13\ The budget justification
asserted this new National IMAT would, ``allow the Department
and FEMA to meet the increasing need for non-Stafford Act
incident management support. It will also reduce the
operational risk to FEMA's ability to respond to Stafford Act
incidents.'' \14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ FEMA, FY 2023 Congressional Justification, Federal Buildings
Fund, (2022), available at https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/
2022-03/Federal%20Emergency%20Management
%20Agency_Remediated.pdf.
\14\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FEMA utilized funding from the FY 2023 Appropriations for
the new National IMAT.\15\ The job postings for the National
IMAT highlights the Flint Water Crisis, Operation Vaccinate Our
Workforce, Unaccompanied Children at the Southwest Border, and
Operation Allies Welcome as examples of past events that new
National IMAT employees would be expected to respond to.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ Pub. L. No. 117-328.
\16\ FEMA, National Incident Management Assistance Team is Now
Hiring, (Oct. 27, 2022), available at https://www.fema.gov/fact-sheet/
national-incident-management-assistance-team-now-hiring.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. THE EXPANDED ROLE OF FEMA

COVID-19 RESPONSE

Beginning on January 31, 2020, a Nationwide public health
emergency was declared in the United States for a novel
coronavirus, COVID-19.\17\ On March 13, 2020, the President
declared a Nationwide emergency under the Stafford Act. Six
days later, on March 19, 2020, FEMA was appointed to lead the
Federal response to COVID-19.\18\ For the first time in
history, 57 major disaster declarations were issued for all
states, the District of Columbia, and United States
territories.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ FEMA, Pandemic Response to Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-
19): Initial Assessment Report (2021), available at https://
www.fema.gov/sites/default/files/documents/fema_covid-19-initial-
assessment-report_2021.pdf.
\18\ Id.
\19\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This also represented the first time in history that FEMA
led the Federal Government's response to a health crisis.\20\
Once FEMA assumed the role as lead Federal agency, operational
task forces previously under the Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS) were transferred to FEMA.\21\ Those task forces
included: Community Based Testing; Data Management; Laboratory
Diagnostics; Healthcare System Resilience; Medical
Countermeasures; Supply Chain Stabilization; Community
Mitigation Measures; and Continuity of Operations.\22\
Additionally, the FEMA Administrator helped oversee the
coordinated Federal response by serving on the White House
Coronavirus Task Force.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ Erica A. Lee, Cong. Rsch. Serv., R47048, FEMA's Role in the
COVID-19 Federal Pandemic Response, (Feb. 10, 2022), available at
https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R47048.
\21\ FEMA, Pandemic Response to Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-
19): Initial Assessment Report (2021), available at https://
www.fema.gov/sites/default/files/documents/fema_covid-19-initial-
assessment-report_2021.pdf.
\22\ Id.
\23\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FEMA's role in the COVID-19 pandemic include the following
programs:
LPublic Assistance (PA)--
+ LFEMA has obligated $75 billion in public assistance as
it relates to COVID-19.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ Email from FEMA staff to Staff, H. Comm. on Transp. and
Infrastructure (Feb. 2, 2024, 3:13 pm EST) (on file with Comm.).

LIndividual Assistance (IA)--
+ LFEMA has obligated $44.3 billion in individual
assistance as it relates to COVID-19.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ Id.

LLost Wages Assistance (LWA)--
+ LFEMA has provided $36.5 billion to assist individuals
who were unemployed because of COVID-19.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ Id.

LCOVID-19 Funeral Assistance--
+ LFEMA has provided more than $3.1 billion to assist
individuals pay for funerals and other funeral related
costs.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ Id.

LCommunity Vaccination Centers (CVC)--
+ LFEMA partnered with state, local, tribal, and
territorial partners with established CVC across the
country.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ FEMA, Federally Supported Community Vaccination Centers, (May
15, 2024), available at https://www.fema.gov/disaster/historic/
coronavirus/vaccine-support/vaccine-center.

On May 11, 2023, FEMA formally ended the COVID-19 National
emergency declaration and the incident period for all the major
disaster declarations for state, tribal, and territorial
governments.\29\ However, the application period for COVID-19
funeral assistance will remain open until September 30,
2025.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ FEMA, Coronavirus (COVID-19) Response, (Jan. 26, 2024),
available at https://www.fema.gov/disaster/historic/coronavirus.
\30\ FEMA, COVID-19 Funeral Assistance (Jan. 18, 2024), available
at https://www.fema.gov/disaster/historic/coronavirus/economic/funeral-
assistance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

THE SOUTHERN BORDER

In recent years, FEMA has been repeatedly called upon to
help assist with the crisis at the Southern Border,
specifically on the issue of unaccompanied minors. In response
to the increased number of unaccompanied minors in 2014, the
FEMA Administrator was directed to serve as the Federal
Coordinating Official for the Unified Coordination Group, which
provided the children with housing, care, medical treatment,
and transportation.\31\ In 2019, DHS informed Congress of plans
to reprogram appropriations in the Disaster Relief Fund (DRF)
base account to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).\32\
Most recently, from March 13, 2021, through June 11, 2021, FEMA
coordinated with HHS to provide shelter, beds, and other
supplies to unaccompanied minors.\33\ As reported by DHS OIG,
HHS and FEMA, the Agency provided shelter to close to 27,000
unaccompanied minors during that time period.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ William A. Kandel, Cong. Rsch. Serv., R43599, Unaccompanied
Alien Children: An Overview, (Sept. 1, 2022), available at https://
crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R43599.
\32\ DHS, DHS FY 2019 Southwest Border Emergency Transfer and
Reprogramming Notification, (July 26, 2019), available at https://
www.documentcloud.org/documents/6354580-DHS-FY-2019-Southwest-Border-
Emergency-Transfer.html.
\33\ DHS OIG, OIG-22-35, FEMA Successfully Assisted HHS in
Providing Shelter and Supplies to Unaccompanied Children From the
Southwest Border (Mar. 2022), available at https://www.oig.dhs.gov/
sites/default/files/assets/2022-04/OIG-22-35-Mar22.pdf.
\34\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FEMA also provides assistance at the Southwest Border
through the Emergency Food and Shelter Program--Humanitarian
Relief (EFSP-H). This is not to be confused with EFSP funding,
which Congress established in 1983 to provide individuals or
families experiencing homelessness or hunger.\35\ Starting in
2019, Congress first authorized and appropriated funding for
EFSP-H which provides, ``food, shelter, and services to
individuals and families encountered by the U.S. Department of
Homeland Security who entered through the Southwestern Border
and who are now awaiting their immigration court proceedings.''
\36\ Between 2019 and 2023, EFSP-H has received $715
million.\37\ In 2023, Congress appropriated $800 million to
establish and fund a new Shelter and Services Program (SSP) to
replace EFSP-H.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\ Elizabeth M. Webster, Cong. Rsch. Serv., IF12026, FEMA's
Emergency Food and Shelter Program (EFSP), (Aug. 31, 2023), available
at https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF12026.
\36\ FEMA, Emergency Food and Shelter Program--Humanitarian Awards,
(July 17, 2023), available at https://www.fema.gov/grants/emergency-
food-and-shelter-program/humanitarian-awards.
\37\ Elizabeth M. Webster & Audrey Singer, Cong. Rsch. Serv.,
R47681, FEMA Assistance for Migrants Through the Emergency Food and
Shelter Program-Humanitarian (EFSP-H) and Shelter and Services Program
(SSP), (Aug. 31, 2023), available at https://www.crs.gov/Reports/
R47681?source=search#fn40.
\38\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

OPERATION ALLIES WELCOME

Following the United States' withdrawal from Afghanistan,
DHS was directed by the President to serve as the agency in
charge of coordinating the resettlement of Afghan refugees.\39\
On August 29, 2021, the Administrator for FEMA Region 9, Robert
J. Fenton, Jr., was appointed as the Senior Response Official
and tasked with coordinating the interagency resettlement
efforts.\40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\39\ Press Release, DHS, DHS to Serve as Lead Federal Agency
Coordinating Efforts to Resettle Vulnerable Afghans, (Aug. 29, 2021),
available at https://www.dhs.gov/news/2021/08/29/dhs-serve-lead-
federal-agency-coordinating-efforts-resettle-vulnerable-afghans.
\40\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. RELEVANT GAO AND DHS OIG REPORTS

CORONAVIRUS (COVID-19)

OIG-22-72: A Review of FEMA Funding for Coronavirus Disease
2019 (COVID-19) Response and Relief

This report reviewed COVID-19 pandemic relief funds
provided to communities in six different geographic locations:
Springfield, MA; Coeur D'Alene, ID; Sheridan County, NE; Marion
County, GA; White Earth Nation in Minnesota; and Jicarilla
Apache Nation in New Mexico. At the time of the review, FEMA
had provided $49.3 million in COVID-19 funding to these
communities. The review found that FEMA was inconsistent in its
data collection, especially at the local level.\41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\41\ DHS OIG, OIG-22-72, A Review of FEMA Funding for Coronavirus
Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Response and Relief (Sept. 2022), available at
https://www.oig.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/assets/2022-09/OIG-22-72-
Sep22.pdf.

OIG-22-69: FEMA Did Not Implement Controls to Prevent More than
$3.7 Billion in Improper Payments from the Lost Wages
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assistance Program

This audit examined the implementation of FEMA's LWA
program. FEMA provided the LWA funding to state workforce
agencies (SWA) who then administered the funds through existing
unemployment insurance (UI) programs. The audit found that
because FEMA failed to implement controls over the payments
that more than $3.7 billion in improper payments had been made
through the LWA program. The audit also highlighted the fact
that UI programs are susceptible to fraud and overpayments, a
concern that the Department of Labor had repeatedly raised to
FEMA.\42\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\42\ DHS OIG, OIG-22-69, FEMA Did Not Implement Controls To Prevent
More Than $3.7 Billion in Improper Payments From the Lost Wages
Assistance Program (Sept. 2022), available at https://www.oig.dhs.gov/
sites/default/files/assets/2022-09/OIG-22-69-Sep22.pdf.

OIG-23-42: Ineffective Controls Over COVID-19 Funeral
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assistance Leave the Program Susceptible to Waste and Abuse

This audit examined FEMA's management over the COVID-19
Funeral Assistance, which is the largest funeral assistance
program ever administered by FEMA. The audit found that under
this program, FEMA expanded the universe of reimbursable
expenses beyond what was previously established in FEMA's
Individual Assistance Program and Policy Guide. As a result,
the OIG found from April 12, 2021, through September 21, 2021,
FEMA made an estimated $24.4 million in COVID-19 Funeral
Assistance payments that FEMA's regular program guidance would
have considered ineligible for assistance.\43\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\43\ DHS OIG, OIG-23-42, Ineffective Controls Over COVID-19 Funeral
Assistance Leave the Program Susceptible to Waste and Abuse (Aug.
2023), available at https://www.oig.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/assets/
2023-08/OIG-23-42-Aug23.pdf.

GAO-22-105397: COVID-19: Current and Future Federal
Preparedness Requires Fixes to Improve Health Data and Address
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Improper Payments

This report broadly examined the Federal Government's
response to COVID-19. As it relates to FEMA's COVID-19 Funeral
Assistance, GAO found, ``several gaps in FEMA's internal
controls meant to prevent improper or potentially fraudulent
payments, such as cases in which these controls did not prevent
duplicate applications for funeral assistance or assistance
issued to ineligible recipients.'' \44\ At the time of the
report, GAO found that $4.8 million of $1.98 billion in COVID-
19 Funeral Assistance awarded to more than 296,000 approved
applications had been paid out to duplicate applications.\45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\44\ GAO, GAO-22-105397, COVID-19: Current and Future Federal
Preparedness Requires Fixes To Improve Health Data and Address Improper
Payments (April 2022), available at https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-22-
105397.pdf.
\45\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

THE SOUTHERN BORDER

OIG-23-20: FEMA Should Increase Oversight to Prevent Potential
Misuse of Humanitarian Relief Funds

This audit examined FEMA's EFSP-H that provides assistance
to individuals and families encountered by DHS at the Southwest
Border. The audit examined how 25 local recipient organizations
(LRO) utilized EFSP-H funds. The OIG found that the LRO's were
not always able to provide documentation for the services they
provided. OIG reviewed $12.9 million of the $80.6 million
allocated by the National board. As a result, the audit
questioned whether $7.4 million, or 58 percent, of the $12.9
million reviewed, complied with Federal law and regulations.
The OIG found that this lack of documentation resulted from
FEMA failing to have proper oversight over EFSP-H.\46\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\46\ DHS OIG, OIG-23-20, FEMA Should Increase Oversight To Prevent
Misuse of Humanitarian Relief Funds (Mar. 2023), available at https://
www.oig.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/assets/2023-03/OIG-23-20-Mar23.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

THE FEMA WORKFORCE

GAO-23-105663: FEMA Disaster Workforce: Actions needed to
Improve Hiring Data and Address Staffing Gaps

This report reviewed FEMA's hiring process and disaster
workforce staffing gaps. The report found that FEMA has
challenges with calculating and reporting consistent and
accurate timeframes for hiring to DHS. Additionally, the report
found FEMA has a staffing gap of approximately 6,200 staff
across different positions and that the efforts FEMA is taking
to fill this gap are not clearly effective.\47\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\47\ GAO, GAO-23-105663, FEMA Disaster Workforce: Actions Needed To
Improve Hiring Data and Address Staffing Gaps (May 2023), available at
https://www.gao.gov/assets/d23105663.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

DISASTER RECOVERY

GAO-23-104956: Disaster Recovery: Actions Needed to Improve the
Federal Approach

This report reviewed issues related to Federal response and
recovery to disasters beginning in 2018 through the analysis of
the statutes, policies, and experience of state and local
officials related to a sample of nine disasters. The report
found that the Federal approach to disaster recovery is
fragmented across 30 Federal entities, making coordination
between different aspects of recovery difficult and creating
difficulty for communities navigating the disaster assistance
process.\48\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\48\ GAO, GAO-23-104956, Disaster Recovery: Actions Needed To
Improve the Federal Approach (Nov. 2022), available at https://
www.gao.gov/assets/gao-23-104956.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. CONCLUSION

In recent years, there has been an expanded use of FEMA
resources to respond to unprecedented and complex disasters
such as the COVID-19 pandemic and non-Stafford Act events
beyond FEMA's traditional mission. As several GAO and DHS OIG
reports have shown, the scope of COVID-19 and speed at which
FEMA was expected to respond, resulted in a lack of oversight
and the misuse of taxpayer dollars. This increasing demand also
comes at a time when FEMA continues to struggle with staffing
shortages in its disaster workforce. FEMA officials have
acknowledged that staff burnout is a significant factor in
staffing shortages. This hearing will examine existing demand
for FEMA resources and what the role of FEMA should be in the
future.

VI. WITNESSES

LThe Honorable Deanne Criswell, Administrator,
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), United States
Department of Homeland Security
LMs. Kristen D. Bernard, Deputy Inspector General
for Audits, Office of Inspector General, United States
Department of Homeland Security
LMr. Chris Currie, Director, Homeland Security and
Justice, United States Government Accountability Office (GAO)

DISASTER READINESS: EXAMINING THE PROPRIETY OF THE EXPANDED USE OF FEMA
RESOURCES

----------

TUESDAY, MARCH 12, 2024

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 10:01 a.m., in
room 2167 Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Scott Perry
(Chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
Mr. Perry. Good morning, everybody. The Subcommittee on
Economic Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency
Management will come to order.
I ask unanimous consent that the chairman be authorized to
declare a 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.
As a reminder, if Members wish to insert a document into
the record, please also email it to DocumentsTI@mail.house.gov.
I now recognize myself for the purposes of an opening
statement for 5 minutes.

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. SCOTT PERRY OF PENNSYLVANIA,
CHAIRMAN, SUBCOMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, PUBLIC
BUILDINGS, AND EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT

Mr. Perry. I want to begin by thanking our witnesses, the
Honorable Deanne Criswell, the Administrator of the Federal
Emergency Management Agency; Ms. Kristen Bernard, the deputy
inspector general for audits for the Office of Inspector
General at the Department of Homeland Security; and Mr. Chris
Currie, the Director of Homeland Security and Justice for the
United States Government Accountability Office, for being here
today.
I'm glad that's on your card. You probably don't want to
say that every time you meet somebody.
Today's hearing will focus on examining the propriety of
the expanding use of FEMA resources and how it's impacting
FEMA's ability to carry out its core mission.
Fundamentally, FEMA's core mission is to help people
before, during, and after disasters. More specifically, States
lead the responses to disaster, and FEMA comes in at the
request of the State if the State's resources are overwhelmed,
or at least that's how it was supposed to work.
Increasingly, however, it seems that States are asking for
help in more and more incidents that States themselves should
be prepared to handle, like snowstorms in the Northeast.
So, we have an increasing reliance on the Federal
Government and then we add that FEMA is also being tasked to
manage nontraditional disasters like pandemics, and help with
issues completely unrelated to its mission, or so-called non-
Stafford Act disasters.
Between 2014 and 2020, FEMA was deployed seven times to
address non-Stafford Act disasters. In just the last 3 years,
that has jumped to 16 non-Stafford Act disasters. These
included the crisis at our Nation's southwest border, Operation
Allies Welcome, Operation Vaccinate Our Workforce, and the list
goes on.
There is such an increasing demand on the Agency that FEMA
created a new National Incident Management Assistance Team to
respond to disasters that fall outside FEMA's typical mission
set.
In addition to being called on to address these non-
Stafford Act disasters, from 2020 to 2023, FEMA also led the
Federal Government's response to COVID-19. To date, as it
relates to COVID-19, FEMA has obligated $75 billion in Public
Assistance, $44.3 billion for Individual Assistance, $36.5
billion for Lost Wages Assistance, and $3.1 billion for the
COVID-19 Funeral Assistance Program.
Not surprisingly, with all this money flowing out, the DHS
IG found billions in fraud and improper payments, sadly. In the
Lost Wages Assistance Program alone, the DHS OIG estimated more
than $3.7 billion, that's billion with a ``b,'' in improper
payments.
It got to the point that the OIG set up a COVID Fraud Unit,
and stealing FEMA funding became a crime of convenience for
criminal organizations, including related crimes like identity
theft.
What's more, FEMA has continued to defend the
administration of the Lost Wages Assistance Program, going as
far as to say that sufficient internal controls were
implemented. The fact that FEMA has failed to implement more
controls raises serious concerns about FEMA's recently
announced interim rule, which would make significant changes to
FEMA's Individual Assistance Program.
Some of the most shocking changes include giving households
$750 cash payments, paying individuals upfront for housing
options of their choice, and providing upfront payments to
individuals who are choosing to stay with family and friends.
And I think we will get into this under a self-certification
circumstance. Many of these changes ignore some of the
inspector general's key recommendations to reduce fraud.
The question really is: where is the accountability in all
of this? Why aren't States doing what they need to do to budget
for these costs? Where is the expectation that States, local
governments, and individuals carry insurance?
How are these added responsibilities on FEMA impacting its
core mission, especially since we know, from the GAO, that FEMA
has a workforce shortage that seems, from my count, to be
pretty prolific?
FEMA can't be all things to all people. We have to get a
handle on the proper role of FEMA and ensure FEMA's internal
controls reduce fraud and misuse of taxpayer funds.
I look forward to hearing from our witnesses on these
issues.
[Mr. Perry's prepared statement follows:]

Prepared Statement of Hon. Scott Perry, a Representative in Congress
from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and Chairman, Subcommittee on
Economic Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management
Today's hearing will focus on examining the propriety of the
expanded use of FEMA resources and how it is impacting FEMA's ability
to carry out its core mission.
Fundamentally, FEMA's core mission is to help people before,
during, and after disasters. More specifically, states lead the
responses to disasters and FEMA comes in, at the request of the state,
if the state's resources are overwhelmed. Or at least, that is how it
is supposed to work. Increasingly, it seems, states are asking for help
in more and more incidents that states themselves should be prepared to
handle, like snowstorms in the northeast.
So, we have an increasing reliance on the federal government, and
then we add that FEMA is also being tasked to manage non-traditional
disasters, like pandemics, and help with issues completely unrelated to
its mission, or so called ``non-Stafford Act disasters.'' Between 2014
and 2020, FEMA was deployed seven times to address non-Stafford Act
disasters. In just the last three years, that has jumped to 16 non-
Stafford Act disasters. These included the crisis at our nation's
southwest border, Operation Allies Welcome, Operation Vaccinate Our
Workforce, and the list goes on.
There is such an increasing demand on the agency that FEMA created
a new National Incident Management Assistance Team (IMAT) to respond to
disasters that fall outside FEMA's typical mission set.
In addition to being called on to address these non-Stafford Act
disasters, from 2020 to 2023 FEMA also led the federal government's
response to COVID-19. To date, as it relates to COVID-19, FEMA has
obligated $75 billion in Public Assistance, $44.3 billion for
Individual Assistance, $36.5 billion for the Lost Wages Assistance
Program, and $3.1 billion for the COVID-19 Funeral Assistance Program.
Not surprisingly, with all this money flowing out, the DHS
Inspector General found billions in fraud and improper payments. In the
Lost Wages Assistance Program alone, the DHS OIG estimated more than
$3.7 billion in improper payments.
It got to a point that the OIG set up a COVID fraud unit, and
stealing FEMA funding became a crime of convenience for criminal
organizations, including related crimes like identity theft.
What's more, FEMA has continued to defend the administration of the
Lost Wages Assistance Program, going as far as to say that sufficient
internal controls were implemented. The fact that FEMA has failed to
implement more controls raises serious concerns about FEMA's recently
announced interim rule which would make significant changes to FEMA's
Individual Assistance Program.
Some of the most shocking changes include giving households $750
cash payments, paying individuals up-front for housing options of their
choice, and providing up-front payments to individuals who are choosing
to stay with family and friends. Many of these changes ignore some of
the Inspector General's key recommendations to reduce fraud.
Where is the accountability in all of this? Why aren't states doing
what they need to do to budget for these costs? Where is the
expectation that states, local governments, and individuals carry
insurance?
How are these added responsibilities on FEMA impacting its core
mission, especially since we know from GAO that FEMA has a workforce
shortage? FEMA can't be all things to all people. We have to get a
handle on the proper role of FEMA and ensure FEMA's internal controls
reduce fraud and misuse of taxpayer funds.
I look forward to hearing from our witnesses on these issues.

Mr. Perry. I now want to recognize the ranking member, Ms.
Davids, for 5 minutes for an opening statement, and I yield.

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. SHARICE DAVIDS OF KANSAS, VICE
RANKING MEMBER, SUBCOMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, PUBLIC
BUILDINGS, AND EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT

Ms. Davids of Kansas. Thank you, Chairman.
And I want to extend a thanks to our witnesses for joining
us today to discuss FEMA readiness and the cause of the
expanded use of FEMA resources.
Climate change and related severe weather events have
changed the disaster landscape and strained capacity and
resources at local, State, and the Federal level. Government
and insurance industry data show that disasters are more
expensive and have greater impact than ever before. To be
disaster ready, FEMA must acknowledge the strains climate
change is placing on its programs and develop strategies to
adapt.
The FEMA workforce is the backbone of the Agency's programs
and is key to enabling proper disaster planning and a
successful response in those disasters, but additional work is
needed to strengthen that workforce. A recent GAO report found
that FEMA has fallen short of its yearly staffing targets since
2019. As disasters grow increasingly frequent and complex, it's
important that skilled personnel are at FEMA to ensure that the
Agency can fulfill its mission.
I would be remiss to not highlight the capacity challenges
experienced by State and local emergency managers whose
obligations have been stressed by the increase of complex
climate and weather disasters is impacting their communities.
Many are managing recoveries for multiple events and submitting
reimbursements for multiple Federal disaster declarations. Even
then, State and local governments are expanding the breadth of
tasks their managers are being asked to support. It's critical
that the Federal Government recognizes the magnitude of
emergency managers' workloads and support policies that are
going to provide adequate funding and resources to the
essential workforce.
The ultimate goal of our work is to protect communities and
to ease the burden of disaster survivors. Natural disasters
amplify existing disparities in our society, and it should go
without saying that the Government must address the needs of
every American equally during recovery. Some of our most
vulnerable populations, however, have been neglected.
As such, I commend Administrator Criswell for the
publication of FEMA's new interim final rule for the Individual
Assistance Program. This rule acknowledges the documented
shortcomings of FEMA's assistance for disaster survivors and
will help the Agency do everything it can, within existing law,
to close those assistance gaps.
But FEMA cannot do everything alone. Congress has to do our
part, and I am glad that we are having this conversation today
to better support Americans that have been impacted, both
physically and financially, by severe weather events.
Administrator, thank you to you and your colleagues for
rising to the challenges that our evolving disaster landscape
has led to and the increase in scope and complexity of your
mission. And I look forward to the conversation today and
moving forward with all the witnesses on solutions that are
going to help emergency managers continue their essential work
and help guarantee public safety.
Thank you, and I yield back.
[Ms. Davids of Kansas' prepared statement follows:]

Prepared Statement of Hon. Sharice Davids, a Representative in Congress
from the State of Kansas, and Vice Ranking Member, Subcommittee on
Economic Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank our witnesses for joining
us today to discuss FEMA readiness and the cause of the expanded use of
FEMA resources.
Climate change and the related severe weather events have changed
the disaster landscape and strained capacity and resources at the
local, state, and federal levels. Government and insurance industry
data show disasters are more expensive and have a greater impact than
ever before. To be disaster ready, FEMA must acknowledge the strains
climate change is placing upon its programs and develop strategies to
adapt.
The FEMA workforce is the backbone of the Agency's programs and is
key to enabling proper disaster planning and successful response. But
additional work is needed to strengthen that workforce. A recent GAO
report found that FEMA has fallen short of its yearly staffing target
since 2019. As disasters grow increasingly frequent and complex, it is
important that skilled personnel are at FEMA to ensure the Agency can
fulfill its mission.
I would be remiss to not highlight that capacity challenges
experienced by state and local emergency managers whose obligations
have been stressed by the increase of complex climate and weather
disasters impacting their communities. Many are managing recoveries for
multiple events and submitting reimbursements for multiple federal
disaster declarations. Even then, state and local governments are
expanding the breadth of tasks their managers are being asked to
support. It is critical that the federal government recognizes the
magnitude of emergency managers' workloads and support policies that
provide adequate funding and resources to this essential workforce.
The ultimate goal of our work is to protect communities and ease
the burden of disaster survivors. Natural disasters amplify existing
disparities in our society, and it should go without saying that the
government must address the needs of every American equally during
recovery. Some of our most vulnerable populations, however, have been
neglected.
As such, I commend Administrator Criswell for the publication of
FEMA's new interim final rule for the Individual Assistance program.
This rule acknowledges the documented shortcomings of FEMA's assistance
for disaster survivors and will help the Agency do everything it can,
within existing law, to close assistance gaps.
But FEMA cannot do everything alone. Congress must do our part, and
I am glad we are having these conversations today to better support
Americans impacted, both physically and financially, by severe weather
events.
Administrator, I thank you and your colleagues for rising to the
challenge as an evolving disaster landscape has increased the scope and
complexity of your mission. I look forward to a conversation with all
the witnesses on solutions that will help emergency managers continue
their essential work and guarantee public safety.

Mr. Perry. The Chair thanks the gentlelady, and the Chair
now recognizes the ranking member of the full committee, Mr.
Larsen, for 5 minutes.

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. RICK LARSEN OF WASHINGTON, RANKING
MEMBER, COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE

Mr. Larsen of Washington. Thank you, Chair Perry and
Ranking Member Davids, for calling today's hearing.
I welcome the opportunity to discuss how Congress can help
FEMA better fulfill its mission of helping communities before,
during, and after disasters.
Talking about nontraditional disasters, in an ideal world,
FEMA would have never had to respond to a worldwide pandemic.
But the worst-case scenario occurred, and FEMA stepped in and
responded to the unthinkable, which is exactly what we expect
FEMA to do anytime there is a disaster.
FEMA's assistance during the COVID-19 pandemic kept our
healthcare system afloat, provided life-saving medical
equipment, administered unemployment insurance to help families
keep a roof over their head and food on the table, ran vaccine
sites that saved countless lives, and offered grieving families
a small comfort through Funeral Assistance.
The testimony from the Office of the IG says that a lot of
money was lost to fraud and ineligible payments. And that's
true. We have seen that, and we need to consider that.
And it was lost when FEMA administered the COVID-19 relief
programs, including the Lost Wages and Funeral Assistance
Programs.
Fraud is bad. We need to protect taxpayer dollars. But no
program is going to be perfect when you are administering it in
the midst of a global emergency and the randomness of COVID,
especially an emergency as unexpected and unprecedented as the
COVID-19 pandemic was.
At a certain point, it's necessary to step back and see the
bigger picture, where scrupulously accounting for every penny
of disaster relief can result in such a long and complex
process that a single mother struggling to survive is unable to
access desperately needed assistance.
FEMA has also stepped up when asked to provide humanitarian
assistance for migrants. FEMA's role at the U.S.-Mexico border
has not undermined its ability to respond to natural disasters.
I support the mission of the Shelter and Services Program,
which provides short-term humanitarian assistance, like
sheltering, food, and medicine for individuals who have come to
our country fleeing violence or in search of a better life.
When people are suffering, does America stand by and do
nothing? Or do we do the right thing and provide assistance
that can save lives?
Nontraditional disasters are not the only factor we should
be considering when discussing disaster readiness. Climate
change is making disasters more frequent, intense, and costly,
straining FEMA's workforce and resources.
In the 1980s, the country experienced, on average, a
billion-dollar disaster every 4 months. Now, there is, on
average, a billion-dollar disaster every 3 weeks. In 2023, the
U.S. experienced climate and weather disasters causing $92.9
billion in damage. This data shows that climate change is
expanding the amount of work FEMA must do to carry out its
mission.
Investment in mitigation and resilience are proven to
lessen the impact of climate and weather-related disasters and
should be at the center of FEMA's strategy to assure readiness
in this evolving world.
Communities are vulnerable. Many infrastructure systems in
the U.S. are at the end of their useful life. They are not
designed to cope with the additional stress from climate change
and extreme weather.
That is why I am a supporter of the resilience investments
that we made in the Inflation Reduction Act and the Bipartisan
Infrastructure Law.
I am pleased to see FEMA making climate change a central
focus of its strategic plan while implementing these bills.
FEMA's work is making mitigation projects possible in
communities around the country. Funding for mitigation and
resilience is not enough. FEMA needs a workforce that is ready
to rise to the challenge.
The FEMA workforce demonstrated incredible capability and
resilience during the response to the COVID-19 pandemic, but
future success and workforce resilience requires adequate
staffing.
I remain concerned with the Government Accountability
Office's finding that a 35-percent staffing gap exists across
different positions at FEMA. I am concerned about that, and I
urge the Agency to prioritize recruitment and retention of a
resilient and diverse workforce.
Diversity is important because it will improve program
delivery and the Agency's understanding of challenges faced by
disaster survivors across the Nation, from rural Texas to
northern Alaska, to Puerto Rico, to Maui and Lahaina, and even
in the Puget Sound.
The BIL made great progress in making our Nation more
resilient by providing nearly $7 billion to help communities
proactively prepare for disasters. Maintaining a resilient
workforce, incorporating climate change projections into all
FEMA's programs, and prioritizing investment in mitigation is
key to ensuring our Nation's readiness to disasters.
Administrator Criswell, while you have a difficult job, I
thank you for the work that FEMA has done under your
leadership. Your dedication to FEMA's mission and service to
communities before and after disasters are building a safer
Nation.
I look forward to discussing with you and the other
witnesses how we can work together to achieve disaster
readiness and help the Agency achieve its goals.
Thank you for being here, I look forward to your testimony,
and yield back my negative 4 seconds.
[Mr. Larsen of Washington's prepared statement follows:]

Prepared Statement of Hon. Rick Larsen, a Representative in Congress
from the State of Washington, and Ranking Member, Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure
Thank you, Subcommittee Chairman Perry and Subcommittee Vice
Ranking Member Davids, for calling today's hearing on disaster
readiness.
I welcome the opportunity to discuss how Congress can help FEMA
better fulfill its mission of helping communities before, during and
after disasters.
Talking about non-traditional disasters in an ideal world, FEMA
would never need to respond to a worldwide pandemic. But the worst-case
scenario occurred, and FEMA stepped in and responded to the
unthinkable, which is exactly what we expect FEMA to do anytime there
is a disaster.
FEMA's assistance during the COVID-19 pandemic kept our health care
system afloat, provided lifesaving medical equipment, administered
unemployment insurance that helped families keep a roof over their head
and food on the table, ran vaccine sites that saved countless lives and
offered grieving families a small comfort though funeral assistance.
The testimony from the Office of the Inspector General says that
money was lost to fraud and ineligible payments when FEMA administered
their COVID-19 relief programs, including the Lost Wage and Funeral
Assistance programs.
Fraud is bad. We need to protect taxpayer dollars.
But no program is going to be perfect when you are administering it
in the midst of a global emergency--especially an emergency as
unexpected and unprecedented as the COVID-19 pandemic.
At a certain point, it's necessary to step back and see the bigger
picture where scrupulously accounting for every penny of disaster
relief can result in such a long and complex process that a single
mother struggling to survive is unable to access desperately needed
assistance.
FEMA has also stepped up when asked to provide humanitarian
assistance for migrants. FEMA's role at the U.S.-Mexico border has not
undermined its ability to respond to natural disasters.
I fully support the mission of the Shelter and Services Program,
which provides short-term humanitarian assistance like sheltering, food
and medicine to individuals who have come to our country fleeing
violence or in search of a better life.
When people are suffering, does America stand by and do nothing? Or
do we do the right thing and provide assistance that can save lives?
Non-traditional disasters are not the only factor we should be
considering when discussing disaster readiness.
Climate change is making disasters more frequent, intense and
costly--straining FEMA's workforce and resources.
In the 1980s, the country experienced, on average, a billion-dollar
disaster every four months. Now, there is, on average, a billion-dollar
disaster every three weeks.
In 2023, the U.S. experienced climate and weather disasters causing
$92.9 billion in damage.
This data shows that climate change is expanding the amount of work
FEMA must do to carry out its mission.
Investment in mitigation and resilience are proven to lessen the
impact of climate and weather-related disasters and should be at the
center of FEMA's strategy to assure readiness in an evolving world.
Communities are vulnerable--many infrastructure systems in the U.S.
are at the end of their useful life and are not designed to cope with
additional stress from climate change and extreme weather.
This is why I am such a strong supporter of the resilience
investments included in the Inflation Reduction Act and Bipartisan
Infrastructure Law.
I am pleased to see FEMA make climate change a central focus of its
Strategic Plan while implementing these bills. FEMA's work is making
mitigation projects possible in communities around the country.
Funding for mitigation and resilience is not enough. FEMA also
needs a workforce ready to rise to the challenge.
The FEMA workforce demonstrated incredible capability and
resilience during the response to the COVID-19 pandemic, but future
success and workforce resilience requires adequate staffing.
I remain concerned with the Government Accountability Office's
finding that a 35 percent staffing gap exists across different
positions at FEMA and urge the Agency to prioritize the recruitment and
retention of a resilient and diverse workforce.
Diversity is important because it will improve program delivery and
the Agency's understanding of challenges faced by disaster survivors
across the nation--from rural Texas to northern Alaska, Puerto Rico,
Maui and even in the Puget Sound.
The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law made great progress in making our
nation more resilient by providing nearly $7 billion to help
communities proactively prepare for disasters.
Maintaining a resilient workforce, incorporating climate change
projections into all of FEMA's programs and prioritizing investment in
mitigation is key to ensuring our nation's readiness to disasters.
Administrator Criswell, you have a difficult job, and I thank you
for all the good work FEMA has done under your leadership. Your
dedication to FEMA's mission and service to communities before and
after disasters is building a safer nation.
I look forward to discussing with you and the other witnesses how
we can work together to achieve disaster readiness and help FEMA
achieve its goals.
Thank you all for being here. I look forward to hearing your
testimony today.

Mr. Perry. The Chair thanks the gentleman.
I would now like to welcome our witnesses and thank them
for being here today.
Briefly I would like to take a moment to explain our
lighting system to the witnesses. There are three lights in
front of you. Green means go, yellow means you are running out
of time, and red means it's time to stop.
I ask unanimous consent that the witnesses' full statements
be included in the record.
Without objection, so ordered.
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 be submitted to them in
writing.
Without objection, so ordered.
I also ask unanimous consent that the record remain open
for 15 days for additional comment and for information
submitted by Members or witnesses to be included in the record
of today's hearing.
Without objection, so ordered.
As your written testimony has been made part of the record,
the subcommittee asks that you each limit your oral remarks to
5 minutes.
With that, Administrator Criswell, you are recognized for 5
minutes for your testimony.

TESTIMONY OF HON. DEANNE CRISWELL, ADMINISTRATOR, FEDERAL
EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY; KRISTEN D. BERNARD, DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL FOR
AUDITS, OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF
HOMELAND SECURITY; AND CHRIS CURRIE, DIRECTOR, HOMELAND
SECURITY AND JUSTICE TEAM, U.S. GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY
OFFICE

TESTIMONY OF HON. DEANNE CRISWELL, ADMINISTRATOR, FEDERAL
EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY

Ms. Criswell. Thank you. Chairman Perry, Ranking Member
Davids, and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to discuss FEMA's evolving role in emergency
management.
The committee expressed particular interest in two topics,
FEMA's work on the COVID-19 pandemic and FEMA's facilitation of
migrant related programs, so, I will focus on these in my
opening comments.
The field of emergency management has changed in recent
years as the problems facing communities are more complex and
interrelated. And as our field develops, so do the expectations
of what emergency managers are expected to handle.
COVID-19 is a prime example. On March 19, 2020, the
previous administration directed FEMA to assume leadership of
the Federal Government's coordinated response to the pandemic.
For the first time in U.S. history, there were concurrent
major disaster declarations across every State, five
Territories, three Tribal nations, and the District of
Columbia.
FEMA rose to the occasion. During the early response, FEMA
coordinated with the Federal interagency community to help
healthcare systems across the country stay staffed and equipped
so they could deliver lifesaving medical care.
FEMA also provided financial assistance to all levels of
Government to cover critical community services. Fast forward
to January 2021, and FEMA's role continued to evolve, now with
the focus on achieving President Biden's goal of administering
100 million COVID-19 vaccinations in 100 days.
We coordinated with Federal, State, local, Tribal, and
Territorial partners to support over 2,100 community
vaccination centers, and we were able to put 213 million shots
in arms in 100 days, more than double the original goal.
In February of 2021, the President directed 100 percent
Federal cost share for eligible emergency protective expenses
incurred by our State, local, Territorial, and Tribal partners
in response to the COVID-19 pandemic through July 1st of 2022.
This included reimbursement for vaccination efforts, COVID-19
screening, and personal protective equipment.
The COVID-19 disaster declaration period ended on May 11,
2023, and FEMA is working diligently to complete reimbursement
of all eligible expenses.
The scale of this historic event required FEMA to respond
to the COVID-19 pandemic while simultaneously maintaining
mission readiness for natural disasters. For example, in 2021,
even as FEMA supported vaccination distribution, the Agency
successfully responded to Hurricane Ida, the fifth strongest
landfalling hurricane to impact the continental United States.
The lessons we learned during the pandemic have made us even
stronger.
I mentioned that FEMA's work on the COVID-19 pandemic began
during the previous administration, and the same is true of
FEMA's grant work related to assistance to migrants.
As you know, FEMA is not an immigration agency or a law
enforcement agency. However, FEMA has a recognized expertise in
executing grant programs and providing incident management
coordination for both Federal partners and our State, local,
Tribal, and Territorial stakeholders.
In 2019, Congress directed FEMA to use the Emergency Food
and Shelter Program to provide financial support to
organizations that provide humanitarian assistance to migrants
encountered by the Department of Homeland Security at the
border. Congress made additional appropriations for this
purpose in fiscal years 2021, 2022, and 2023. In all, $715
million was provided for humanitarian assistance through the
EFSP Humanitarian Program.
Through the fiscal year 2023 Omnibus Appropriations Act,
Congress directed Customs and Border Protection to transfer
$800 million to FEMA and transition humanitarian assistance
from the EFSP program to a new Shelter and Services Program.
FEMA has executed this congressional direction and to date
has provided almost $364 million to States, localities, and
nonprofit organizations for this purpose.
In addition to these grant programs, a limited number of
FEMA personnel have intermittently supported the coordination
of efforts by the Department at the southern border since 2014,
including under the previous administration in 2019.
At their peak in 2022, these efforts involved fewer than
250 FEMA personnel combined. Regardless of the challenges that
FEMA confronts, we will always prioritize the well-being,
recruitment, and retention of a well-trained workforce ready to
deploy at a moment's notice.
FEMA is well prepared to execute its powerful mission
statement: helping people before, during, and after disasters.
Thank you.
[Ms. Criswell's prepared statement follows:]

Prepared Statement of Hon. Deanne Criswell, Administrator, Federal
Emergency Management Agency, U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Chairman Perry, Ranking Member Titus, and Members of the
Subcommittee, thank you for giving me the opportunity to talk to you
today about the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) evolving
role within the emergency management community. We value this
committee's legislative support and oversight of our agency, and I look
forward to our conversation today.
The Committee expressed particular interest in discussing two
topics at today's hearing: FEMA's work on the COVID-19 pandemic, and
FEMA's facilitation of migrant-related programs. I appreciate the
opportunity to dive into these topics today. The field of emergency
management has changed in recent years, and emergency managers--at
every level of government--are being asked to do more. The problems
facing communities are more complex and interrelated. We are chief
problem solvers, conveners, coordinators, and strategists. And as our
field develops and grows, so too do the expectations of what emergency
managers are expected to handle.
COVID-19 is a prime example of these evolving expectations. As
Members of this committee will recall, on March 19, 2020, the previous
Administration directed FEMA to assume leadership of the federal
government's coordinated response to the pandemic. For the first time
in U.S. history, there were concurrent Major Disaster Declarations
across every state, five territories, three Tribal Nations, and the
District of Columbia.
FEMA rose to the occasion. During the early response, FEMA, through
coordination with the federal interagency community, helped health care
systems across the country stay staffed and equipped so they could
deliver lifesaving medical care. FEMA also provided financial
assistance to all levels of government to cover critical community
services like emergency medical care and the distribution of necessary
supplies such as food, medicine, and personal protective equipment.
Fast forward to January 2021 and FEMA's role continued to evolve,
now with a focus on achieving President Biden's goal of administering
100 million COVID-19 vaccinations in 100 days. FEMA coordinated with
federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial (SLTT) partners to
support the establishment and expansion of over 2,100 Community
Vaccination Centers (CVCs). This included 39 federally led CVC pilot
sites and the deployment of 18 mobile vaccination units to help reach
traditionally underserved and more remote communities. With the help of
our partners, FEMA exceeded the goal of 100 million vaccinations in 100
days by putting 213 million shots in arms.
In February 2021, the President directed 100 percent federal cost
share for eligible emergency protective expenses incurred by SLTT
partners in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, through July 1, 2022.
This included reimbursement for costs for emergency work, such as
vaccination efforts, COVID-19 screening, and personal protective
equipment. FEMA also expanded the activities eligible for reimbursement
to support the safe opening and operation of schools, child-care
facilities, health care facilities, non-congregate shelters, domestic
violence shelters, and transit systems impacted by COVID-19. These
changes were critical to protecting the health of communities so we
could safely transition out of this challenging chapter in our nation's
history.
Simply put, the decision to cover 100 percent of costs, including
the vaccination campaign, saved countless lives. During most of the
pandemic, including during the darkest days in early 2020, I was the
Commissioner of the New York City Emergency Management Department. New
York City, ordinarily a well-funded, bustling city suffered--like many
places in America--from plummeting revenue and increasing demands
because of the pandemic. As vaccines became available, my team and I
were involved in planning the historic vaccination effort--it was going
to be intense, needed to happen quickly and effectively, and was going
to be expensive. Staff needed to be hired, contracts needed to be
issued, equipment needed to be purchased in order to safely receive,
transport, store, and administer the vaccine. These massive expenses
would not have been endurable without the federal government's
financial commitment.
The COVID-19 disaster declaration period ended on May 11, 2023, and
FEMA is working to complete reimbursement of eligible expenses incurred
by SLTT partners and other stakeholders. As of January 24, 2024, FEMA
has provided more than $75 billion through its Public Assistance
program. With the recent deadline for applications, we assessed the
total number of healthcare specific claims and doubled the number of
staff hired to help process our healthcare claims so we can accelerate
reimbursements while also safeguarding taxpayer dollars against fraud.
The scale of this historic event required FEMA to adapt to the
unique challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic while simultaneously
maintaining mission readiness for other natural disasters like
hurricanes, earthquakes, floods, or wildfires. For example, in 2021,
even as FEMA focused on supporting vaccination distribution efforts,
the agency responded to Hurricane Ida, the fifth strongest landfalling
hurricane to impact the continental United States. FEMA also responded
to severe winter storms across the central United States, which caused
prolonged power outages for nearly 10 million people. This is a
testament to the unwavering dedication of our FEMA workforce. The
lessons we learned as an agency during the pandemic have made us even
stronger and better prepared for the next emergency.
I mentioned that FEMA's work on the COVID-19 pandemic began during
the previous Administration, and the same is true of FEMA's grant work
relating to assistance to migrants. As you know, FEMA is not an
immigration or law enforcement agency. However, FEMA has a recognized
expertise in executing grant programs and providing incident management
coordination for both federal partners and SLTT stakeholders.
Through the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations for Humanitarian
Assistance and Security at the Southern Border Act of 2019, Congress
directed FEMA to use the Emergency Food and Shelter Program (EFSP) to
provide financial support to organizations providing assistance to
migrants encountered by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS or the
Department) at the border. FEMA designated this assistance as Emergency
Food and Shelter Program-Humanitarian (EFSP-H). Congress made
additional appropriations for this purpose in Fiscal Years 2021, 2022,
and 2023. In all, $715 million was provided for humanitarian assistance
through the EFSP-H program.
Through the FY23 Omnibus Appropriations Act, Congress directed the
U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to transfer $800 million to
FEMA and transition humanitarian assistance from EFSP to a new Shelter
and Services Program, in collaboration with the CBP. FEMA has executed
this Congressional direction, and to date has provided almost $364
million to states, localities, and non-profit organizations for this
purpose.
A limited number of FEMA personnel have intermittently supported
the coordination of efforts by the Department at the southern border
since 2014 (including under the previous Administration in 2019). In
2021, FEMA assisted the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
(HHS) in the setup of logistical operations to process the surge in
unaccompanied migrant children. In 2022, FEMA also supported the
Southwest Border Coordination Center, which provided incident
management technical assistance and other support to CBP. Finally,
along with staff from other DHS components, FEMA staff have
participated in the DHS Volunteer Force at the southern border, in non-
law-enforcement humanitarian roles. At its peak in 2022, these efforts
involved fewer than 250 FEMA personnel combined. These border missions
were important, but they did not undermine FEMA's ability to respond to
the COVID-19 pandemic or multiple natural disasters. The cost of FEMA's
assistance was reimbursed to the agency under the Economy Act, which
authorizes Federal agencies to provide goods and services, on a
reimbursable basis, to each other. As of this month, there are only
around 50 FEMA personnel supporting the southwest border mission.
Regardless of the challenges that FEMA confronts, we will always
prioritize the wellbeing, recruitment, and retention of a well-trained
workforce ready to deploy at a moment's notice. We have both national
and regional personnel at the ready to support lifesaving and life-
sustaining response operations, including five National and 13 Regional
Incident Management Assistance Teams; 28 Urban Search and Rescue Teams;
and 36 Emergency Communications Teams. But the vast majority of our
23,600-person workforce consists of reservists. And I would like to
again thank this Committee and Congress for taking a huge step in
helping us recruit and retain reservists by passing the Civilian
Reservist Emergency Workforce (CREW) Act, which extends to our
reservists the job protections of the Uniformed Services Employment and
Reemployment Rights Act.
FEMA is well prepared to execute its powerful mission statement:
helping people before, during, and after disasters. And we continue to
adapt to the changing face of disaster management to meet the needs of
the moment. I would like to quickly touch on two initiatives that are
helping us evolve.
The first is our recent announcement of revised regulations for our
Individual Assistance Program, which will streamline assistance, cut
red tape, and make it easier for survivors to access the assistance for
which they qualify. These changes draw on lessons learned over the past
20 years and hundreds of public comments that we received in preparing
these regulations.
The second is what we are calling the Year of Resilience. This is a
first-of-its-kind campaign that will help our agency build resilience
at all levels--federal to individual. While traditionally thought of as
a response and recovery agency, we want people to think of FEMA as a
resilience agency and to understand that we have the tools communities
need to be more resilient, prepared, and ready before a disaster
strikes.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify today, and I look forward
to your questions.

Mr. Perry. Thank you for your testimony.
Ms. Bernard, you are now recognized for 5 minutes.

TESTIMONY OF KRISTEN D. BERNARD, DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL FOR
AUDITS, OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF
HOMELAND SECURITY

Ms. Bernard. Thank you, Chairman Perry, and members of the
subcommittee.
Thank you for inviting me here today to discuss the Office
of the Inspector General's oversight of FEMA's nonnatural
disaster programs.
As of September 2021, FEMA received approximately $98
billion to assist the Nation with the challenges of the
pandemic. The sense of urgency, amount of funding, and high
volume of disbursements posed unprecedented challenges and
risks for FEMA.
DHS OIG responded to these challenges and risks with
focused oversight, which revealed that FEMA's controls were not
sufficient to prevent or deter fraudsters from exploiting
FEMA's pandemic relief programs.
From fiscal year 2020 to date, we've issued 18 reports on
FEMA's nonnatural disaster management.
In total, we found nearly $4 billion in unallowable or
unsupported costs.
We also identified $45 million that are funds that could
have been put to better use. Our audits have consistently
identified the need for FEMA to strengthen internal controls
over its programs.
Specifically, we've identified four key areas where
additional controls are needed to promote efficiency and
protect the integrity of FEMA's programs.
First is ensuring eligibility for Federal assistance. Our
audit work has demonstrated that FEMA did not implement or
enforce front-end controls to ensure eligibility of recipients,
which is a necessary means to prevent fraud, waste, and abuse
in disbursement of COVID-19 relief funds.
For example, we found that FEMA implemented the Lost Wages
Assistance Program without sufficient controls to counter the
risk imposed by allowing self-certifications for claimants'
eligibility.
This led to nearly $4 billion in potentially fraudulent
payments, over $21 billion in overpayments, and even $400
million in payments made without obtaining the required self-
certifications.
Second is insuring allowability of costs reimbursed. Our
audits have repeatedly disclosed that FEMA reimbursed
recipients for unallowable costs. For example, during our audit
of the COVID-19 Funeral Assistance Program, we found that FEMA
improperly reimbursed over $27 million in unallowable costs.
Additionally, we questioned over $7 million in funds
reimbursed by FEMA for the Humanitarian Assistance Program that
were unallowable or unsupported.
Third is program oversight. Our audits have disclosed that
FEMA did not provide sufficient oversight of its programs to
ensure they were meeting their intended mission.
For example, we identified over $45 million in funds that
could have been put to better use. This stemmed from grant
funds for the Emergency Food and Shelter Program that were not
spent and were never reallocated to ensure that they were
timely used to provide assistance for those in need.
And finally, the fourth challenge is ensuring consistent
data practices. FEMA's inability to provide consistent,
reliable data hinders oversight of its programs and operations.
In one example, FEMA could not provide us with detailed,
comparable data across its programs and regional offices, which
we needed to support our review of COVID-19 funds that had been
allocated across six geographic regions.
Our audits of FEMA's nonnatural disaster management during
this time have resulted in 56 recommendations that are intended
to strengthen FEMA's management of its programs and operations
when implemented.
However, FEMA has not yet fully implemented our
recommendations and, in fact, as of today, 20 percent of our
recommendations remain unresolved because FEMA either disagreed
or hasn't developed an adequate corrective action plan to
address them.
In addition to our audits aimed at improving FEMA's
programs and operations, we also investigate allegations of
criminal misconduct.
In 2020, in response to the billions of dollars
appropriated to DHS for pandemic relief, Inspector General
Cuffari established a dedicated unit to investigate COVID-19
fraud.
To date, our COVID-19 investigations have resulted in 87
convictions and more than $21 million in recoveries. These
criminal actions underscore the urgent need for FEMA to improve
the way it administers its programs to ensure the appropriate
use of taxpayer funds.
This concludes my testimony. I would be happy to answer any
questions you may have.
[Ms. Bernard's prepared statement follows:]

Prepared Statement of Kristen D. Bernard, Deputy Inspector General for
Audits, Office of Inspector General, U.S. Department of Homeland
Security
Chairman Perry, Ranking Member Titus, and Members of the
Subcommittee: Thank you for the opportunity to discuss the Department
of Homeland Security, Office of Inspector General's oversight of the
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), including its non-natural
disaster programs and operations.
DHS OIG's body of work specific to FEMA's use of resources for non-
natural disasters has revealed that FEMA does not have sufficient
controls in place to prevent fraud, waste, and abuse. We have conducted
18 audits over the past 4 years that identified overpayments,
ineligible payments, and unsupported or unallowable costs totaling
approximately $3.9 billion in improper payments. We also identified an
additional $45.4 million in funds that could be put to better use.
We have issued 56 recommendations designed to address FEMA's
challenges specific to its management of non-natural disaster
resources. FEMA's challenges to ensure financial accountability and
safeguarding of taxpayer dollars were highlighted in our fiscal year
2023 and FY 2024 reports on Major Management Performance Challenges
Facing the Department of Homeland Security.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ (OIG-23-01) Major Management and Performance Challenges Facing
the Department of Homeland Security, October 27, 2022, (OIG-24-05)
Major Management and Performance Challenges Facing the Department of
Homeland Security (MMPC), October 26, 2023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DHS OIG Oversight of FEMA's Management of Non-Natural Disaster
Resources
Historically, our disaster management oversight has focused on
FEMA's response and preparedness activities for traditional natural
disasters. However, in recent years, the increasing frequency and costs
of disasters, the COVID-19 pandemic, and other events, have placed
additional demands on FEMA. As of September 2021, FEMA had received
approximately $98 billion to assist the Nation in addressing the
challenges of the pandemic. The size of these appropriations, coupled
with the need to quickly distribute funds, signaled an environment ripe
for fraud. We increased our oversight of FEMA's non-natural disaster
programs during FY 2020, to include COVID-19 relief and humanitarian
relief efforts.
Congress holds FEMA accountable for effective and efficient
management of the funds it appropriates to ensure timely assistance is
provided to eligible entities and individuals, in accordance with
applicable laws and guidance.\2\ Our oversight of FEMA's non-natural
disaster programs and activities demonstrated FEMA lacked sufficient
controls to ensure eligibility for federal assistance and allowability
of costs reimbursed. FEMA also lacked reliable data. The following
selection of DHS OIG work demonstrated recurring challenges in FEMA's
management of non-natural disasters, as reported by six audits on
COVID-19 funds and humanitarian efforts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance
Act, Public Law 93-288, as amended.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ineffective Controls to Ensure Eligibility of COVID-19 Assistance
Lost Wages Assistance Program: In response to the COVID-19
pandemic, in August 2020, the President directed FEMA to provide up to
$44 billion in Lost Wages Assistance (LWA) from FEMA's Disaster Relief
Fund to individuals unemployed/partially unemployed due to the
pandemic. FEMA delivered these payments in conjunction with States'
existing Unemployment Insurance Systems.
We conducted two audits \3\ to determine to what extent FEMA
ensured states and territories distributed LWA to eligible recipients,
including DHS employees. As part of these audits, we reviewed payments
distributed by 21 States, which represented 80 percent of the LWA
expenditures. We concluded that FEMA did not implement controls that
may have prevented the 21 States from distributing more than $3.7
billion in improper payments. The improper payments identified
included:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ (OIG-22-69) FEMA Did Not Implement Controls to Prevent More
than $3.7 Billion in Improper Payments from the Lost Wages Assistance
Program, September 16, 2022 and (OIG-22-73) More than $2.6 Million in
Potentially Fraudulent LWA Payments Were Linked to DHS Employees'
Identities, September 27, 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
$3.3 billion in potential fraudulent payments,
$21.6 million in overpayments to recipients, and
$403 million in payments that lacked the required self-
certification.

Additionally, we identified weaknesses in FEMA and the Department's
controls to prevent the payment of $2.6 million in LWA for potentially
fraudulent claims made by DHS employees or claimants who fraudulently
used the identities of DHS employees to obtain LWA benefits. This
included payments linked to 1,809 DHS employees who were ineligible or
potentially ineligible for LWA benefits because they were actively
working. In addition, we identified 167 employees who were eligible but
at high or medium risk of fraudulent activity including identify theft.
We referred employees with a high likelihood of fraud to the DHS OIG
Office of Investigations for potential criminal action.
These improper payments occurred because FEMA launched the LWA
program in 11 days without clear guidance, fraud mitigation controls,
and other measures to address weak underlying Unemployment Insurance
(UI) program controls, such as self-certification, to determine
eligibility and prevent fraud. We determined none of the 21 States had
sufficient controls to prevent fraudulent activities or overpayments,
primarily because they relied on self-certifications from recipients to
determine eligibility. The Department also did not have the necessary
controls in its Unemployment Compensation for Federal Employees program
to ensure it had accurate information to determine DHS employees'
eligibility.
FEMA's practice of self-certification poses inherent risk for
fraudulent claims. Without additional requirements or controls to
corroborate and validate that recipients were eligible, these programs
are vulnerable to a high risk of fraud. We had previously warned FEMA
of our concerns with two prior audits related to Individual and
Household Programs, OIG-20-23 and OIG-20-60, namely, FEMA Has Made More
than $3 Billion in Improper and Potentially Fraudulent Payments for
Home Repair Assistance since 2003, and FEMA Has Paid Billions in
Improper Payments for SBA Dependent Other Needs Assistance since
2003.\4\ Collectively, these two reports totaled more than $6.3 billion
in improper payments. In these reports, we found applicants may have
inaccurately reported no homeowner's insurance or incorrectly reported
their income and dependent information despite penalty of perjury. As a
result, we recommended FEMA establish and implement preventive controls
to mitigate the risk of improper payments. The Pandemic Response
Accountability Committee (PRAC), the U.S. Government Accountability
Office, and the Department of Labor OIG also reported self-
certification as a top fraud vulnerability in administering
unemployment benefits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ These two reports related to FEMA's oversight of disaster
response and are therefore not included in the 18 reports since FY 2020
that we identify as related to FEMA's oversight of non-natural
disasters.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Despite our warnings about the high risk of fraud, FEMA has not
implemented preventive controls such as a system to test applicant data
or require applicants to sign an Internal Revenue Service release for a
copy of tax information to support individual assistance programs. On
the contrary, on January 22, 2024, FEMA issued an interim final rule
\5\ for its Individual Assistance program that will provide greater
flexibility and expand the use of self-certifications, referred to now
as self-declarations, for applicants to obtain funding in a more direct
and expedited manner.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Federal Emergency Management Agency 44 CFR Part 206; RIN 1660-
AB07 Individual Assistance Program Equity https://www.govinfo.gov/
content/pkg/FR-2024-01-22/pdf/2024-00677.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ineffective Controls to Ensure Allowable COVID-19 Costs
COVID-19 Funeral Assistance Program: In December 2020, Congress
appropriated $52 billion to FEMA's Disaster Relief Fund to provide
funeral assistance at 100 percent Federal cost share. In August 2023,
DHS OIG reported \6\ FEMA had not administered the program adequately
to protect funds from waste and abuse, as it distributed $24.4 million
in ineligible expenses for this program. We determined:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ (OIG-23-42) Ineffective Controls Over COVID-19 Funeral
Assistance Leave the Program Susceptible to Waste and Abuse, August 22,
2023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FEMA expanded the universe of reimbursable expenses for
deaths related to COVID-19 without providing guardrails to ensure
relief was limited to necessary expenses and serious needs, as required
by statute.

FEMA issued an estimated $24.4 million in COVID-19
Funeral Assistance funds from April 12, 2021, through September 21,
2021, for expenses identified as ineligible under established FEMA
policy. Examples of these questionable reimbursements include$2,800 for
a horse and carriage, $727 for flowers, and $790 for a limousine.

Each of the expenses we questioned are not allowable for
deaths related to other disasters. FEMA did not provide justification
for why certain expenditures were considered allowable for deaths
related to COVID-19, but unallowable for deaths related to other
disasters.

We questioned an additional $2.5 million in costs as
unallowable. Of this, we identified $1.3 million in assistance payments
to multiple parties applying for the same decedent; $759,026 in
payments more than the allowable maximum award of $9,000; and $591,805
in unallowable costs due to inconsistent application of program
guidance.

Due to the unprecedented size of this program and the uncertainty
surrounding the duration of the COVID-19 pandemic, DHS OIG issued a
management alert \7\ during our review to FEMA leadership to encourage
FEMA to take action that would prevent further reimbursement of
ineligible expenses which wasted and abused taxpayer dollars.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ (OIG-22-36) Management Alert--FEMA's COVID-19 Funeral
Assistance Operating Procedures Are Inconsistent with Previous
Interpretation of Long-Standing Regulations for Eligible Funeral
Expenses, April 13, 2022
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In our audit report, we issued five recommendations for FEMA to
improve oversight of COVID-19 Funeral Assistance by strengthening its
guidance and training provided to the caseworkers tasked with
processing program applications; aligning future funeral assistance
policy and procedures with statutory requirements; and resolving
questioned costs. In its response to both our Management Alert and full
audit report, FEMA asserted that it has broad authority to determine
eligible costs for funeral assistance. FEMA did not agree with DHS
OIG's conclusions and stated that OIG's recommendation would slow its
review of applications and limit the funds FEMA could provide to
applicants. FEMA also maintained that the costs questions by DHS OIG
were in fact eligible and should not be considered debts owed by the
recipients for erroneous payments.
FEMA Lacked Reliable Data for COVID-19 Response and Relief
DHS OIG conducted a study in 2022 \8\ as part of a broader review
by the PRAC to determine the sources and intended purposes of Federal
pandemic program funds, approximately $49.3 million, that FEMA provided
to six selected geographic locations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ (OIG-22-72) A Review of FEMA Funding for Coronavirus Disease
2019 (COVID-19) Response and Relief, September 16, 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We determined FEMA provided data for each of its funding
initiatives as requested, but in some instances, FEMA could not provide
detailed data and/or supporting documentation. This was because FEMA
does not always maintain data at the local level, some FEMA systems
cannot provide program data as of a specific date, and FEMA did not
follow a standardized process to obtain and generate program data.
While this phase of the PRAC study was not designed to identify
misspent funds, these data weaknesses prevented us from comparing
program data across geographic locations and limited our ability to
validate the accuracy of FEMA's systems.
DHS OIG is currently supporting phase 2 of the PRAC study in
reviewing FEMA's oversight of Federal funds for COVID-19 Emergency
Protective Measures and recipient and subrecipient compliance with
Federal reporting requirements.
Insufficient Oversight of Emergency Food and Shelter Program Funds
In March 2021, FEMA awarded $110 million in humanitarian relief
funds to the Emergency Food and Shelter Program (EFSP) as part of the
American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 to provide services to families and
individuals encountered by DHS in communities most impacted by the
humanitarian crisis at the Southwest border.
We conducted an audit in 2022 \9\ which found unsupported costs of
$7.4 million in claimed expenses that were missing required supporting
documentation. This included a local grant recipient not adequately
supporting charges paid to a contractor conducting COVID-19 tests and
other grant recipients claiming expenses without documenting the
migrant families and individuals they assisted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ (OIG-23-20) FEMA Should Increase Oversight to Prevent Potential
Misuse of Humanitarian Relief Funds, March 28, 2023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Without additional oversight and enforcement from FEMA and the
National Board which governs the EFSP, local grant recipients may
continue to use the funds for services without providing the required
supporting documentation for reimbursement, increasing the risk of
misuse of funds and fraud.
In an earlier audit of FEMA's Emergency Food and Shelter
program,\10\ we reported on other weaknesses in FEMA's management of
the program. Specifically, we questioned $45.2 million in funds that
could have been put to better use. This finding stems from the $58
million in grant funds that were not spent from FY 2017 to FY 2020. In
other words, when subrecipients were unable to spend their allocated
funding, the Program's National Board was not reallocating funds in a
timely manner to other recipients who had the ability to use the funds.
We made 10 recommendations to reallocate unclaimed funds and improve
coordination.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ (OIG-22-56) FEMA's Oversight of the Emergency Food and Shelter
Program, August 10, 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DHS OIG COVID-19 Fraud Unit
In 2020, DHS Inspector General Cuffari established a dedicated
COVID-19 Fraud Unit (CFU) to focus solely on identifying and
investigating fraud related to COVID-19. The findings from the audits
above were turned over to the COVID-19 Fraud Unit for further
investigation to determine whether criminal charges were warranted.
Due to the large scope of the potential fraud, DHS OIG used data
analytics to identify large, organized fraud schemes--some of which
resulted in millions of dollars being distributed to fraudsters. DHS
OIG also used the Reemployed Annuitant authority provided by the Office
of Personnel Management to hire retired criminal investigators to staff
the CFU, ensuring we had experienced agents who were able to begin
investigations as quickly as possible.
Our investigations have identified instances in which recipients,
by committing fraud, received payments that they were not eligible for
under the Disaster Relief Fund. Since the beginning of the pandemic,
DHS OIG has received over 8,525 complaints and opened over 550
investigations into COVID-19 fraud. To date, our investigations have
resulted in more than 125 indictments, 30 criminal informations, 87
convictions, and more than $21.5 million in recoveries.
A sample of our significant cases in this area include:
A Virginia-based supply company made fraudulent claims
and was awarded a FEMA contract to deliver 6 million N95 masks totaling
$38.5 million to protect employees and patients at various Veterans
Administration facilities at the height of the pandemic. The company
failed to deliver because they were never in possession of the masks,
which resulted in felony charges for false statements, wire fraud, and
theft of government funds.

A New Jersey man was sentenced to 6.75 years in prison
for schemes to steal California UI benefits and economic injury
disaster loans. The fraudster filed for over 180 California Economic
Development Department (EDD) UI applications in which he sought
$7,500,000 in UI benefits; the EDD ultimately funded at least
$3,403,656 of the total. The defendant collected personally
identifiable information of numerous individuals from the dark web--
including names, birth dates, and Social Security numbers--and used
their identities to file fraudulent UI claims.

An employee of the Arizona Department of Economic
Security, the state agency responsible for adjudicating COVID-19
unemployment benefit claims, filed 66 fraudulent UI benefits claims
while employed by the agency. This resulted in fraudulent payments
totaling $32,580. The defendant pled guilty to a theft charge and
received a sentence of 24 months of supervised release and restitution
in the amount of $32,580.

Multiple subjects in Virginia fraudulently filed
unemployment insurance claims for 31 prison inmates totaling over
$430,000. The investigation resulted in multiple felony theft-related
charges and sentences ranging from 78 to 115 months incarceration, as
well as restitution in the amount of $290,000.

Many of the audits and investigations addressed in this testimony
reflect collaboration with our external partners. For example, DHS OIG
teams worked extensively with data scientists from Department of Labor
OIG to obtain fraud indicators. DHS OIG participates on numerous task
forces, and we are a member of the Attorney General's COVID-19 Fraud
Enforcement Strike Force. We currently have special agents assigned to
all three strike force teams in California, Florida, and Maryland, and
we are assigning agents to the newest teams being developed in Colorado
and New York. DHS OIG is also one of nine statutory members of the PRAC
where we share information and model practices to help identify COVID-
19 fraud.
Conclusion
DHS OIG's oversight of FEMA's use of resources for non-natural
disasters has identified overpayments, ineligible payments, and
unsupported or unallowable costs totaling approximately $3.9 billion in
improper payments. We also identified an additional $45.4 million in
funds that could be put to better use.
Our audits have consistently identified the need for FEMA to
strengthen internal controls over its programs. Specifically, we have
identified four key areas where additional controls are needed to
protect the integrity of FEMA's programs and prevent fraud, waste, and
abuse. These include controls for:
1. Ensuring eligibility for federal assistance;
2. Ensuring allowability of costs reimbursed;
3. Program oversight; and
4. Ensuring consistent data collection, reliability, tracking, and
reporting practices.

The six audits highlighted in this testimony resulted in 31
recommendations, or approximately 55 percent of the 56 recommendations
pertaining to FEMA's management of non-natural disasters over the last
4 years. The recommendations are intended to strengthen FEMA's
management of its programs and operations. Many of the recommendations
are aimed to help FEMA bolster its program controls, procedures,
guidance, and training to prevent continued misuse of funds, including
fraud, waste, and abuse. DHS OIG also has two ongoing audits and one
planned audit that will continue our oversight of FEMA's expanded use
of its resources on non-natural disasters. These relate to FEMA's:
COVID-19 funding for emergency protective measures,
Administration of the Port Security Grant Program, and
Oversight of the new Shelter and Services Program.

FEMA has taken action to fully address 23 (41 percent) of the 56
recommendations. These actions address some of FEMA's risks by
strengthening certain policies, procedures, and controls related to
non-natural disaster related programs. However, far more remains to be
done. As of today, FEMA has not completed action on 22 (39 percent)
recommendations. Finally, 11 (20 percent) of our recommendations remain
unresolved because FEMA disagrees or has not developed responsive
action plans. In fact, over one-third of DHS OIG's recommendations from
the reports mentioned above remain unresolved. DHS OIG, along with
other oversight entities, remains deeply concerned with FEMA's long-
standing practice of self-certification of applicants. We continue to
work with FEMA to emphasize the need to require additional
documentation to corroborate that applicants are eligible, or to audit
a sample of applicant data for accuracy.
We appreciate the ongoing support of Congress and acknowledgment of
our objective, independent oversight. Thank you for the opportunity to
discuss DHS OIG's critical work.

Mr. Perry. Ms. Bernard, thank you for your testimony.
Mr. Currie, you are now recognized for 5 minutes for your
testimony.

TESTIMONY OF CHRIS CURRIE, DIRECTOR, HOMELAND SECURITY AND
JUSTICE TEAM, U.S. GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE

Mr. Currie. Thank you, Chairman Perry, Ranking Member
Davids, Ranking Member Larsen, and other members of the
committee.
I appreciate the chance to be here today to talk about
GAO's work at FEMA. I like to start these conversations always
by recognizing the men and women at FEMA and the work they do
every day.
We get to work with them all the time; they're very
dedicated public servants. I also respect that they're also
always willing to improve. And before I talk about some of
these challenges, I think that's an important point.
FEMA is under increasing pressure every day to do more and
more. States and locals are as well. It's not just the Federal
level. The reason FEMA is often asked to do these additional
things is because they have the funding, flexibility, and the
capability to do them often when other Federal agencies don't.
The bad news about this, though, is that it takes a huge
toll on the Agency. And I just want to throw out some numbers
just to illustrate this.
In 2016, at the height of hurricane season, FEMA was
actively managing 30 disasters. In 2023 last year, it was
actively managing 71 during hurricane season.
Staff deployments have doubled, too. Before 2017, they
deployed about 3,300 staff a day. After 2017, that's doubled to
about 7,000 staff per day. And so, this has a huge impact on
the workforce.
In COVID alone, FEMA had 59 separate disaster declarations
across the country. So far, they've spent $123 billion total on
COVID, and they expect to spend $144 billion by the end of
September, the end of the fiscal year.
So, that's more than Hurricane Katrina, Sandy, Harvey,
Irma, and Maria so far combined. It's a huge number. And what's
happened is this led to a shortage in the Disaster Relief Fund.
Last year, as the committee knows, FEMA actually had to put
many recovery projects on hold because the Disaster Relief Fund
was running short on money. Congress then appropriated the
money, but now they're in the same position as they were
before.
They now estimate there's going to be a $7 billion shortage
at the end of this fiscal year. And I expect this to continue,
mainly driven by the higher than expected costs of COVID.
While it's hard to exactly quantify the operational impact
this has, it has a huge impact on the workforce. As folks noted
on the panel, last year, we found that FEMA was about 6,000
people short of its staffing goal. That's about 65 percent
operational capacity it was operating at.
And while FEMA is always going to prioritize response
efforts and lifesaving efforts, the impact that this has is
really on the long tail and recovery projects that FEMA
manages.
Most people may not realize that FEMA is managing 500 open
disaster declarations going back to sometimes 20 years to
Hurricane Katrina still. So, it has a huge impact on the
processing and efficiency of those operations.
According to FEMA itself, it recognizes these challenges.
These shortages have led to burnout and attrition issues. And
part of this, according to them, was COVID-19 and the never-
ending disaster season that they now face.
The last point I want to make is the impact these things
have on other parts of FEMA's mission. One consistent theme
we've been trying to drive home in the last few years is the
need for FEMA to streamline its disaster recovery programs.
We hear over and over again from State and locals that we
visit that these programs are complicated, they're lengthy,
they're very hard to navigate, survivors are often--they're not
incentivized to pursue assistance because it's very difficult
to get.
And this is something we've been driving home for a few
years now. And it's very difficult to focus on these additional
challenges and improving when you're having to constantly react
to additional responsibilities on top of additional
responsibilities.
And some of these efforts are going to require years and
years of reform work across the entire country, and it's going
to be very difficult. So, we think that's a very important goal
of FEMA that they need to continue to focus on.
That's my opening statement. I look forward to the
conversation today. Thank you.
[Mr. Currie's prepared statement follows:]

Prepared Statement of Chris Currie, Director, Homeland Security and
Justice Team, U.S. Government Accountability Office
FEMA: Opportunities Exist To Address Mission Challenges and Increased
Workload
Highlights
Why GAO Did This Study
FEMA leads the nation's efforts to prepare for, respond to, and
recover from disasters. In recent years, the increasing frequency and
costs of disasters, the COVID-19 pandemic, and other responsibilities
have placed additional pressures on FEMA.
This statement discusses GAO's prior work and recommendations
related to FEMA's (1) roles and responsibilities outside of natural
disasters and (2) workforce challenges.
This statement is based on products GAO issued from May 2020
through May 2023, along with selected updates to address GAO
recommendations, and updates from FEMA. For those products, GAO
reviewed and analyzed federal laws, agency guidance, and other agency
documents. GAO also analyzed data on FEMA's workforce, and disaster
assistance, among others. GAO interviewed knowledgeable officials from
FEMA; other selected federal agencies; and state, local, and
territorial officials impacted by disasters.
What GAO Recommends
GAO has made 24 recommendations in prior reports designed to
address the various mission and management challenges discussed in this
statement. FEMA has taken steps to address these recommendations. GAO
will continue to monitor FEMA's efforts to determine if they fully
address the challenges GAO has identified.
What GAO Found
The increasing frequency of disasters overall and the additional
responsibilities for responding to other events have stretched the
Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) workforce in unprecedented
ways. GAO's work has identified various challenges FEMA has faced in
its efforts to respond to these additional events.
The scale and scope of federal efforts and funding required to
address the COVID-19 pandemic tested FEMA's and other federal agencies'
capacity to mount an equitable and effective nationwide response.
FEMA's role included lost wages assistance; COVID-19 funeral
assistance; public assistance to state, tribal, and territorial
governments; mission assignments to other federal agencies; and mobile
vaccination units. For example, GAO reported in April 2022 that FEMA
had received and was processing more than 444,000 applications for
COVID-19 funeral assistance since April 2021--when it began accepting
applications--compared to the approximately 6,000 cases of funeral
assistance the agency had processed over the decade prior to the
pandemic. FEMA reported that as of December 2023 it has obligated $123
billion in response to the pandemic and projected that it will obligate
a total of $144 billion by the end of fiscal year 2024. In addition to
the 59 major disaster declarations for COVID-19, as of July 2022, FEMA
had about 500 non-COVID-19 active major disaster declarations in
various states of response and recovery. At the same time, FEMA
recently reported a projected deficit of nearly $6.4 billion in the
fund by September 2024.
GAO has also identified several gaps in FEMA's internal controls
meant to prevent improper or potentially fraudulent payments in funeral
assistance. In April 2022, GAO recommended that FEMA implement
additional control activities to ensure that consistent and accurate
data are available to prevent and detect improper payments and
potential fraud. FEMA has fully addressed this recommendation
implementing additional controls but as of April 2023 has only
partially addressed the recommendation on data consistency and
accuracy. Until FEMA fully addresses this recommendation, they will
continue limited ability oversee and prevent and detect fraud.
GAO's past work has identified longstanding challenges facing the
FEMA workforce, which have been exacerbated given FEMA's additional
responsibilities. Specifically, in May 2023, GAO reported that FEMA had
a disaster workforce strength of approximately 11,400 employees at the
beginning of fiscal year 2022, a gap of 35 percent between the actual
number of staff and the staffing target of 17,670. FEMA officials
stated that they faced additional responsibilities due to COVID-19,
while also managing the traditional seasonal peaks of disaster activity
during the year. This created burnout for many employees and increased
employee attrition. GAO recommended that FEMA document plans to monitor
and evaluate the agency's hiring efforts to address staffing gaps,
among other recommendations. As of January 2024, FEMA has taken some
steps to address these recommendations, including developing yearly
hiring targets to ensure they are on pace to meet overall hiring goals.
To fully address the recommendation, FEMA should finalize its staffing
plans.

__________

Chairman Graves, Chairman Perry, Ranking Members Larsen and Titus,
and Members of the Subcommittee:
Thank you for the opportunity to discuss our work on the Federal
Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) mission challenges and the
increasing workload and expectations on the agency.
FEMA, within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), leads our
nation's efforts to prepare for, protect against, respond to, recover
from, and mitigate the risk of disasters. Under the Robert T. Stafford
Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (Stafford Act), the
President's declaration of a major disaster or emergency is the key
mechanism by which FEMA gets involved in coordinating and funding
disaster response and recovery activities.\1\ The Disaster Relief Fund
is a primary source of federal disaster assistance. In addition to
providing assistance after natural disasters, the Disaster Relief Fund
can be used to assist in response and recovery from other disasters
such as the COVID-19 pandemic.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 42 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 5170, 5191.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In recent years, FEMA has faced an unprecedented demand for its
services and played a significant role in various disasters and
emergencies. For example, FEMA played a key role in the federal
response to the COVID-19 pandemic and responded to other emergencies
such as the condominium collapse in Surfside, Florida in June 2021.
FEMA also assisted with the February 2023 Norfolk Southern train
derailment in East Palestine, Ohio, Afghan refugee resettlement efforts
and at the southwest border as directed by the President and Secretary
of Homeland Security.
In August 2023, funding requirements threatened to exceed available
resources in the Disaster Relief Fund. In response FEMA implemented
measures to prioritize response and immediate recovery efforts, and to
pause new obligations that were not essential for lifesaving and life-
sustaining activities. Such steps may be necessary again in fiscal year
2024. Specifically, FEMA recently reported a projected deficit of
nearly $6.4 billion by September 2024.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management
Agency, Disaster Relief Fund: Monthly Report as of December 31, 2023--
January 8, 2024 Fiscal Year 2024 Report to Congress.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, the increasing frequency of disasters overall and the
additional responsibilities for responding to other events have
stretched FEMA's workforce in unprecedented ways. For example, the
number of disasters FEMA reported managing at the peak of the hurricane
season more than doubled in the last seven years, from 30 disasters in
2016 to 71 disasters in 2023. Similarly, the average daily deployments
increased from 3,331 employees before 2017, to 7,113 after 2017.
FEMA's role during COVID-19 and other events has raised questions
about its capacity to handle additional responsibilities on top of its
normal natural disaster workload. My statement today discusses our
prior work on FEMA's: 1) roles and responsibilities outside of natural
disasters; and 2) workforce challenges.
My statement today is based on products we issued from May 2020 to
May 2023, along with selected updates from FEMA's January 2024 Disaster
Relief Fund Monthly Statement and FEMA's COVID-19 funeral assistance
website.\3\ To perform our prior work, we reviewed and analyzed federal
law, agency guidance, and other agency documentation. We also analyzed
data on FEMA's workforce, and disaster assistance programs, among
others. We interviewed officials from FEMA, and selected federal
agencies, as well as officials from states, local jurisdictions, and
territories impacted by disasters. More detailed information on the
scope and methodology of our prior work can be found in each of the
issued reports cited throughout this statement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ For a complete list of products this statement is based on see
GAO Related Products at the end of the statement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We conducted the work on which this statement is based in
accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. Those
standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our
findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that
the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and
conclusions based on our audit objectives.
FEMA's Roles and Responsibilities Outside of Natural Disasters Have
Increased
COVID-19 Pandemic
We have previously noted that the scale and scope of federal
efforts and funding required to address the COVID-19 pandemic tested
FEMA's and other federal agencies' capacity to mount an equitable and
effective nationwide response. We continue to be concerned about
challenges FEMA faces managing a significant number of concurrent
disaster operations--including for remaining COVID-19 assistance--and
the demands on the Disaster Relief Fund. Our concerns about the ability
of the Disaster Assistance Fund to meet demands continue. In addition
to the 59 major disaster declarations for COVID-19, as of July 2022,
the agency had 494 open non-COVID-19 active major disaster declarations
in various states of response and recovery. We previously reported that
the number of concurrent demands on the Disaster Relief Fund and the
unpredictability of future response needs raised questions about its
availability for the significant number of active disasters in
different stages of recovery, including the ongoing recovery in Puerto
Rico--one of the largest recovery efforts in FEMA history and other
events.\4\ As of December 2023, FEMA reported $123 billion in
obligations for COVID-19 and projected obligations to increase to $144
billion by the end of fiscal year 2024.\5\ FEMA's COVID-19 pandemic
response efforts are discussed below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ GAO, COVID-19: Urgent Actions Needed to Better Ensure an
Effective Federal Response, GAO-21-191 (Washington, D.C.: November 30,
2020).
\5\ Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management
Agency, Disaster Relief Fund: Monthly Report as of December 31, 2023--
January 8, 2024 Fiscal Year 2024 Report to Congress.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Individual Assistance. FEMA provides Individual Assistance to
eligible individuals and households who have sustained losses as a
direct result of a disaster. For weather- and climate-related and
earthquake disasters, many of these needs consist of sheltering and
housing, and assistance includes repairing damaged dwellings and
providing immediate and interim shelter for individuals whose homes
were damaged. For COVID-19, Individual Assistance consisted primarily
of Lost Wages Assistance and COVID-19 funeral assistance.

Lost Wages Assistance. In response to COVID-19, the President
issued a presidential memorandum that directed that up to $44 billion
be made available from the Disaster Relief Fund to provide Lost Wages
Assistance to supplement unemployment insurance programs.\6\ FEMA
approved Lost Wages Assistance grant applications totaling more than
$37.3 billion in grant obligations for 49 states, four territories, and
the District of Columbia. As of April 2022, $36.5 billion had been
expended by the state workforce agencies. This program resulted in
particularly rapid expenditures from the Disaster Relief Fund. In order
to administer supplemental payments for lost wages FEMA leveraged
existing state unemployment insurance systems or agencies.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ The White House, Memorandum on Authorizing the Other Needs
Assistance Program for Major Disaster Declarations Related to
Coronavirus Disease 2019 (Aug. 8, 2020).
\7\ A state's or territory's delivery of supplemental payments for
lost wages was contingent upon an approval of a state's administrative
plan, which describes the partnership between FEMA and the state or
territory for delivering assistance. We have reported on unemployment
insurance programs and their programs' susceptibility to fraud. See
GAO, Unemployment Insurance: Data Indicate Substantial Levels of Fraud
during the Pandemic; DOL Should Implement an Antifraud Strategy, GAO-
23-105523 (Washington, D.C.: Dec. 22, 2022). For example, in December
2022, we reported that measures and estimates indicate substantial
levels of fraud and potential fraud in unemployment insurance programs
during the pandemic. We found that based on formal determinations of
fraud by states and territories, unemployment insurance fraud during
the pandemic is at least $4.3 billion. However, this does not account
for potential fraud that has not been formally determined as such.

COVID-19 Funeral Assistance. We previously reported that from
April 2021--when it began accepting applications--through February
2022, FEMA received and was processing more than 444,000 applications
for COVID-19 funeral assistance and had awarded more than $1.92 billion
for more than 296,000 approved applications, as shown in the figure
below.\8\ According to FEMA, as of January 1, 2024, there were more
than 488,338 applications totaling more than $3.15 billion for 499,096
decedents.\9\ Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, FEMA had processed
approximately 6,000 cases of funeral assistance over the past decade.
FEMA announced that it will continue to provide funeral assistance
until September 30, 2025, to those who have lost loved ones due to the
pandemic.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ GAO, COVID-19: Current and Future Federal Preparedness Requires
Fixes to Improve Health Data and Address Improper Payments, GAO-22-
105397 (Washington, D.C.: Apr. 27, 2022).
\9\ Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management
Agency, COVID-19 Funeral Assistance, accessed on Feb. 1, 2024, COVID-19
Funeral Assistance. FEMA.gov

In April 2022, we identified several gaps in FEMA's internal
controls meant to prevent improper or potentially fraudulent payments
in funeral assistance. We recommended that the FEMA Administrator
implement additional control activities, where needed, and ensure that
consistent and accurate data are available to prevent and detect
improper payments and potential fraud. FEMA has fully addressed our
recommendation on implementing additional control activities. In April
2022, we also recommended that FEMA address deficiencies in the COVID-
19 Funeral Assistance data by updating data records as data are
verified, and adding data fields where necessary, to ensure that
consistent and accurate data are available for monitoring of potential
fraud trends and identifying control deficiencies. However, as of April
2023, the agency had only partially addressed this recommendation. FEMA
officials noted that it has established a new payment integrity and
fraud prevention section tasked with the review and analysis of
potentially fraudulent funeral assistance cases. Additionally, agency
officials stated that they were performing an audit of a random sample
of applications intended to assess the agency's controls more broadly.
While these efforts could help identify inconsistent data elements and
lead to improvements, we continue to believe that the agency should
make targeted efforts to improve the consistency and accuracy of the
COVID-19 funeral assistance data to facilitate oversight and prevent
and detect fraud.
Public Assistance. FEMA provides disaster assistance through its
Public Assistance program to state, local, tribal, and territorial
governments, and certain types of private nonprofit organizations so
that communities can quickly respond to, and recover from, major
disasters or emergencies. After natural disasters, Public Assistance
tends to be used for emergency cleanup and for permanent reconstruction
projects--for example, to rebuild damaged public infrastructure. For
all 59 major disaster declarations for COVID-19, FEMA authorized Public
Assistance for emergency protective measures only. This included
eligible medical care, purchase and distribution of food, non-
congregate medical sheltering, operation of Emergency Operations
Centers, and the purchase and distribution of personal protective
equipment. As of December 2023, FEMA has reported obligating a total of
approximately $74.3 billion for thousands of COVID-19 Public Assistance
projects.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management
Agency, Disaster Relief Fund: Monthly Report as of December 31, 2023--
January 8, 2024 Fiscal Year 2024 Report to Congress.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In October 2021, we found that FEMA inconsistently interpreted and
applied its policies for expenses eligible for COVID-19 Public
Assistance within and across its 10 regions.\11\ These inconsistencies
were due to, among other things, changes in policies as FEMA used the
Public Assistance program for the first time to respond to a nationwide
public health emergency. FEMA officials stated that it was difficult to
ensure consistency in policies as different states and regions were not
experiencing the same things at the same time. We recommended that FEMA
ensure consistency of the agency's interpretation and application of
the COVID-19 Public Assistance policy and require training to ensure
policies are applied consistently nationwide. FEMA has implemented both
recommendations. For example, to ensure consistency of COVID-19
guidance, as of November 2023, FEMA has conducted continued outreach to
all FEMA regions to further clarify and communicate Public Assistance
eligibility requirements nationwide. FEMA also conducted trainings with
staff to help ensure staff interpret and apply COVID-19 policies
consistently.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ GAO, COVID-19: Additional Actions Needed to Improve
Accountability and Program Effectiveness of Federal Response, GAO-22-
105051 (Washington, D.C. October 27, 2021). FEMA has 10 regional
offices located across the United States as follows: Region I:
Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island,
Vermont; Region II: New Jersey, New York, Puerto Rico, and the U.S.
Virgin Islands; Region III: Delaware, District of Columbia, Maryland,
Pennsylvania, Virginia and W. Virginia; Region IV: Alabama, Florida,
Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, N. Carolina, S. Carolina and Tennessee;
Region V: Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio and Wisconsin;
Region VI: Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma and Texas; Region
VII: Iowa, Kansas, Missouri and Nebraska; Region VIII: Colorado,
Montana, N. Dakota, S. Dakota, Utah and Wyoming; Region IX: Arizona,
California, Hawaii, Nevada, American Samoa, Guam, Commonwealth of the
Northern Mariana Islands, Republic of the Marshall Islands, and
Federated States of Micronesia; and Region X: Alaska, Idaho, Oregon and
Washington.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mission Assignments. FEMA issues mission assignments--work orders
directing other federal agencies to provide direct assistance to state,
local, tribal, and territorial governments--to support disaster
response and recovery, which FEMA may reimburse through the Disaster
Relief Fund. FEMA issued mission assignments to multiple federal
agencies--the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Department of Labor,
Environmental Protection Agency, and Department of Defense, among
others--to assist in the COVID-19 response. For example, FEMA issued
mission assignments to the National Guard to help set up public
vaccination sites in some U.S. territories.\12\ As we reported in April
2022, according to FEMA, the estimated cost for National Guard
assistance totaled nearly $6.6 billion as of February 28, 2022.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ GAO, COVID-19: U.S. Territory Experiences Could Inform Future
Federal Relief, GAO-23-106050, (Washington D.C.: Sept.19, 2023).
\13\ GAO, COVID-19: Current and Future Federal Preparedness
Requires Fixes to Improve Health Data and Address Improper Payments,
GAO-22-105397 (Washington, D.C.: Apr. 22, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mobile Vaccination Units. FEMA personnel along with other federal
personnel also ran mobile vaccination units that offered primary
vaccinations, booster shots, and pediatric vaccines for children ages 5
and above. All states, tribes, and territories could request mobile
vaccination units. FEMA started 10 mobile vaccination units between
December 15, 2021, and January 18, 2022; two in Washington, four in New
Mexico, three in Oregon, and one in Pennsylvania. FEMA reported that as
of March 4, 2022, the 10 mobile vaccination units had administered
136,770 vaccinations.
FEMA Assistance in Sheltering at U.S. Southern Border
Outside of declared disasters, FEMA has taken on additional
responsibilities to help local communities around the country better
manage the costs of noncitizen arrivals in their communities. FEMA's
Emergency Food and Shelter Program has provided funding to
organizations assisting individuals and families encountered by the
Department of Homeland Security.\14\ In fiscal years 2019-2023, FEMA
provided $715 million in humanitarian relief grants to nonprofit and
governmental organizations that provided services to noncitizens.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ GAO, Southwest Border: DHS Coordinates with and Funds
Nonprofits Serving Noncitizens, GAO-23-106147, (Washington D.C.: Apr
19, 2023).
\15\ The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023, appropriated $800
million for a new Shelter and Services Program that is to be
administered by FEMA. Pub. L. No. 117-328, 136 Stat. 4459, 4730 (2022).
The Shelter and Services Program is to replace the humanitarian relief
funding provided as part of FEMA's Emergency Food and Shelter Program,
which has provided funding to organizations assisting individuals and
families encountered by the Department of Homeland Security. A portion
of the appropriation for the Shelter and Services Program for fiscal
year 2023 was awarded through the Humanitarian Emergency Food and
Shelter Program while FEMA establishes the new program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Figure 1: Fiscal Year 2021 Emergency Food and Shelter Program
Humanitarian Relief Funding, Nonprofit Spending by Service Category

Note: Emergency Food and Shelter Program Humanitarian Relief Funding
is provided as advanced funding and reimbursements. Advanced funding is
for designated nonprofits or governmental organizations that further
disburse the funds to local service providers in their area and may
also use the funds for services they provide directly. Reimbursements
are payments made to nonprofits to reimburse them for expenses incurred
when providing services to noncitizens. In fiscal year 2021, of the
nearly $123 million distributed, about $113 million was advanced
funding and about $10 million was reimbursement funding. Figure 1 shows
the nonprofit spending of reimbursement funding on different categories
of services. Per capita represents a set reimbursement rate that
nonprofits can receive for each noncitizen they serve. Nonprofits can
choose to request reimbursement at a per capita rate instead of
requesting reimbursement for their actual expenditure amounts in the
food and shelter and medical and other categories.

FEMA also assists in other DHS efforts at the border. For example,
in February 2022, DHS launched the Southwest Border Coordination
Center--comprised of officials from U.S. Customs and Border Protection,
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and FEMA, among others--to
establish a unified approach to the increased number of noncitizens
encountered at the southwest border. According to responsible
officials, the Southwest Border Coordination Center works with DHS
field locations and nonprofits located along the southwest border to
increase the efficiency of that coordination. The Center also works to
build a network of nonprofits, cities, and counties located in the
interior of the U.S. to further support noncitizens traveling to their
communities.
Increasing Workload Contributes To Continuing Workforce Management
Challenges
Our past work has identified longstanding challenges facing the
FEMA workforce which have been exacerbated under FEMA's additional
responsibilities. Specifically, we reported on issues related to: (1)
staffing shortages; (2) workforce qualifications; (3) staff
development; and (4) workplace morale. We have made recommendations to
address challenges we have identified, and FEMA has taken steps to
address our recommendations. We will continue to monitor staffing
shortages and other workplace challenges as they affect staff's morale
and FEMA's ability to deliver required assistance.
Staffing shortages. Increasingly complex and severe natural
disasters coupled with the COVID-19 pandemic and responsibilities at
the southern border have created an unprecedented demand for FEMA's
disaster workforce. In May 2023, we reported that as of the beginning
of fiscal year 2022, FEMA had approximately 11,400 disaster employees
on board and a staffing goal of 17,670, creating an overall staffing
gap of approximately 6,200 staff (35 percent) across different
positions.\16\ This means that FEMA's disaster workforce was operating
at 65 percent force capacity during the pandemic.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ GAO, FEMA Disaster Workforce: Actions Needed to Improve Hiring
Data and Address Staffing Gaps, GAO-23-105663 (Washington, D.C.: May 2,
2023).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Figure 2: Staffing Gaps for the Federal Emergency Management Agency's
(FEMA's) Disaster Workforce, Fiscal Years 2019 through 2022
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

FEMA officials attributed these staffing gaps to the loss of staff
due to the year-round pace caused by the COVID-19 pandemic and
increasing number of disasters, a combination which officials said
caused burnout for many employees and increased employee attrition.
During fiscal year 2020, which included the beginning of the COVID-19
pandemic, the disaster workforce lost 20 percent of its staff (over
2,600 employees). These losses resulted in staffing gaps in certain
positions, and an overall decline in force strength.
Specifically, the Public Assistance cadre lost over 400 staff
(approximately 16 percent) in fiscal year 2020.\17\ With the increase
in staffing targets and reduction in staff, the Public Assistance
cadre's force capacity decreased from over 100 percent to about 55
percent during the pandemic. This cadre serves important functions
including administering assistance to state, territorial, and local
governments, a responsibility that greatly increased during the COVID-
19 pandemic.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ Cadres are groups of FEMA employees organized by type of work
(organizational or programmatic function). These groups are based on
skills and experience and generally deploy to an incident at varying
points in the response and recovery phases, depending on their
functions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We recommended that FEMA document plans to monitor and evaluate the
agency's hiring efforts to address staffing gaps, among other
recommendations. Such plans would help FEMA determine how effective
hiring efforts are at closing staffing gaps and prioritize these
efforts accordingly. FEMA has taken steps to address these
recommendations, including developing yearly hiring targets to ensure
they are on pace to meet overall hiring goals. We will continue to
monitor FEMA's implementation of its efforts to determine if they
address the challenges we identified.
Workforce qualifications. In May 2020, we also reported that FEMA
faced challenges deploying staff with the right qualifications and
skills at the right times to meet disaster needs.\18\ Qualification
status in the qualification and deployment systems FEMA uses to
identify staff qualification status and skillsets, was not a reliable
indicator of staff's ability to perform in the field. For example, in
14 of the focus groups we held with FEMA staff, participants said that
staff who were designated as qualified in FEMA's system did not always
have the necessary skills for their position. We recommended that FEMA
develop a plan to address challenges in providing quality information
to field leaders about staff qualifications. In June 2022, FEMA
developed plans to inform field leadership about staff skills and
abilities, among other things. We also recommended that FEMA develop
mechanisms to assess deployment outcomes. FEMA said it is modifying its
force structure targets, with input from field leadership, and has
implemented continuous data collection efforts. FEMA has fully
addressed these recommendations as we believe these actions could
better enable the agency to use its disaster workforce as flexibly and
effectively as possible to meet mission needs in the field.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ GAO, FEMA Disaster Workforce: Actions Needed to Address
Deployment and Staff Development Challenges, GAO-20-360, (Washington
D.C.; May 4, 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Staff development. In May 2020, we also found shortcomings in
FEMA's ability to ensure staff training and development for the skills
needed in the field.\19\ For example, Reservists--often comprising the
greatest proportion of FEMA staff in the field during a disaster--faced
barriers to staff development and inconsistently received performance
evaluations.\20\ We recommended that FEMA create a staff development
program that addresses access to training, development, and feedback.
FEMA has fully addressed this recommendation by, for example including
process improvements for development opportunities, and creating a plan
to consistently conduct performance reviews.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ GAO-20-360.
\20\ Reservists are on-call FEMA employees that work intermittently
as required during a disaster or emergency incident.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Workplace morale. We have reported multiple times that workforce
challenges can affect FEMA staff's morale.\21\ For example, in May 2020
we reported that planning managers in a joint field office we visited
said that staff inaccurately designated as qualified in FEMA's
qualification system were sometimes only able to complete half of the
tasks expected of them, which hindered the cadre's ability to support
mission needs. They noted that this affected morale, added to others'
workload, and could turn a 12-hour day into a 14-hour day.\22\
Additionally, in September 2020, we reported that for several years
leading up to our reporting, FEMA's call center workforce faced
challenges using program guidance to assist survivors and struggled
with low morale.\23\ In that report, we also found that opportunities
existed to improve employee engagement and morale among these staff.
Staff we spoke to consistently cited engagement challenges that
undermined morale in all four call center locations. According to staff
at all four locations, poor employee engagement from their management
and supervisors resulted in pressures related to productivity, among
other challenges, particularly since the 2017 hurricane season
generated a high work volume for certain call center staff. Staff in
all four locations stated they felt pressured to meet productivity
standards, which conflicted with providing quality service to the
survivor.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ GAO, FEMA Workforce: Long-Standing and New Challenges Could
Affect Mission Success, GAO-22-105631 (Washington, D.C.: Jan. 20,
2022).
\22\ GAO-20-360
\23\ GAO, Disaster Assistance: Additional Actions Needed to
Strengthen FEMA's Individuals and Households Program, GAO-20-503
(Washington, D.C.: Sep. 30, 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We recommended FEMA use desirable characteristics of employee
engagement--including performance feedback, career development,
communication, and attention to work-life balance--while completing
planned activities for improving morale. FEMA has since fully addressed
this recommendation by implementing a Wellness and Morale program and
providing additional resources, such as peer support and professional
support through its Employee Health and Wellness Hub.
Thank you, Chairman Graves, Chairman Perry, Ranking Members Larsen
and Titus, and Members of the Subcommittee. This concludes my prepared
statement. I would be happy to respond to any questions you may have at
this time.
Related GAO Products
COVID-19: U.S. Territory Experiences Could Inform Future Federal
Relief, GAO-23-106050. (Washington D.C.: September 19, 2023)

FEMA Disaster Workforce: Actions Needed to Improve Hiring Data and
Address Staffing Gaps, GAO-23-105663 (Washington, D.C. May 2, 2023)

Southwest Border: DHS Coordinates with and Funds Nonprofits Serving
Noncitizens, GAO-23-106147, (Washington D.C.: Apr 19, 2023).

Unemployment Insurance: Data Indicate Substantial Levels of Fraud
during the Pandemic; DOL Should Implement an Antifraud Strategy, GAO-
23-105523 (Washington, D.C.: Dec. 22, 2022).

Disaster Recovery: Actions Needed to Improve the Federal Approach, GAO-
23-104956 (Washington, D.C. Nov 15, 2022)

FEMA Workforce: Additional Actions Needed to Help Prevent and Respond
to Discrimination and Harassment, GAO-23-105243 (Washington, D.C., Oct
20, 2022)

COVID-19: Current and Future Federal Preparedness Requires Fixes to
Improve Health Data and Address Improper Payments, GAO-22-105397
(Washington, D.C.: Apr. 27, 2022).

FEMA Workforce: Long-Standing and New Challenges Could Affect Mission
Success, GAO-22-105631 (Washington, D.C.: Jan. 20, 2022).

COVID-19: Additional Actions Needed to Improve Accountability and
Program Effectiveness of Federal Response, GAO-22-105051 (Washington,
D.C. October 27, 2021).

COVID-19: Urgent Actions Needed to Better Ensure an Effective Federal
Response, GAO-21-191 (Washington, D.C.: November 30, 2020).

Disaster Assistance: Additional Actions Needed to Strengthen FEMA's
Individuals and Households Program, GAO-20-503 (Washington, D.C., Sep.
30, 2020).

FEMA Disaster Workforce: Actions Needed to Address Deployment and Staff
Development Challenges, GAO-20-360, (Washington D.C.; May 4, 2020).

Mr. Perry. Thank you, Mr. Currie, for your testimony. We
will now turn to questions, and the Chair will recognize
himself for 5 minutes of questions.
We already kind of have briefly discussed the ever-
expanding role of FEMA to include what I refer to as non-
Stafford Act disasters.
And as I highlighted in my opening statement, they seem to
be increasing every single year.
Now, Administrator Criswell, I think that you are dedicated
to your mission. I think your staff, your employees are as
well, and I think that in many cases, you've got this huge
responsibility that's almost untamable under your purview, and
the people, like I said, are good people that are trying to get
the job done. You don't have the resources. And quite honestly,
I don't think Congress has helped you very much by throwing
more at you, but you've taken the job, so, you're going to have
to take the tough questions.
One of the disasters we're talking about is the Nation's
southwest border. The Biden administration and the DHS
Secretary claim there's not a crisis, but, obviously, it's at
least invoked some kind of disaster response, right? I mean,
that's what we're talking about here.
Can you tell us how much money FEMA has spent to address
the illegal foreign national crisis on the border?
Ms. Criswell. Chairman Perry, thank you for the question.
FEMA's role in supporting the border operations has been
limited to the grant programs that Congress has directed us to
administer.
As I stated in my opening statement, it started with the
EFSP Humanitarian Program and now has moved into the Shelter
and Services Program. That is the money that we have committed,
is what has been appropriated for us by Congress.
Mr. Perry. So, how much is that?
Ms. Criswell. I can get you the numbers, and I'll have the
staff get you the exact year over year. I know that's available
on public record. I just don't have it right now.
Mr. Perry. I mean, I'm seeing the Emergency Food and
Shelter Humanitarian is $900 million; Shelter and Services
Program is $425 million; the Emergency Food and Shelter itself
I think is $775 million or something like that.
The money that has been spent here, particularly by the
charities that make up the board of the Emergency Food and
Shelter Program, would you say it encourages--I mean, maybe not
by design, but some people believe it is by design--do you
think it encourages illegal crossings at the border by foreign
nationals?
Ms. Criswell. Well, what I can tell you, Chairman Perry, is
that we are facing a broken immigration system, and----
Mr. Perry [interposing]. I understand that.
Ms. Criswell [continuing]. This program that Congress has
directed us to administer is providing relief to those border
agencies, border communities, nonprofit organizations, small
communities to help them with the cost that they are incurring.
Mr. Perry. I understand that, but what I am saying is if
you are on the other side of the border, and you know that when
you come to this side of the border, you are going to receive,
at a minimum, shelter, food, transportation, acute medical
care, personal hygiene supplies, and everything necessary to
manage that, does that encourage people to stay on the other
side of the border where they have none of that, or does that
encourage them to come to this side of the border where they
get all that?
Ms. Criswell. Chairman Perry, I am not an immigration
expert on what the causes of people coming across the border
are, but we will continue to support Congress' direction to
help support those communities that are experiencing costs.
Mr. Perry. All right. Well, I am going to tell you that it
does encourage them to come. And, like I said, you are forced
to, I guess, manage this program, so to speak.
If FEMA was its own agency, outside of the Department of
Homeland Security, do you think that it would still repeatedly
be called on to respond to the disaster at the southwest
border?
Ms. Criswell. The role of emergency managers continues to
get more well understood. And I would say the role of FEMA and
our technical ability to provide coordination and
collaboration, we provide that level of support to many
different Federal agencies, not just the Department.
Mr. Perry. No, I get it, but do you have a direct line to
the President in times of disaster?
Mr. Perry. Correct.
Ms. Criswell. Right? You have direct, otherwise, you
generally work through the Secretary. Have you had a
conversation with the President regarding your work on the
southwest border and the funds that are being expended there?
Ms. Criswell. My conversations with the President have
focused around the responses that we have been doing for
natural disasters.
Mr. Perry. Does it include the border?
Ms. Criswell. Just natural disasters.
Mr. Perry. Did you say just natural disasters?
Ms. Criswell. Those are the things that I work with the
President on----
Mr. Perry [interrupting]. OK. So, you haven't had a
conversation with the President regarding your role as the
Administrator of FEMA and the money being spent at the
southwest border?
Ms. Criswell. I work through the Department of Homeland
Security and the Secretary.
Mr. Perry. But you have or have not had a conversation with
the President? It should be easy.
Ms. Criswell. No, I have not had a conversation with the
President regarding the border. We are just administering the
grant dollars that have been directed by Congress.
Mr. Perry. All right. Thank you. My time has expired.
The Chair now recognizes the gentleman, Mr. Larsen, for his
questions.
Mr. Larsen of Washington. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
So, a report for the FY 2022 House Homeland Security
appropriations bill directed the OIG to review FEMA's
Individual Assistance Program and identify whether
recommendations from oversight entities, including OIG, may
have inadvertently led FEMA to develop policies and procedures
that are overly restrictive and prevent disaster survivors from
accessing aid.
Ms. Bernard, can you summarize the IG's findings and
explain how the IG considers the hardships that disaster
survivors are experiencing and the need for quick assistance
when issuing recommendations to minimize waste, fraud, and
abuse?
Ms. Bernard. Certainly. Thank you for that question. I'd be
happy to.
The work that we've done on Individual Assistance has been
primarily focused on FEMA's administration of the Individual
Assistance Programs in terms of its management and oversight.
We have not done specific work to look at whether the
administration was equitable or streamlined, but what we have
found is FEMA should make improvements to be sure that
applicants are eligible for the benefits that they're receiving
and that costs are allowable.
Mr. Larsen of Washington. Were the findings from your
review incorporated into recent reports, including the 2023
report on FEMA's COVID-19 Funeral Assistance Program delivery?
Ms. Bernard. I'm sorry, can you repeat the question?
Mr. Larsen of Washington. Were the findings from the review
incorporated into recent IG reports, including the 2023, then
2022, report on FEMA's COVID-19 Funeral Assistance Program
delivery?
Ms. Bernard. Yes, we did release, I believe you're asking
if we released a report on FEMA's oversight of the Funeral
Assistance programming. Yes, we did issue findings.
Mr. Larsen of Washington. And were the findings from the
2022 review that the Homeland Security appropriations bill
asked for, were the results from those findings incorporated
into your report?
Ms. Bernard. I would have to check to make sure.
Mr. Larsen of Washington. Great, thanks. I will say,
reading your testimony just made me think that we have a pre-
COVID-19 set of policies and procedures that we're applying to
a global pandemic response and perhaps they don't fit.
But those are the rules and procedures that you have to
apply when in fact, maybe they weren't the best things to apply
to a situation where we're all scrambling to a randomness that
came with COVID-19.
Not that you didn't find legitimate fraud, waste, and
abuse, but some of your testimony, though, talks about things
that maybe in your judgment weren't allowable, but it's not
really firm that it wasn't allowable.
It's just that you or the OIG made a judgment about things
as opposed to put it up against a hard metric.
Ms. Bernard. I will say in conducting our audit work, using
the Funeral Assistance Program as an example, we do use our
criteria--the criteria is the Stafford Act and whether the
expenses are necessary or allowable.
So, we do have a very specific set of criteria that we're
testing against, so, I don't believe the findings are open for
interpretation, but FEMA does certainly have the latitude to
issue waivers or to interpret its policies.
I believe our findings--the key message was that FEMA was
interpreting the Stafford Act requirements differently for
COVID-19 deaths than it had for deaths from other disasters.
So, we just asked FEMA to be consistent in its application
of the Stafford Act.
Mr. Larsen of Washington. I try not to be too flippant
around here, but to the family that spent $727 in flowers for
their loved one's funeral, I'm glad they spent it on that.
Administrator Criswell, in 2023, NOAA reported the damages,
and I covered this, the damages from disasters totaled $92.9
billion and 28 separate climate disasters. Can you give us some
guidance on pre- and post-disaster mitigation resources and how
you would better use them in order to deal with this increasing
frequency of extreme weather events and climate change-based
disasters?
Ms. Criswell. Yes, Ranking Member Larsen.
We are seeing an increase in the number and the severity of
the severe weather events that we are responding to, which are
creating more complex and complicated and costly recoveries.
Our focus this year has really been to lift up the part of
our Agency that does the work before disasters, the ``before''
part of our mission statement, investing in our mitigation
programs like the Building Resilient Infrastructure and
Communities, as well as our Flood Mitigation Assistance, and
our post-disaster mitigation through the Hazard Mitigation
Grant Program.
These are three programs that can really help communities
build to a level of resilience that they can reduce the impact
that they can expect to see in the next 5 or 10 years, even 20
years, from these severe weather events that are happening.
But we also focus on individual resilience and helping
communities become better prepared, so individuals know the
steps that they need to take to protect themselves and their
families in the event that they are in the path of one of these
storms.
Mr. Larsen of Washington. Thanks.
I yield back.
Mr. Perry. The Chair thanks the gentleman.
The Chair now recognizes Chairman Graves from Louisiana.
Mr. Graves of Louisiana. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Administrator, thank you very much for being here, and I
want to echo the comments of the chairman. A job where all you
do is deal with disasters is certainly a challenging one, and I
question you and other people's judgment of taking that job,
but thanks for your service anyway.
I first want to see if I can dispense with two quick
questions. Number one, you and I have had numerous
conversations on Risk Rating 2.0. I wanted to ask if you would
commit to give this committee access to the methodology for
Risk Rating 2.0, as well as how levees and other protection
systems are treated in determining rates?
Ms. Criswell. Representative Graves, we will be happy to
continue to provide briefings on the methodology that we are
using for Risk Rating 2.0. I know that we have provided several
briefings so far, but I am committed to continuing that
process.
Mr. Graves of Louisiana. So, briefings but not the actual
methodology? FEMA is going to continue to not provide us access
to that information?
Ms. Criswell. I believe that we have shared all of the
methodology and the techniques in how we are implementing Risk
Rating 2.0, but I am committed to----
Mr. Graves of Louisiana [interrupting]. In addition to how
protection systems are treated, things like levees are treated,
in calculating the methodology?
Ms. Criswell. Can you repeat that, sir?
Mr. Graves of Louisiana. Including how levees are treated
in regard to how they provide protection or lower rates?
Ms. Criswell. They are definitely a factor in the risk
rating calculation to determine what the premium is. Again,
we'll be happy to continue to have these conversations on how
the different factors are incorporated into an individual's
premium.
Mr. Graves of Louisiana. I would very much appreciate that.
Second one, look, the purpose of this hearing is to discuss, I
guess, FEMA's sort of expanded role in getting involved in
areas like dealing with illegal immigrants coming into the
country and the shelter and housing programs.
At home, we represent 750,000 Americans, and as you know,
we have dealt with devastating consequences of hurricanes, and
I want to thank you for coming down and touring the community
with us after Hurricane Ida.
We still have parishes that still have PWs outstanding for
schools. We have parishes that have PWs outstanding for other
public needs or I should say school boards, for the schools,
particularly in Lafourche and Terrebonne Parishes. We have
Ochsner Hospital System that I think still has like a couple
hundred million dollars in outstanding reimbursements under
their PWs. They even went back and worked with RAND Corporation
to use their methodology for duplication of benefits,
resubmitted, still don't have anything.
We have Thibodaux Regional Hospital, which was the only
hospital system that was fully operating in that region during
the disaster, that still has at least $10 million in
outstanding PWs in category D and E, as I recall.
Can I get a commitment that you will please prioritize the
work on actually American citizens and outstanding debts there?
This has a profound impact on their ability to provide
services, whether it's teaching our kids if they're operating
in substandard facilities or broken or shared facilities, as
well as our hospital systems.
Ms. Criswell. Congressman Graves, that is our priority. The
priority of our Agency is to assist these communities that have
been impacted by the severe weather events as a result of
climate change.
Mr. Graves of Louisiana. Administrator, that----
Ms. Criswell [interrupting]. So, we will continue to
prioritize that work.
Mr. Graves of Louisiana. Administrator, I would rather if
you didn't say ``continue to'' because I feel like it hasn't
been dealt with the urgency that it needs to be dealt with.
And, just going back to the comments that the chairman made, as
I recall, the Agency's been operating with about 65 percent of
its staffing needs, and so, if you're being pulled into
directions that do not prioritize Americans, then that clearly
deprioritizes or it jeopardizes how our own citizens are being
treated, and so, it does raise very significant concerns.
Look, I am going to say it over and over again. I think as
an agency of the United States Government, we need to
prioritize United States citizens and their needs. If our
hospital systems are waiting years for reimbursement, if our
school systems are waiting years for reimbursement, I don't
think I can go back to people at home and say, yes, they're
properly triaging the needs of our own citizens.
I can't do that, and so, I would just rather if you didn't
say you will ``continue to.'' I just want to ask you to please
redouble efforts to address the needs of our own citizens.
Ms. Criswell. I will go back with my team and see if
there's anything we can do to expedite some of the projects
that you have mentioned, but that is our priority.
Mr. Graves of Louisiana. Thank you. Director Currie, I am
out of time, but I do want to follow up with you on better
synchronizing HUD and FEMA and other resources from disasters,
and I will do that on the record. Thank you.
Mr. Perry. The Chair thanks the gentleman from Louisiana
and recognizes the other gentleman from Louisiana, Mr. Carter.
Mr. Carter of Louisiana. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank
you to all of our witnesses who are joining us today.
The ability for FEMA to adequately respond to all types of
disasters is a major concern in my home district in southeast
Louisiana.
The threats to my district and our Nation are increasing
each year as impacts from the climate crisis worsen, making
storms more deadly and weather more unpredictable.
Louisiana has witnessed major hurricanes, record heat
waves, droughts, wildfires, and Mississippi River level so low
that it threatened the drinking water in New Orleans and the
metropolitan area that I proudly represent.
Another looming disaster for Louisiana is Risk Rating 2.0
and the rising cost of insurance, particularly flood insurance.
Administrator Criswell, increased rates from the National
Flood Insurance Program's Risk Rating 2.0 are exacerbating
housing affordability issues in my district and may cause
homeowners to opt out of the program altogether.
In the past, Secretary Mayorkas has admitted that Risk
Rating 2.0 is, in fact, flawed and needs some tweaking. What
steps have been taken, if any, to fix these flaws and provide
affordable flood insurance for all Americans?
Ms. Criswell. Congressman Carter, I appreciate our
continued conversation regarding the policyholders in Louisiana
regarding Risk Rating 2.0.
I think the most important fact that I will continue to
talk about is that Risk Rating 2.0 now bases your flood
insurance premium on your actual risk. And so, while this does
mean an increase for some homeowners, it also means a decrease.
In fact, 20 percent of our policyholders have seen a
decrease.
However, as you and I have discussed, there is a certain
group of individuals that are caught in this ``I don't have an
expensive home, but I live in this high-risk area and cannot
afford the flood insurance.''
And we are committed to continuing to work with Congress on
the affordability proposal that we have put forth as part of
the NFIP reauthorization.
We believe this is the best way for people to truly
understand their risk, but also have the ability to purchase
the insurance to protect their families.
Mr. Carter of Louisiana. Twenty-percent decrease----
Ms. Criswell [interposing]. Across the Nation.
Mr. Carter of Louisiana [continuing]. Eighty-percent
increase. I don't like those odds. I'm only talking about
Louisiana, and I appreciate your mentioning a broader swath.
But for me and Congressman Graves and the Louisiana delegation,
other Members that represent areas throughout this country that
are impacted, those aren't good odds for us.
And so, I appreciate that. We are going to keep hammering
home the danger and the catastrophe that it's causing the
people of Louisiana.
FEMA released a mitigation discount visualization tool for
Risk Rating 2.0, but it does not show in actual dollars how
this affects your premium. Can FEMA create a more comprehensive
public-facing premium calculator so policyholders can see their
rating factors and how rating factors affect their annual
premiums?
Ms. Criswell. Congressman Carter, I'll certainly take that
back to my team and have a conversation with them. I do believe
that one of the benefits of Risk Rating 2.0 now is that a
policyholder can sit with their insurance agent and put in
different scenarios to determine what the impact will be on
their insurance premium.
But I'll certainly take that back and see what we can
continue to do to increase that awareness for individuals to
know what will impact their premiums.
Mr. Carter of Louisiana. And I am going to come and further
question as Congressman Graves just did relative to the
algorithm, the methodology.
I think everyone deserves to be able to evaluate and
explore how you arrive at these numbers. And I get it. You've
tried to work with us, and I appreciate that.
I know you've got a very difficult job, but we do, too. And
so, it's very difficult for us to stand before audiences and
constituents and not be able to explain what methodology is
being used to arrive at these numbers, many of which make no
sense to us.
So, and I know that it's been asked multiple times, and I
know it may be--obviously, it's difficult to get to us, but I'd
ask you to redouble your efforts on finding a way that we can
better explain to our constituencies how you arrive at these
numbers.
And I've got just a few seconds. So, I want to, after a
storm, getting people back into their homes is one of your
Agency's most important priorities. Sometimes, but not always.
FEMA can make repairs to somebody's house to get them back
in quickly. However, this was often limited to prohibitions of
making permanent repairs. How is this addressed in your new
Individual Assistance Program through its regulations?
Ms. Criswell. So, through the new interim final rule, we do
have some expanded ability to do some repairs to homes. But the
Disaster Survivors Fairness Act, which Congress is moving
forward on a bipartisan level, will actually give us greater
capability to do direct repairs to homes, as well as provide
grants to States to help us along the way.
I think the combination of both the Disaster Survivors
Fairness Act, as well as our interim final rule, are going to
really help individuals jump start their road to recovery in a
more commonsense approach, for us to be able to use our funding
more efficiently and more effectively.
Mr. Carter of Louisiana. And so, the prohibition where a
person can fix their home and make it even better, but they've
been prohibited from doing so because it's deemed a permanent
fix. Is that something that's addressed in these regulation
changes?
Ms. Criswell. We have expanded slightly the ability to do
some of those repairs within the regulation. It will be
addressed more fully if the Disaster Survivors Fairness Act
passes.
Mr. Carter of Louisiana. Thank you. I yield back.
Mr. Perry. The Chair thanks the gentleman.
The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Wisconsin,
Representative Van Orden.
Mr. Van Orden. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Ms. Criswell, you mentioned in your testimony that you had
several of your FEMA folks working on the southern border,
helping with the illegal immigrants. And you've said that at
one point you had 250; is that right?
Ms. Criswell. Yes, sir. At our peak, we did not have more
than 250 people engaged.
Mr. Van Orden. OK. You didn't have more than 250. OK.
Great. So, what's the pay grade of those 250 people?
Ms. Criswell. I would have to have my staff get back to
you.
Mr. Van Orden. Let's have a look at that please. So, let's
just say they are 13's, you've got 250, that's $33.5 million.
Did you calculate that into your cost of what you expended for
the--I don't even know what program that would be.
Is that out of the $715 million provided for humanitarian
assistance? Did you count the salaries of these people?
Ms. Criswell. The majority of the people that we have sent
to support the southern border have been reimbursed to us
through the Economy Act by the Department.
Mr. Van Orden. OK. So, they are being paid by taxpayers'
dollars?
Ms. Criswell. Correct.
Mr. Van Orden. OK. How many of these people were working on
the southern border, immediately following the fires in Maui?
Ms. Criswell. Immediately following what? Sorry, I didn't
hear you.
Mr. Van Orden. The wildfires in Maui, the most devastating
wildfire in the history of the United States and the most
horrendous tragedy that has ever happened to the State of
Hawaii?
Ms. Criswell. I would have to get back to you as to exactly
how many were there at that particular time, but I can tell you
that currently today we have less than 50 people out of our
workforce of nearly 24,000----
Mr. Van Orden [interrupting]. I got you. My point is this:
if there is one single member of FEMA working on the border
processing illegal aliens coming into the country when our
Hawaiian brothers and sisters are without homes, that's one too
many, and I think that you have lost your way. Are you familiar
with the term ``mission creep''?
Ms. Criswell. I am.
Mr. Van Orden. OK. Although, as you know, FEMA is not an
immigration or law enforcement agency; however, FEMA has
recognized expertise in executing grant programs. So, you are
good at giving away taxpayers' dollars?
Ms. Criswell. The expertise that we have, sir, is to bring
collaboration and----
Mr. Van Orden [interrupting]. Ma'am, this is your
testimony. You are recognized experts in executing grant
programs. OK? So, you are good at giving away other people's
money. And I believe that if I read this stuff and I see how
your Agency's been working in particular at the southern
border, you are confusing emotion with progress.
Ms. Bernard, I am looking at this stuff, and I see there
are billions and billions of dollars that were fraudulently
expended, right? And you say repeatedly, FEMA has interpreted
these things. FEMA made these decisions. FEMA decided to do
these additional duties.
FEMA is not a person. FEMA is an agency. Do you have the
names of the individual people that made these, I think, very
poor decisions to expend billions of taxpayers' dollars
fraudulently?
Do you have anybody's names attached to these expenditures?
Ms. Bernard. So, if I'm understanding your question, you're
asking if we have the names of the fraudsters?
We do have a very robust COVID Fraud Unit that's conducting
over 500 investigations.
Mr. Van Orden. Yes. I see that. I mean, the names of the
people at FEMA that made these incredibly poor decisions.
Because FEMA is--that's an agency, it's not a person.
An agency is made up of people that make bad decisions. Do
you have their names?
Ms. Bernard. We do not have their names. No. But we have,
generally, across the board, made several recommendations for
FEMA to improve its ability to get money into the right hands
and keep money from the wrong hands.
Mr. Van Orden. OK. So, you make recommendations to an
agency, not individual people, so, the individual person is
not--they don't even know if they made a good decision or bad?
Is that right?
Ms. Bernard. That's correct in this context, yes.
Mr. Van Orden. OK. Has anyone been fired for the misuse of
billions of taxpayers' dollars, to your awareness?
Ms. Bernard. I wouldn't want to speak to the outcome of
investigations because we do have so many investigations
underway.
Mr. Van Orden. You can say no. To the best of your
knowledge, has anyone been fired for misusing billions of
taxpayers' dollars?
Ms. Bernard. I wouldn't want to speculate. No.
Mr. Van Orden. I'm going to take that as a no. Has anyone
been disciplined?
Ms. Bernard. Again, I would point to our investigative
work.
Mr. Van Orden. Has anyone been retrained? OK. Hold on a
sec.
Ms. Criswell, has anyone been fired, disciplined, or
retrained for the misuse of billions of taxpayers' dollars,
from your Agency?
Ms. Criswell. Congressman, as it relates to the findings in
the OIG reports and those, especially, that we have disagreed
with, no.
Mr. Van Orden. OK. All right. Then how do we learn? We keep
doing the same thing.
You people are spending billions and billions of American
taxpayers' dollars fraudulently. And if I don't know who did
it, we can't hold them accountable, and we are going to keep
doing the same thing over and over again.
This is why people hate Washington, DC. You people are
giving billions of dollars that you throw willy-nilly around
because you can, Mr. Currie, and you keep doing it over and
over again. And we don't learn. That's why people hate
bureaucracies.
Ms. Bernard, you need to be empowered. You need to be
empowered to recognize individuals, not an agency. And you need
to be empowered to recommend them being fired and held
financially accountable and put into prison for fraud.
Ms. Criswell, you are the leader. You are the captain of
this ship. And if you are not cleaning house right now, you are
not doing your job, ma'am. Because you've been put--you are
responsible for billions of taxpayers' dollars and thousands of
people's jobs and tens of thousands of Americans' well-being
and tragedy, and if you have leakers on your team, it is not
going to work out.
Sorry for----
Mr. Perry [interrupting]. The Chair thanks the gentleman.
Mr. Van Orden. I yield back.
Mr. Perry. The Chair thanks the gentleman.
Administrator Criswell, you mentioned the Economy Act that
was used to reimburse. Is there an interagency agreement that
we can see regarding the use of those funds? Is there
documentation regarding that that the committee can have?
Ms. Criswell. For anything that we would be reimbursed for
the Economy Act on, there should be paperwork. We'll be happy
to follow up with you.
Mr. Perry. All right. We're going to formally request that
at this time.
The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Arizona,
Representative Stanton.
Mr. Stanton. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, for
allowing me to waive onto the subcommittee to discuss critical
issues to my home State of Arizona.
Administrator Criswell, when you were before this
subcommittee last September, I raised concerns with the
implementation of FEMA's Shelter and Services Program or SSP.
As you know, Congress designed the SSP program to reimburse
local governments and nonprofits that provide essential
services to migrants after processing by border patrol.
But inexplicably, FEMA hasn't prioritized border
communities while allocating this funding. The southern Arizona
coalition, a network of local governments and nonprofits, was
only eligible to apply for a total of $12 million under this
program, a fraction of the total funds available, while New
York received 10 times that.
It makes no sense. Arizona is on the front lines of the
border crisis. In just the first 4 months of this fiscal year,
border patrol in the Tucson sector apprehended more than
250,000 migrants, the highest number on record, and now Arizona
nonprofits are about to run out of their tiny slice of funding.
Last month, I visited Casa Alitas, a nonprofit in Tucson
that works with Federal law enforcement to support asylum
seekers and prevent street releases. They do incredible work,
taking in as many as 1,000 migrants a day and providing
casework services that help asylum seekers find sponsors,
reducing the flow of people seeking services from interior
locations like New York.
But without additional Federal funding, they will be forced
to close their doors. A Pima County executive described what
they are about to experience as, ``homeless on steroids.''
I have been calling on House leadership for months to pass
additional funds for this program.
Mr. Chairman, I ask for unanimous consent to add a letter
from the Arizona Border Counties Coalition requesting
additional SSP funding to the record.
Mr. Perry. Without objection.
[The information follows:]

Letter to Members of Arizona's Congressional Delegation from the
Arizona Border Counties Coalition and Attached Pima County, AZ,
Southwest Border Executive Situational Report, Submitted for the Record
by Hon. Greg Stanton
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

Senator Kyrsten Sinema
Senator Mark Kelly
Representative Ruben Gallego
Representative Raul Grijalva
Representative Greg Stanton
Representative Juan Ciscomani

Honorable Members of Arizona's Congressional Delegation:
Since early 2021, our border Counties have seen steady increases in
the number of migrants crossing the border with Mexico seeking asylum
in the United States. The past six months alone the numbers have been
unprecedented, 271,000 border encounters in our four counties. Customs
and Border Protection (CBP) reported more than 87,000 encounters in
December 2023 alone.
Under current provisions, CBP releases Legally Processed Asylum
Seekers (LPAS) into our communities within 24 hours of their completion
of the asylum screening process. Before 2019, the number of LPAS
releases into our communities were minimal, perhaps a few dozen a week.
Several charitable organizations, including some critical partners
from faith-based organizations, provided shelter and transportation
assistance to ensure a humanitarian treatment while the LPAS arranged
for transportation to other parts of the country while they wait for
the adjudication of their application.
The attached report from Pima County shows how the LPAS releases
have increased, month over month to unprecedented levels. To keep up, a
coalition of nearly 30 organizations--federal, state, county and local
governments, and numerous non-governmental organizations--contracted
with dozens of private sector contractors to provide migrants with
temporary shelter and travel assistance. Since 2019, more than 400,000
people have been released in the Tucson Sector by the Border Patrol,
with more than half of that number occurring in 2023. As of the date of
this letter an average of 1,000 LPAS are being released per day in
Pima, Cochise, and Santa Cruz counties.
In the Yuma Sector, the state and Phoenix-area charities assisted
Somerton and Yuma County mitigate the effects of releases there by
transporting the releases to shelters in Maricopa County in addition to
assistance by local NGOs.
The efforts of this complex coalition have been entirely paid for
with federal funds. To put it simply, since 2019, the federal
government, through its immigration enforcement policies, has been
creating daily humanitarian catastrophes in our communities. We have
mitigated those daily occurrences through a cobbled coalition relying
greatly on federal funds, but the situation has been tremendously
taxing on our limited resources at the county and local level.
As you know, federal funding will run out on March 31, 2024. We
don't have the resources to continue this effort without federal
funding.
Without the funding there will not be any shelter from the extreme
weather in our region, there will not be any food or other basic
humanitarian services.
By now, the nation has recognized that this is not a border problem
or an Arizona problem, this is a national crisis that requires and
deserves your immediate attention.
We ask that you work with your colleagues in Congress to secure the
necessary funding before the end of March so that we can continue to
fulfill the tasks that are clearly a federal responsibility. Action is
needed now or a thousand people per day will be released into our
streets which will stress our assistance resources, tax our first
responder agencies, limit our ability to provide services and programs
to legal residents and citizens, harm tourism industries, and degrade
quality of life across the state but especially in our four border
counties.

Attachment

Respectfully,
The Honorable Dr. Sylvia Lee,
Pima County Representative.
The Honorable Ann English,
Cochise County Representative.
The Honorable Bruce Bracker,
Santa Cruz County Representative.
The Honorable Marco A. ``Tony'' Reyes,
Yuma County Representative.

C: Richard Karwaczka, Cochise County Administrator
Jesus Valdez, Santa Cruz County Manager
Ian McGaughey, Yuma County Administrator
Jan Lesher, Pima County Administrator

__________

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

Highlights:
This reporting period the Tucson Sector Border Patrol (BP)
continued Community Safe Releases of Legally Processed Asylum Seekers
(LPAS) in Tucson (referred to as Tucson Soft-Sided), Nogales, and
Douglas throughout the day. CBP Nogales Port of Entry (POE) also
processed and released. BP Tucson Soft-Sided releases were transported
by BP directly to Casas Alitas Welcome Center (CAWC) Drexel. BP Nogales
Station and CBP Nogales POE were transported to CAWC Drexel by
transportation coordinated by Arizona Department of Emergency and
Military Affairs (DEMA) and Pima County transportation focused
resources to support local needs. Due to the size of the BP Tucson
Sector, this is a regional support operation covering three counties.
CAWC received from BP and CBP a daily average of 955 arrivals and
6,686 total arrivals for the week, a 255 LPAS decrease from previous
period. There were over 1933 more family members released than single
adults. County, CAWC, and City are monitoring the situation daily and
will surge support as needed. Federal (FEMA/CBP Shelter and Services
Program) funding continues to cover cost of the response. Operations
are optimized to reduce the potential of street releases and there were
no street releases in Tucson. When federal funding runs out, operations
will be drastically reduced. The additional funding of EFSP will
support operations and partners are working with GMI (fiscal agent) to
determine parameters.
BP Safe Community Release: Term used for BP released LPAS
at a public location with access to transportation services (i.e. bus
station, transportation hub) during daylight hours and BP communicates
the release to stakeholders. For releases in border towns like Nogales
and Douglas, Pima County and/or DEMA transport LPAS directly to a CAWC
or other humanitarian partner to prevent overwhelming border
communities with limited resources.

BP Station: Nine Stations are located within the Tucson
Sector and the Tucson and Nogales Stations currently process and
release LPAS into the local community. In the past Douglas and Naco
have processed and released. The vast majority of LPAS released daily
are from BP Stations.

CBP Port of Entry (POE): There are five POE in Arizona
and four within Pima, Santa Cruz, and Cochise counties. CBP Nogales POE
currently processes and releases approximately 100 LPAS per day. During
normal operations there is a transition of the LPAS to the humanitarian
network.

Legally Processed Asylum Seeker (LPAS): A reference for
those that BP have qualified and gained legal status into the United
States. It has been stated that to gain that status, BP interviews,
collects biometric and biographic information, and completes a
background check before individual is released. During normal
operations there is a transition of LPAS to the humanitarian network.

Street Release: Term used when BP initiates a release
other than to a humanitarian or other partner and LPAS are released
into the local community with little to no support resources and LPAS
will navigate their own way. Can occur when CAWC is at over-capacity
with no shelter space available, when transportation support is not
available to move LPAS to a humanitarian partner, federal funding no
longer support operations, and BP can no longer detain. The release
location has been coordinated between BP and the local government. When
street release occurs Pima County will work with CAWC, the City of
Tucson, Santa Cruz, and Cochise County to prioritize who will enter
shelter as shelter space is available.
Weekly Arrivals received by CAWC after release by BP and CBP:
CCS/CAWC received from BP and CBP a daily average of 919 arrivals
and 6,431 total arrivals for the week.
Historical operational volumes
(*The cumulative total of LPAS arrivals in Pima County and LPAS
transported to Phoenix with Pima County support)
Record Day of Releases = 1,642 (12/22/23)
Record Week of Releases = 9,114 (12/21/23-12/27/23)
Record Month of Releases = 39,561 (12/23)
Total Releases to Date = 411,434 (since 1/1/2019)

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

5-week Overview of Legally Processed Asylum Seeker Arrivals Compared to
the Record Week of Arrivals

Transportation
BP can transport LPAS only as far as the closest safe community
location. BP Tucson Soft-Sided transports directly to CAWC. BP Nogales
Stations will transport to the Nogales Reception Center and BP Douglas
Station to a local church when required. In Nogales and Douglas, BP
works with Santa Cruz and Cochise OEM. Santa Cruz OEM reports that from
9/13/23 to 1/31/24 when BP shifted to current release pattern, 56,804
single adults and family members were released in Nogales. Cochise
County OEM reports that 5927 LPAS were released in the same time-frame
in Douglas and includes a short period in Naco. DEMA after receiving
additional state level funds is back to support operations. DEMA and
Pima County both have the ability to utilize buses to transport LPAS
from Nogales and Douglas to CAWC and from CAWC to other humanitarian
partners to decompress CAWC operations. Other transportation options
are considered as needed. DEMA also has the ability to transport from
Nogales and Douglas directly to Phoenix humanitarian partners and to
humanitarian partners in New Mexico during critical need. The
flexibility of transportation enables the shelter community to support
each other and maximize available space. County utilizes vans and cabs
to move LPAS between CAWC shelter network and to airport or bus
station. The County has contracts with four long distance vendors and
one short-distance vendor. The City utilizes SunTran for the local
operation.

Number of Legally Processed Asylum Seekers Transported by Long Distance
Transportation
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

A total of 230,368 Legally Processed Asylum Seekers have
been transported by Long Distance Transportation from May 2021-February
2024.
Forty-seven (47%) percent of long-distance trips are from
BP Stations and Ports of Entry to Casa Alitas.

Number of Legally Processed Asylum Seekers Transported by Short
Distance Transportation
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

A total of 97,007 Legally Processed Asylum Seekers have
been transported by Short Distance Transportation from August 2021-
January 2024.
Congregate and Non-Congregate Shelters
Congregate Shelters are CAWC Ajo and CAWC Drexel. CAWC Ajo provides
support and shelter to LPAS that require specialized assistance and
include vulnerable families. CAWC Ajo is uniquely suited with
individual rooms and common spaces. CAWC Drexel is a large communal
facility where one demographic of LPAS can be served and currently
family units are sheltered at Drexel. This facility can transition
easily to serve single adults depending on release demographics or
operational changes. CAWC Drexel serves as the Intake Center when LPAS
are released by BP and CBP. During Intake, LPAS are processed, and it
is determined if LPAS can travel immediately or require respite,
shelter, and supportive assistance. Non-Congregate locations are the
hotels needed to support surge beyond the congregate locations and
reduce the chance of a street release. These locations provide ``rooms
as needed'' and are flexible because they can support both family units
and single adults. It is at the shelter location where staff provide
quality of life support like showers, acquire a change of clothes,
diapers, care kits, etc. and work with LPAS family or sponsor on their
forward travel arrangements. LPAS stay on average 1-3 days. County
manages contracts with two hotel properties (Comfort Inn Suites and Red
Roof Inn) and City with four hotel properties (La Palma formally known
as Ramada, two Quality Inns, and a Best Western). Comfort Inn Suites
contract was revised from whole hotel to a block of rooms needed to
provide medical isolation plus additional rooms for CAWC. Humanitarian
partners that provide additional Shelter support when available include
Phoenix based International Rescue Committee (IRC), Helping With All My
Heart, Monte Vista Cultural Church, and Tongan United Methodist. Those
shelters are now reporting decreased to no capacity due to lack of
federal funding. A shelter in New Mexico and a church in Douglas have
also provided critical support when available.

Pima County and NGO partner (CCS) Shelter Summary
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total
Total Total Overnight
Shelter LPAS LPAS Rooms Available
Served Sheltered Used
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Drexel............................................................ 8,307 2,016 2,016 400
CAWC.............................................................. 645 645 33 39
Red Roof.......................................................... - - - As Needed
Comfort Suites Airport............................................ 808 148 48 40
Additional Non-Congregate Shelter................................. 815 446 207 As Needed
---------------------------------------------
Total........................................................... 10,575 3,255 2,304 523
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total LPAS Served: The cumulative total of LPAS who have received services at a shelter, encompassing
both daytime and nighttime use.
Total LPAS Sheltered: The cumulative total of LPAS who stayed one or more nights.
Total Overnight Rooms Used: The cumulative total of rooms that were used for an overnight stay.
Available: The number of cots (Drexel) and rooms (CAWC, Comfort Inn Suites Airport) allocated for use.

Public Health / Infectious Disease Prevention
All LPAS undergo medical screening by federal paramedical staff
prior to release. LPAS are assessed again when they arrive at CAWC
during the Intake process. Trained staff ask all single adults and
heads of family a series of medical questions and the staff visually
assess all individuals for signs of sickness. If there is a positive
response to the screening questions or if there is suspicion based on
the assessment, the individual is tested for COVID and undergoes a
clinical evaluation. Individuals (and their contacts) testing positive
for COVID or suspected of other communicable illness are provided
isolation and medical care in a hotel room setting until cleared for
travel. Additional medical evaluation and care may be provided as
needed by El Rio and coordinated by Southeast Arizona Health Education
Center.
From 1/1/23 to the 1/12/24 almost all LPAS underwent medical
screening; 66,217 LPAS were identified as at risk for COVID and
subsequently tested for COVID. 7316 tested positive and followed the
PCHD COVID positive LPAS protocol including isolation until medically
cleared for travel. Public Health identified 74 cases of Varicella
(Chicken Pox) and <10 cases each of Malaria, Tuberculosis, and Scabies
infestation.
In general, LPAS are healthy and have low levels of disease.

Please note: All data is a ``snapshot'' reported in real time and
is subject to change because of new information, data is verified,
changes in process requirements, and the availability of resources.

Mr. Stanton. Administrator Criswell, if and when Congress
does appropriate additional funding for SSP, does FEMA have a
plan to adjust the allocation formula to better prioritize
border communities?
Ms. Criswell. Congressman, we recognize the incredible
amount of value that the SSP program has brought to our border
communities. And in the first iteration of that, because of the
limitation on time, we did determine to do a direct allocation
based on some previous requests.
If appropriated by Congress, our plan is to go forward with
a competitive program so we can take in current data and
current needs within different communities to help determine
the appropriate amount to go to each of the different
jurisdictions.
Mr. Stanton. OK, I appreciate you saying that, although I
think Arizona has dealt with the disproportionate burden and
should be in front of the line, if you will, for the next round
of funding when Congress does pass additional SSP support.
I want to switch gears now to the ongoing effort of the
city of Maricopa to develop a regional flood control solution
to address the flooding of the Lower Santa Cruz River.
In December 2021, the city submitted a Conditional Letter
of Map Revision, a CLOMR, for its flood channelization project
at the time. FEMA estimated that it would be completed within
12 months.
That was 26 months ago. CLOMR is still pending with FEMA. I
am extraordinarily frustrated that the significant delay in
advancing this project is causing harm to the community.
So, the city of Maricopa, as every day goes by, the city
remains vulnerable to flooding. Last week, the city met FEMA
representatives here in Washington and with region 9, and I
understand they committed to reducing the response time to 45
days and adding consultations to the city to improve
communication.
I further understand that FEMA acknowledged that delays on
the Agency's behalf in 2022 contributed to the current
situation and indicated the CLOMR should be completed by the
end of July this year.
The city values its partnership with FEMA, understands that
this is a complicated issue, but it is important to know that
an estimated $1 billion in property tax revenue and $50 million
in flood control solution cannot be realized until this CLOMR
is completed.
Administrator Criswell, can you provide me assurance here
today that this CLOMR will be completed within this recently
agreed to time plan?
Ms. Criswell. Congressman, I know that our teams have been
working with your staff as well as the city of Maricopa. I am
committed to making sure that we can continue this on time,
that we can complete it on time.
If we run into any roadblocks with that, I'll be certain to
reach out with you so I can have the conversation with you
personally.
Mr. Stanton. I appreciate you doing that. Lack of
communication has been a significant issue. The delay is a
significant issue, and it is a project not just important to
the city of Maricopa, but really the entire Maricopa County
because flooding in that area would be devastating.
I appreciate your leadership in getting this done. Thank
you so much. I yield back.
Mr. Perry. The Chair thanks the gentleman.
The Chair now welcomes--her first hearing--the gentlelady
from Utah, Ms. Maloy.
Ms. Maloy. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Ms. Bernard, Mr. Currie, thank you for the work you are
doing to increase accountability and transparency. That is
really important work.
The taxpayers deserve to know how these funds are being
spent, and so, I appreciate what you are doing.
Administrator Criswell, I share the concerns that have
already been expressed about mission creep and focus on non-
Stafford Act disasters. And in the meantime, I am hearing from
constituents in Utah that they have concerns with FEMA that are
clearly within FEMA's authority and FEMA's mission.
We have flood plain maps that aren't being updated, and
locals who are reaching out to FEMA about updating flood plain
maps, and they are having a hard time getting answers. People
aren't being responsive.
Is this something you can help us with? Will your staff
work with us on making sure we can get responses?
Ms. Criswell. Yes, Congresswoman, I am not familiar with
the specific flood maps, but I will certainly take that back
personally and talk to my team about the status and what we can
do to help them.
Ms. Maloy. Thank you. And then I also have concerns that
are being shared with me by my constituents about Risk Rating
2.0, including that we have homeowners who aren't in the flood
plain, but are adjacent to the flood plain and their insurance
rates are going up so that they are dropping their flood
insurance.
It seems like that's counterproductive to the mission. So,
I just want to echo, Utah is very different from Louisiana, but
I want to echo the concerns by my colleagues from Louisiana
that we need to understand the methodologies.
We probably need to address the methodologies because if
people are dropping their flood insurance, it's not serving the
purpose. So, will you work with us on that as well?
Ms. Criswell. Absolutely.
Ms. Maloy. OK. Then I have no further questions.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Mr. Perry. The Chair thanks the gentlelady.
The Chair now recognizes the gentlelady from the Nation's
capital, Ms. Norton.
Ms. Norton. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Administrator Criswell, I understand that it is GSA's
intention to modernize the Federal building at 7th and D
Streets Northwest here in the District of Columbia, known as
the regional office building, to house FEMA's headquarters.
How did FEMA and GSA determine that the renovation of the
regional office building to house FEMA's headquarters is the
most effective option?
Ms. Criswell. Congresswoman Norton, as you know, our lease
is coming up in 2027, and we have been working closely with the
Department, as well as GSA, to identify the most suitable
building for us to move into.
I believe that the building at 7 and D is going to make the
most cost-effective use of Federal funding by using an existing
Federal facility. It also provides improved security features
to support our staff and our interagency that come together
when we activate our National Response Coordination Center.
It's also co-located with one of our DHS partners. And so,
we'll continue to work with the Department and GSA as they move
forward with this move.
Ms. Norton. What is the timeline for completion of each
phase of the regional office building construction, and when do
you expect to request funding for phase 2?
Ms. Criswell. I don't have the specifics on the timeline or
additional funding. I know we've already been appropriated
funding for this move, but we'll be happy to get back with you
with those details.
Ms. Norton. I would appreciate that.
Administrator Criswell, please provide to the committee in
writing within 7 days of today's hearing: the cost-benefit
analysis conducted of FEMA continuing operations in its
existing headquarters location under its current lease, through
purchase of the leased building, and for the renovation of the
regional office building, if you will.
Ms. Criswell. Yes, ma'am. We'll be happy to provide that
for the record.
Ms. Norton. Thank you.
Mr. Currie, climate change has fueled an alarming rise in
natural disasters with once in a century storms becoming a
matter of course.
It is critical to invest in our emergency management
workforce to respond to these continuing emergencies and to
help rebuild affected communities.
Yet, the Government Accountability Office found that in
recent years, FEMA is significantly understaffed, falling 6,200
employees short of staffing goals in 2022.
Director Currie, what are your recommendations for
improving the hiring and retention of FEMA staff?
Mr. Currie. Thank you, ma'am. This has been a historical
problem. For over a decade, we've been looking at this, and
it's been the case over and over again.
Ms. Norton. Why is that a problem?
Mr. Currie. Attrition. It's tough at FEMA because a lot of
these are part-time positions, a lot of these are intermittent
positions, so, you can only recruit certain types of people
that are willing to fill those.
Also, FEMA has told us that there's definitely been a
burnout factor in recent years because of COVID-19 and the
nonstop disaster season.
It used to be that someone would deploy for a number of
months, take a break, and maybe deploy months later. With back-
to-back-to-back-to-back disasters, a lot of times they're asked
to deploy sequentially, especially people that have specialized
skills, and they don't have a lot of them.
I think a number of things need to happen. One, some steps
have been taken through the CREW Act to give FEMA reservists
and employees similar protections to, like, the military
reserve would have, where their jobs are secure.
I think those things need to go further. I think there
needs to be almost like the National Guard, the military
reserve, there needs to be a training component of that when
they're not deployed to disasters, a development component of
that, a hierarchy structure, a transition structure into full-
time positions. So, there's more of a pipeline starting early
all the way through to the end of a career, to where you're not
just able to recruit people, frankly, that don't have full-time
jobs or have other part-time jobs.
Ms. Norton. Administrator Criswell, in the past year, this
year, since the release of the GAO report, what steps has FEMA
taken to improve staff hiring and retention?
Ms. Criswell. Ma'am, I really appreciate that question
because I just had the opportunity to visit our Center for
Domestic Preparedness yesterday. And what I saw there was I had
the opportunity to swear in 78 of our new reservists.
They come in every 2 weeks to go through training. And I
asked them, how many of them have benefited from some of the
new programs that we have put in place to include the CREW Act,
which we really appreciate Congress' passing of that
legislation, as well as some of the incentives for bonuses.
And more than half of the individuals in that room have
benefited from those programs. Every 2 weeks, we're continuing
to see this, and so, those types of legislation and new program
changes that we have made will increase the most important part
of our workforce, which is our reservist workforce.
They are the ones that go out to each of these disasters to
support them. We'll continue to look for additional ways that
we can enhance that level of recruitment, as well as retention.
Ms. Norton. Thank you. I yield back.
Mr. Perry. The Chair thanks the gentlelady.
The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Mississippi,
Mr. Ezell.
Mr. Ezell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to all
three of you for being here today.
You have a monumental task, and I have been a recipient of
your assistance. But like everything else, there's always room
for improvement.
Ms. Criswell, it's good to see you again. I appreciate you
being here. As you know, South Mississippi is uniquely
threatened by major natural disasters, and your Agency is
responsible for completing many of the recovery projects.
One of the projects that I have focused on since my first
day in office is addressing the flood insurance crisis.
My constituents on the Mississippi gulf coast are being
hammered by the unaffordable flood insurance premiums under
Risk Rating 2.0. On top of this, many families in my district
are inaccurately included in a high-risk flood zone due to the
outdated flood maps.
Combining the high risk and flood insurance prices with
outdated maps, people in my communities are being forced to
move. My hometown of Pascagoula has been completely changed
because of this.
It's frustrating to watch, and it's beyond time that we get
this fixed. I'm glad that the Mississippi State Legislature
fully funded a project to update the flood maps in partnership
with the Southern Mississippi Planning and Development
District.
This project has partnered with experts in the field to
create more reliable flood maps. I understand the group has
submitted to FEMA their findings and the data required to
revise the flood map for the Mississippi coast.
As you can see, this is a very important issue to me and my
constituents. You and I both know that the success of these
projects relies on good communications between FEMA, the review
team, and the local stakeholders.
Will you commit to making sure that all the groups working
on this project are communicating properly?
Ms. Criswell. Congressman, I will personally go back and
check in on the flood maps that you just mentioned to ensure
that they are being included appropriately into the risk rating
calculations for premiums. And I would be happy to continue
working with you and other Members of Congress as we work on an
affordability framework so everybody that needs flood insurance
can afford flood insurance.
Mr. Ezell. Thank you very much.
My district is still dealing with projects dating back to
Hurricane Katrina. And so, I am glad we are talking about why
FEMA must effectively use its resources.
This becomes more challenging when FEMA employees are
forced to work on nondisaster emergencies such as the border
crisis.
What is FEMA doing to ensure the Agency's mission is not
causing further project delays, especially as the Agency works
to address staffing issues?
Ms. Criswell. FEMA has been continuously called on for the
last several decades in supporting some of the non-Stafford Act
events. Back as far as 2014 and again in 2019, and we are still
being called on to support some of the non-Stafford events
because of our ability to provide technical assistance and
technical expertise in establishing a coordination and a
collaboration function.
That is the expertise and the skillset that our emergency
managers across the Nation bring to the table. That's what FEMA
brings to our Federal partners to help them with some of these
challenging issues that we are facing today.
Mr. Ezell. Thank you. Several cities have also complained
to me about the long wait times between their request for
reimbursement and the time they finally receive the Federal
relief money under the FEMA PA Program.
These loans can often be outstanding for years, collecting
interest the entire time. In a high interest rate environment,
this is very costly to the taxpayer. If this reimbursement
money gets out faster, I believe it would help FEMA and the
community save money by ultimately reducing the cost of these
loans.
Do you think improving and clarifying the interest
reimbursement process would help FEMA and communities better
utilize resources?
Ms. Criswell. We do continue to hear frustration with the
length of time for reimbursement. And one of the changes that
we recently made last year was simplifying procedures by
increasing the dollar amount for the small project threshold to
$1 million.
That is up significantly from, it was just under $200,000
before, which is the majority of the projects that people are
waiting for reimbursement on. Through these new procedures, we
feel that we are going to be able to get the reimbursements out
into the hands of these communities faster.
Mr. Ezell. Thank you.
Ms. Bernard and Mr. Currie, can you speak about this a
little bit?
Mr. Currie. I can take that, sir.
In our work over the years, we've been to every State and
Territory in the country, and a consistent theme is complexity
of FEMA grant programs.
You mentioned it. I know you probably still have open
projects in the Mississippi gulf coast and Gulfport and Long
Beach. And it's a consistent theme, and I think while there
have been some steps taken to reduce some complexity in some of
the steps, I think an overhaul of the system needs to happen in
order to sort of relook at how we apply Public Assistance
projects.
I mean, the way it is now is that you do a damage
assessment, and then for years and years later, you're
basically going back and forth, back and forth between the
Federal Government and the State and the locality for small
changes.
That's going to have to change. The structure of that is
going to have to change if this is ever going to get more
efficient. And so, I think that's what needs to be focused on.
Mr. Ezell. Thank you very much.
Thank you all again for your help and support. We really
want to work together to get this done because, ultimately, our
people are suffering. And so, thank you for what you have done
and what you are going to do.
And Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Mr. Perry. The Chair thanks the gentleman.
We are going to have another round of questioning with the
Members that are present or still may be present.
I am going to start. This Chair is going to start with
himself.
Administrator, the Emergency Food and Shelter Program, as I
understand it, is essentially the money that is allocated is
then distributed or decided to be distributed by the National
Board; is that correct?
Ms. Criswell. The legacy program, EFSP Humanitarian
Program, yes. It was an existing program that we had that we
adapted to meet the original or the initial direction by
Congress to administer funding. The SSP Program that it has now
evolved into will not be.
Mr. Perry. That's a grant program, but I want to focus on
the Emergency Food and Shelter Program, which does have a
board. How many FEMA individuals oversee their work?
Ms. Criswell. I would have to get back to you on the
number. I know that we have a member of FEMA that sits on the
board. Again, this was an existing program that does need----
Mr. Perry [interrupting]. I am not blaming you for it,
ma'am. I am just trying to get clarification. Just to get clear
here, but----
Ms. Criswell [interrupting]. Yes, I don't know how many,
but I'd be happy----
Mr. Perry [interrupting]. And our understanding, just to
let you know, it's one person, and you say that one person does
sit on the board. This is an enormous amount of money.
Since the members of the board also have affiliate
organizations in the States and in the various communities
within those States, does it seem to you to be a good idea to
have this board then decide where the money is going and who is
getting it, knowing that, in many cases, they are picking their
own affiliate organizations in the members' States, cities, and
political subdivisions.
Does that seem to be--does that at all seem incestuous to
you from a relationship of spending money, and the fact that
the organizations, the members of that board, exclusively
decide where that money is being spent?
Ms. Criswell. The legacy or the initial Emergency Food and
Shelter Program that we have is one that, again, we adapted to
meet the needs of the direction back in 2019. It was an ill-
suited program to meet the needs and the scale of the support
that we were providing under the humanitarian side of that
program.
That's why we were grateful for Congress to direct the SSP
program as the board no longer has a role in making these
decisions.
Mr. Perry. I understand, but this program still exists----
Ms. Criswell [interrupting]. It does not exist.
Mr. Perry. It does not exist?
Ms. Criswell. It has been sun-setted and is now being
replaced by the SSP program. We are still closing out----
Mr. Perry [interrupting]. How much money is left in the
program?
Ms. Criswell. I would have to get back with the specifics.
Mr. Perry. All right. I would like to know how much money
is left in that program, and when is the timeline for that to
expire?
Ms. Criswell. We will not be doing any new obligations
under that program. Everything will fall under the SSP program.
Mr. Perry. And when is that going to happen? I understand--
--
Ms. Criswell [interrupting]. The SSP program started last
fiscal year, and, if appropriated, it will continue into this
fiscal year.
Mr. Perry. OK.
The inspector general reviewed 18 audits that they
conducted related to FEMA's involvement in nonnatural
disasters. These 18 audits took place over the past 4 years,
and Ms. Bernard, I have $3.8 billion in fraud, but I think you
cited a different number.
Can you clarify that?
Ms. Bernard. 3.8 is the correct number.
Mr. Perry. 3.8? OK.
So, Administrator Criswell, I mean, apparently, like, my
question kind of was, does FEMA have sufficient controls in
place to prevent fraud? But obviously they don't.
What I mean, I am sure you are taking the recommendations,
or at least you are hearing the recommendations of Ms. Bernard,
but what are you offering in regard to changing that
circumstance so we don't see that level?
I mean, $3.8 billion might not seem much in the face of
$7.2 trillion, but still a lot of money where I come from, and
it's still a lot money to taxpayers of America. What are you
recommending be done?
Ms. Criswell. Chairman Perry, we take all concerns about
fraud against our programs very seriously, and we appreciate
the continued partnership and cooperation with the IG.
Again, many of these recommendations we have already closed
out, but there are some that we did not agree with the data
that they used to provide that. We don't necessarily agree with
the dollar amount cited by the IG, but we'd be happy to have a
session with you in a closed session about our fraud controls--
--
Mr. Perry [interrupting]. I would like to you know your----
Ms. Criswell [continuing]. I would prefer not to talk about
that in public.
Mr. Perry. I understand Ms. Bernard's doing it, but you
don't agree, that's fine. But what do you, you know, you are
the guy, you are the captain of the ship, as one of my
colleagues said.
Let me ask you this about these self-certifications and the
potential for using that in the Lost Wages Assistance Program.
To me, that is rife with fraud and self-certification is one of
the roots of that.
Are you literally considering self-certification regarding
the cash assistance, the changes to the Individual Assistance
Program, which would see $750 in cash assistance prior to, for
upfront housing?
Are you still considering self-certification for that in
light of what you have seen in the other programs?
Ms. Criswell. So, as it relates to the Lost Wages
Assistance Program that was administered by the previous
administration, and I was of course very concerned when I came
into this role to learn about the potential fraud.
This was a program that was the responsibility for
executing between the State workforce agencies, and we continue
to work with them to repay us for any of the amounts of money
that was fraud.
And to date, we have over $165 million that has been
returned to FEMA. As it relates to our new program for serious
needs assistance, it's an expansion upon an existing program
that we have. Self-certification is just one of many steps that
we use to make determinations on whether to issue that money.
Mr. Perry. So, you are going to use self-certification?
Ms. Criswell. It will be one of the steps that we use. Yes.
Mr. Perry. Well, if you are self-certifying, what other
steps would you use that would negate self-certification?
Ms. Criswell. We also use identity verification and a
number of other things that we'd be happy to provide a full
briefing on----
Mr. Perry [interrupting]. So, I just want to make sure I
understand. So, FEMA is saying we are going to make sure that
you are who you say you are, that's identification, but still
allow you to self-certify in the face of what you just rightly
criticized as the previous administration's fraud based on
self-certification, but you are still going to use it in this
instance, even though, essentially what you are saying, we are
just going to make sure you are who you say you are?
Ms. Criswell. Chairman Perry, we believe that the processes
that we are using are sufficient to make sure that we are
determining that we are giving money appropriately. We put
fraud controls in place, and I would be happy to have a
separate session with you, not on public camera, about our
fraud controls that we have in place.
Mr. Perry. All right, well, I will tell you, and my time is
way overdue for this round, but the self-certification process
is very concerning to me and the fact that we just identify the
individual, that might be great after the fact to try and go
collect that money that is fraudulently taken from the American
people.
But I think the self-certification process, even by your
own admission--not that you handled it, that was another
administration--is a problem, and I am concerned that you would
consider that as some kind of reasonable methodology to
disburse money prior to, as a matter of fact, in advance.
In any case, I would yield now to the gentlelady from
Washington, DC, Ms. Norton.
Ms. Norton. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Administrator Criswell, you will recall that, in my round
of questions, I asked you about your recommendations for hiring
and retention. Let me ask you further, has FEMA done outreach
on college campuses, and what are your thoughts on establishing
a training program for recent graduates?
Ms. Criswell. Congresswoman Norton, we do outreach to
college campuses. We have intern programs. In fact, during this
administration, we have instituted an HBCU and MSI intern
program, which we've had several individuals participate across
FEMA.
We have a number of ways that we try to create that
pipeline for future employees. Part of it can be our FEMA Corps
Program, which is our youth that are out there supporting us
through a partnership within Triple C, as well as through our
existing reservists, as you heard from my previous answer, have
been great recruiters for us.
I would be happy to work with you on what type of training
program would be beneficial to our employees to retain them and
to make sure that they have a career pathway that allows them
to be able to succeed within this field.
Ms. Norton. That would be very helpful. I would be happy to
work with you.
Administrator Criswell and Director Currie, this is a
question for both of you. What action should Congress take to
increase the emergency management workforce?
Ms. Criswell [to Mr. Currie]. Do you want to start?
Mr. Currie. I'll start. A couple things, I think. We talked
about how important legislation is because so much of how we
recruit, train, and deploy our workforce is tied up in the
Stafford Act and how that money can and can't be used.
A lot of the Stafford Act dollars and Disaster Relief Fund
dollars have to be used for a specific disaster. I think there
possibly needs to be more flexibility in how some of those
moneys can be used on blue sky days when there's not a disaster
to make sure that we have a constant recruitment, training,
exercising, and retention program for our intermittent disaster
workforce.
I think there's always going to need to be an intermittent
part of the workforce because you have to scale up and down
with the disaster, but the extent to which we can make that
more consistent all the time would be better.
Similar to how we do it with the National Guard, and the
military reserves.
Ms. Norton. That's an interesting idea.
Do you have any ideas, Ms. Criswell?
Ms. Criswell. Congresswoman Norton, first off, we are very
appreciative of Congress passing the CREW Act, which provides
the USERRA-level protection for our reservists, and it has had
a tremendous impact on our ability to recruit and retain a
larger number of reservists across the country.
I do agree with something that Mr. Currie said earlier. I
believe, having been a National Guard member myself, having a
training academy, training program that is well suited to help
individuals enter in and go through the appropriate level of
training and having annualized training that gives them the
opportunity, if they aren't deployed, that they can maintain
their skill proficiency is a way that we can retain and
continue to promote the individuals across the workforce.
Ms. Norton. Thank you very much, and I yield back.
Mr. Perry. The Chair now recognizes the gentleman, Mr.
Larsen.
Mr. Larsen of Washington. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I am going to kind of go around the panel here.
Administrator Criswell, just to clarify, does the board exist
at all anymore?
Ms. Criswell. The board for EFSP?
Mr. Larsen of Washington. Yes.
Ms. Criswell. The board exists for the Pre-Humanitarian
Program. It was the same board that was being used to adapt and
deliver the humanitarian side of EFSP.
The original EFSP program still exists, and the board is
still there. But they are also closing out the original EFSP
allocations.
Mr. Larsen of Washington. And so, then----
Ms. Criswell [clarifying]. Humanitarian allocations.
Mr. Larsen of Washington. Yes. So, the oversight for the
SSP, Shelter and Services Program, grant then rests with you or
rests with FEMA as an agency now?
Ms. Criswell. Our Grant Programs Directorate will
administer it on behalf of the Department, and yes, it falls
within the Grant Programs Directorate now.
Mr. Larsen of Washington. Just to clarify that. Yes,
thanks.
Inspector General Bernard, on the self-certification, you
mentioned in your statement, $403 million in payments lacked
the required self-certification.
Is the IG making any judgment about the process of self-
certification, generally?
Ms. Bernard. Yes sir. Yes sir, we do. And we have issued
several recommendations for FEMA to just consider how it can
better mitigate the risk when it does rely on self-
certification.
And as you noted, we did find $403 million in costs that
had been distributed for applicants without a self-
certification as a form of documentation.
Mr. Larsen of Washington. In COVID-19--in the Lost Wages
Assistance Program?
Ms. Bernard. In the Lost Wages Assistance, yes.
Mr. Larsen of Washington. Generally, self-certification,
have you looked at self-certification FEMA programs generally
as in----
Ms. Bernard [interrupting]. Yes. Yes, sir, we have. So,
we've conducted four audits over the last few years of FEMA's
programs that rely on self-certification. And across those four
audits, we found $10 billion in potentially fraudulent and
improper payments.
Mr. Larsen of Washington. Yes. Yes. And then as a use of
self-certification, are there uses for it that the IG says,
yes, that it should be used?
Ms. Bernard. That's a great question. And I don't think our
position is one where we're asking FEMA to overhaul its process
or replace self-certification. We're just asking for risk
mitigating steps to consider what else can be done when it's
relying on self-certification.
And I think the key there is to consider preventative
controls, and there are a number of very timely and free
options to help FEMA put in place preventative controls.
Mr. Larsen of Washington. Mr. Currie, what policy changes
did FEMA and Congress prioritize to ensure mitigation dollars,
getting back to the mitigation side of things, are disbursed
fairly and to reduce demand for post-disaster FEMA resources?
Mr. Currie. Oh, I'm glad you made that comparison, because
I think mitigation is one of the only options we have to reduce
the post-disaster costs. Because we're going to continue to
have disasters, and the Federal Government's going to continue
to pay for them.
I think some of the things that are being done right now
are helpful through like the BRIC Program. So, over the years,
we've talked about how little funding actually came in on the
predisaster side versus the post-disaster side.
Now with BRIC, you have a lot more available funding.
However, when you spread it across the country and all the
Territories, it's still hard--it's not that much money per
State.
So, I think being able to allocate that to the most
effective and most impactful resilience projects is key. And I
think these should be the ones that we see the most damage and
the most cost on the back end.
So, for example, in every disaster, the electric grid,
wastewater treatment facilities, public buildings, those are
the big costs. Those are probably 90 percent of Federal
disaster, FEMA disaster costs.
The extent of which we can mitigate the huge expensive
pieces of infrastructure, we're going to save money on the back
end.
Mr. Larsen of Washington. Yes. Thanks. And then,
Administrator Criswell, Ranking Member Titus couldn't be with
us today, which is unfortunate because she's long advocated for
improving post-disaster housing outcomes for disaster
survivors, and she has the Disaster Survivors Fairness Act to
fill in additional assistance gaps for families.
And this is on both supporting and perhaps expanding the
interim rule that you all have on Individual Assistance. So,
this is kind of the softball question first, like, isn't the
Disaster Survivors Fairness Act the best piece of legislation
ever? Right?
Ms. Criswell. I would think so.
Mr. Larsen of Washington. Yes, exactly. That's kind of the
gist of the question, but I mean, is it your assessment that
those reforms would make an additional difference, a
significant difference, beyond the interim rule that you
currently have on IA?
Ms. Criswell. It will continue to expand on the interim
rule that we put in place, and it will have a tremendous impact
on our ability to actually use Federal dollars in a way that
makes sense, instead of having them build back to a temporary
place, only to have to replace it with permanent dollars and
permanent structures later.
It just makes sense to be able to help people on their road
to recovery. Gets them back in their homes sooner. Gets them
out of shelters, out of hotels sooner.
Mr. Larsen of Washington. So, does your interim rule then,
in your view, push--are you allowed to push only as far as you
believe you legally can and to have the authority to push for
the interim rule and Representative Titus' bill is necessary to
provide you additional authorities to go farther than the
interim rules?
Ms. Criswell. The interim rule focuses, I would say the
majority of it focuses on authorities we have to provide
funding for different areas, like helping to cover uninsured
costs to be able to support rental assistance in a different
way.
It has some clarification on how we can build back to a
habitable level. But the permanent construction pieces that
we're talking about really would take hold with the Disaster
Survivors Fairness Act.
Mr. Larsen of Washington. Yes. OK.
Thanks, Mr. Chair. Appreciate that. I yield back.
Mr. Perry. The Chair thanks the gentleman.
Just because of your questioning, Administrator, I just
need further clarification.
I understand the Emergency Food and Shelter Humanitarian
Program is being moved, or the functions of that, over to the
Shelter and Services Program under the grant format for driving
those resources out, but the original legacy Emergency Food and
Shelter Program, which has a board, will remain. Is that my
understanding or am I missing something?
Ms. Criswell. So, I know it can sound confusing. There was
an existing program, Emergency Food and Shelter Program, that
supported communities across the U.S. with some of their
homeless populations.
Mr. Perry. Right.
Ms. Criswell. That program will continue.
Mr. Perry. OK.
Ms. Criswell. The adaption to that program for EFSP
Humanitarian has sun-setted, and it has been replaced with the
Shelter and Services Program.
Mr. Perry. So, just for further clarification, for the
legacy program that exists and has a board, is there anything
to preclude those funds that will come or that remain in that
program from--anything that will preclude that money to be
spent on people existing and residing in the United States who
are illegal foreign nationals?
Ms. Criswell. So, we have eligible expenses within that
program, and we reimburse jurisdictions, organizations for the
list of eligible expenses that have been identified. I'd be
happy to get you the list of what those eligible expenses are.
Mr. Perry. So, if you know, and if you don't know, it's OK
to say so, but that list, would it include--because these are
homeless people in America living in some city or some town in
America--does it preclude money from being spent on people
residing illegally that are illegal foreign nationals in this
country who are also homeless?
Ms. Criswell. So, you're talking about, I just want to make
sure I'm clear, you're talking about the original program?
Mr. Perry. Yes. That has----
Ms. Criswell [interrupting]. I do not know that
specifically. I'd have to get back to you on that.
Mr. Perry. I would appreciate it if you would.
With that, I want to thank, let's see, OK, I want to thank
our witnesses and the members of the committee for their
participation.
I don't think there are any other further questions, so,
seeing none, that concludes this hearing for today. I would
like to thank each of the witnesses for your testimony and for
taking the hard shots.
This committee stands adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:39 a.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]

Appendix

----------

Question to Hon. Deanne Criswell, Administrator, Federal Emergency
Management Agency, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, from Hon. Lori
Chavez-DeRemer

Question 1. I have a question related to wildfires that have
plagued the western states and communities, and most recently, Texas.
What steps are FEMA taking to ensure States, Territories and Tribes
have access through FEMA grant programs to advancing technologies
related to predicting and reducing or eliminating the threat of
wildfires, particularly as part of the Hazard Mitigation Assistance
Grants? \\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\\ Representative Celeste Maloy of Utah submitted the same
question to Ms. Criswell. To avoid duplication, it is not included
here.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Answer. Wildfire mitigation measures are eligible under the Federal
Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) Hazard Mitigation Assistance (HMA)
grant programs, including the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP),
HMGP Post Fire, Safeguarding Tomorrow through Ongoing Risk Mitigation
Revolving Loan Fund (Safeguarding Tomorrow Revolving Loan Fund), and
Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC). The most
common wildfire mitigation measures funded by HMA grant programs are
hazardous fuels reduction, defensible space, and ignition-resistant
construction. Other eligible wildfire mitigation measures include post-
fire soil stabilization, post-fire flood risk reduction, and early
warning systems. Additional information regarding wildfire mitigation
under HMA grant programs is available at Part 12.B.9. Wildfire
Mitigation and Part 12.B.12. Warning Systems of the 2023 HMA Program
and Policy Guide.
FEMA continues to work toward improving access to grant funding
opportunities for state, local, Tribal, and territorial (SLTT)
communities. For example, FEMA developed a number of application
support materials for the most common mitigation project types to help
streamline the application development process. These materials include
application templates specific to various mitigation project types,
along with instructions and job aids for technical and environmental
and historic preservation (EHP) reviews.
FEMA also administers the Fire Prevention and Safety (FP&S) Grant
program as part of the Assistance to Firefighters Grants (AFG),
focusing on enhancing safety of the public and firefighters with
respect to fire and related hazards. The Research and Development (R&D)
Activity is aimed at improving firefighter safety, health, or well-
being through R&D that reduces firefighter fatalities and injuries. In
2005, Congress reauthorized funding for FP&S and expanded the eligible
uses of funds to include Firefighter Safety R&D.
In addition, FEMA implements the Building Science Disaster Support
Program (BSDS) to assess the performance of buildings and other
structures affected by natural hazard events. BSDS has deployed
Mitigation Assessment Teams (MATs) to Colorado for the Marshall Fire
[https://www.fema.gov/sites/default/files/documents/fema_marshall-fire-
mat-decreasing-structure-fire-spread.pdf] and Maui for the Lahaina Fire
to assess the performance of buildings in areas destroyed by wildfire.
The MATs produce actionable recommendations and best practices such as
Recovery Advisories and Fact Sheets to aid the community its recovery.
This information is critical in identifying Hazard Mitigation
Activities and resources like grants to implement solutions that will
expedite recovery, reduce future losses, and save lives by
strengthening a community's capability for superior building
performance.

Questions to Hon. Deanne Criswell, Administrator, Federal Emergency
Management Agency, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, from Hon. Rick
Larsen

Question 1. The Government Accountability Office published a report
February 2024 titled ``Puerto Rico Disasters: Progress Made, But the
Recovery Continues to Face Challenges'', which stated that ``certain
permanent recovery work projects face challenges due to cost
increases.'' In past conversations, FEMA has advised the Committee that
the Agency is reviewing permanent work projects in Puerto Rico
obligated under the Accelerated Awards Strategy (FAASt) to determine
whether cost overruns for projects with fixed cost estimates are
anticipated due to inflation. Please provide an update on FEMA's review
of possible cost overruns for projects with fixed cost estimates.
Answer. While FEMA already includes an inflation adjustment factor
in all fixed cost offers, and fixed cost offers are generally not
adjusted after award, FEMA is working closely with Puerto Rico's
Central Office for Recovery, Reconstruction and Resiliency (COR3) to
compare recent actual costs of project implementation to the awarded
fixed cost estimates (FCEs). In March 2024, FEMA held several meetings
with COR3 leadership to provide the background, methodology, and
results of the Future Price Forecast (FPF) allowance and cost
escalation factors used for the FCEs in DR-4339 and DR-4473.
In addition to working with COR3, FEMA engaged with the Government
Accountability Office (GAO) as part of the development of the February
2024 report titled ``Puerto Rico Disasters: Progress Made, But the
Recovery Continues to Face Challenges.'' While the GAO identified
inflation as a potential risk, it also found that ``it is too early to
determine the full effect of the increased project costs on the
recovery of Accelerated Award Strategy subrecipients' facilities.''
This determination aligns with FEMA's own findings; comparisons of
recent actual costs of project implementation to the awarded FCEs have
not found widespread instances of actual costs coming in higher than
the fixed cost estimate because of inflation.
FEMA has identified that improved projects, which are cases where
an applicant is expanding the Scope of Work (SOW) beyond the FEMA
approved SOW at their own cost, are likely to require additional
funding beyond the original awards. For example, for the Vieques Health
Center, the applicant deviated from the FEMA approved original SOW.
Prior to Hurricane Maria, Vieques Health Center was approximately
33,000 sq ft, FEMA's original approval for a replacement of the
facility includes a number of upgrades to bring the facility to the
latest building codes and industry standards, increasing the size of
the replacement facility to 38,613 sq ft, in addition to adjustments
for inflation and the FPF factors. After approval of the project, the
applicant then elected to go out to bid for a new Vieques Health Center
of 59,210 sq ft which was an increase of 65 percent over the original
FEMA approved SOW, and 79 percent over the pre-disaster size of the
facility. FEMA carefully reviewed the bids on the contract to the
original estimate, and the final bided costs for this project are
proportional to the increased scope of the improved project. While it
not possible to determine what the exact effect inflation would have
had on the original version of the project, the analysis indicates that
the included inflation adjustment would have been sufficient for the
original approved SOW, and that the increased costs are primarily
attributable to the applicant expanding the SOW at their own cost.
FEMA remains committed to meeting with the Recipient to discuss any
concerns raised about inflation costs and the potential impact on the
recovery projects in Puerto Rico. As of March 12, 2024, COR3 still has
over $8.9 billion in funding remaining under the collective FEMA
Accelerated Awards Strategy, and FEMA is closely monitoring the
available funding with COR3 to ensure they have sufficient resources to
complete their recovery. As recommended by the GAO, FEMA will continue
to identify, assess, and manage risks in coordination with Puerto Rico.

Question 2. Public Assistance is a complex and lengthy grant
program that has long been a source of frustration for state and local
officials. Complicating this is the fear that if rules are not followed
or changed later, certain funding may be recouped years down the road.
Question 2.a. Can you please tell us what steps, in your view, are
needed to streamline public assistance to speed up recovery?
Answer. FEMA has been innovating the PA Program for efficiency and
effectiveness since creating the National Delivery Model in 2016. This
model allows for greater transparency of the PA grant delivery process
as well as more comprehensive documentation retention through the web-
based Grants Portal/Grants Manager system. Furthermore, PA has
implemented the following changes based on recommendations from the
Public Assistance Steering Committee (PASC), which is comprised of FEMA
regional staff and representatives from SLTT governments:
Simplified documentation requirements for unobligated
projects.
Waived the requirement that unobligated projects with
completed small projects must be prepared based on actual costs.
Adjusted the deadline for projects with work already
completed.
Began deploying technical experts from FEMA Consolidated
Resource Centers to aid project scoping and development for complex
operations and projects.
Released the ``Public Assistance Sampling Procedure'' to
reduce documentation level requirements.
Provided examples allowing a FEMA Regional Administrator
to approve time extensions for project closeout.

FEMA has also taken the following steps to streamline the PA
Program:
Raised the simplified procedures threshold to $1 million.
Annual inflation adjustments will continue each fiscal year pursuant to
the Sandy Recovery Improvement Act.
Allowed additional flexibility in costs claimed for power
restoration work.
Eliminated size requirements for the eligibility of the
removal of hazardous trees, limbs, branches, and stumps for debris
removal projects.
Allowed applicants to develop cost estimates faster
without using consensus-based codes in 50 percent rule calculations.
Not requiring separate cost analysis from work performed
through the Emergency Management Assistance Compact (EMAC).
Simplified documentation requirements for Management
Costs for force account labor by accepting a summary of force account
labor and equipment costs.

Additionally, the PA Program is in the process of updating its
cornerstone document, the Public Assistance Program and Policy Guide.
The updated version emphasizes the importance of equitable application
of the program and is written to be more accessible to Recipients and
Subrecipients by using more plain language. FEMA PA meets monthly with
the PASC to discuss continued program improvement and simplification
recommendations.

Question 2.b. Are changes to the Stafford Act needed to address
this issue?
Answer. At this time, no changes are recommended.

Question 3. Federally-recognized Tribes have struggled to build and
maintain emergency management capacity to manage grants and other
assistance in the wake of a disaster. What is FEMA doing to help Tribes
build and maintain capacity?
Answer. Tribal Nations have worked to build and maintain emergency
management capacity within the confines of limited access to many of
the preparedness grants and resources that build state capacity. For
example, due to statutory constraints, Tribal Nations do not have
direct access to the Emergency Management Performance Grant and cannot
participate in the EMAC. To support Tribal Nations, FEMA's Recovery
Directorate focuses on providing program flexibility when possible and
technical assistance through FEMA regional offices. FEMA provides
Tribal Nations as much self-determination in the disaster assistance
process as is allowable under the Stafford Act. This means they can
pick the path that best suits their unique emergency management
capabilities and resource needs.
Tribal Nations can request their own disaster declarations, they
can be subrecipients under a state declaration, they can be recipients
under a state declaration (with a direct relationship with FEMA), or
any combination of these options that does not result in a duplication
of benefits. Currently, FEMA is in the process of updating its Tribal
Declarations Pilot Guidance. This document provides guidance on
evaluating whether a Tribal Nation has been overwhelmed by a disaster
and the process to request a disaster declaration. After consultation
with over 120 Tribal Nations, FEMA will make updates to the Guidance to
streamline the assistance process for Tribal Nations and eliminate
unnecessary administrative barriers when appropriate.
At any point, before, during, or after disasters, Tribal Nations
can request technical assistance from FEMA through their Regional
Administrator to support their needs navigating any number of steps in
the assistance process. Each region has Regional Tribal Liaisons that
can connect Tribal Nations with the appropriate FEMA program support
staff, who in turn can provide hands on guidance on the identified
need. Examples of provided guidance include how to develop a Tribal
Mitigation Plan, conduct preliminary damage assessments, request a
disaster declaration, or create an administrative plan.
Additionally, the annual Tribal Nations Training Week, hosted by
the FEMA Center for Domestic Preparedness in Anniston, Alabama, plays a
pivotal role in enhancing emergency preparedness capabilities and
fostering relationships among Tribal Nations and their partners.
Aligned with FEMA's overarching goal of instilling a culture of
preparedness across all communities, this event serves as a crucial
platform for non-federal employees engaged in emergency management and
affiliated with Tribal Nations or the Indian Health Service, as well as
those directly involved with Tribal Nations.
The 2024 Tribal Nations Training Week, which occurred from March
9th to March 16th was hosted by the FEMA Center for Domestic
Preparedness in Anniston, Alabama. These sessions include various
workshops and discussions focusing on continuity of government
operations planning, the National Incident Management System overview,
disaster declaration processes, and all-hazards preparedness.
The importance of the Tribal Nations Training Week is emphasized
through several executive orders that recognize and affirm the Federal
government's commitment to engaging in meaningful consultation and
coordination with Indian Tribal Governments. Executive Orders such as
13175, 13647, and 14112 emphasize the principles of Tribal sovereignty,
self-determination, and trust responsibilities:
Executive Order 13175 Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments (2000) recognizes tribal rights of self-
government and tribal sovereignty, and affirmed and committed the
Federal government to a work with Native American tribal governments on
a government-to-government basis.

Executive Order 13647 Establishing the White House
Council on Native American Affairs (2013) establishes a national policy
to ensure that the Federal Government engages in a true and lasting
government-to-government relationship with Federally recognized tribes
in a more coordinated and effective manner, including by better
carrying out its trust responsibilities.

Executive Order 14112 Reforming Federal Funding and
Support for Tribal Nations to Better Embrace Our Trust Responsibilities
and Promote the Next Era of Tribal Self-Determination (2023) highlights
the federal government's obligation to reform federal funding and
support for Tribal Nations, ensuring accessibility, flexibility, and
equity in funding allocation. It establishes mechanisms to streamline
access to federal funding, better embrace trust responsibilities, and
assess unmet obligations to support Tribal Nations.

FEMA is committed to engaging in government-to-government listening
sessions and tribal consultations to better understand the needs of
Tribal Nations to meet them where they are and create unique solutions
to support them before, during, and after disasters.

Questions to Hon. Deanne Criswell, Administrator, Federal Emergency
Management Agency, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, from Hon. Mike
Ezell

Question 1. Homeowners, homebuilders, and floodplain managers in my
district have expressed their concerns that mitigation measures, such
as elevating a home, are not significantly reducing National Flood
Insurance Program premiums. Specifically, how does FEMA consider
mitigation measures that either local governments or individual
homeowners take to lower their flood risk profile? Will FEMA provide
greater transparency into how those measures factor into the algorithm
and reduce premiums?
Answer. Specific to property owner mitigation efforts, the National
Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) provides premium discounts based on a
building's first floor height (elevation above the ground), foundation
type, flood openings, flood proofing, and location of machinery and
equipment (referred to as mitigation discounts). In contrast to NFIP
legacy rating, the updated rating approach, which FEMA implemented in
phases from October 1, 2021, through April 1, 2022, provides mitigation
discounts to all properties regardless of the building's flood zone.
For detailed information on how individual policyholder mitigation
credits are applied, please see the Discount Explanation Guide and the
Appendix D Rating Factors online at https://www.fema.gov/flood-
insurance/risk-rating. In the Appendix D Rating Factors file, the tabs
for Foundation Type, First Floor Height, and Machinery and Equipment
elevation above First Floor contain the specific rating factors used
for each category or value for each of these three variables. FEMA
encourages property owners to discuss mitigation options with their
insurer and community officials. FEMA has also published a Flood
Insurance Mitigation Discount tool to floodsmart.gov. This estimator
provides discount information on certain rating variables that are
generally applied to the building and contents premium. The tool can be
publicly accessed at https://www.floodsmart.gov/flood-insurance-
mitigation-discount-tool.
Specific to community mitigation efforts, NFIP rate setting
includes the impact of levee systems on flood risk reduction. FEMA
partnered with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) to identify and
use credible and consistently available information and methods to
account for the level of risk reduction that levees provide to the
buildings located behind them. The National Levee Database (NLD),
developed and maintained by USACE, is the primary source for
comprehensive information about all the nation's levees, as authorized
by Congress. The NLD is a dynamic database that is continually updated
to add or refine levee data from federal agencies, states, tribes,
territories, and local sources. As levee systems are added to the NLD,
the risk reduction they provide will be accounted for in subsequent
rate updates. Community mitigation actions may also be incorporated
into premiums through underlying datasets. The updated rating approach
relies on the United States Geological Survey National Hydrography
Dataset for delineation and classification of individual hydrographic
features such as lakes and rivers.
Stormwater management features, such as ditches, detention ponds,
and weirs, may be reflected in both the elevation data from the United
States Geological Survey and third-party catastrophe models. To the
extent that these features are present in the elevation data and the
flood models, they would implicitly be incorporated into rates for a
local area. In addition, Risk MAP regulatory and non-regulatory
products are used in the development of rates. As these products are
updated to reflect local mitigation projects, these data will continue
to inform the rates when rates are updated.

Question 2. Per the National Flood Insurance Program's (NFIP)
authorizing statute, NFIP has the ``objective of making flood insurance
available where necessary at reasonable rates as to encourage
prospective insureds to purchase such insurance.'' However, since the
implementation of Risk Rating 2.0., NFIP has lost 215,000
policyholders, or 4.39% of all policyholders.
Question 2.a. Why is NFIP seeing such a large reduction in
policyholders?
Answer. There are many reasons behind a property owner's decision
to buy or not buy flood or other catastrophic insurance, including
recent large scale flood events, inflation, and ``optimist bias''
(i.e., ``It has not flooded here in many years.''). At this time, there
is no evidence to suggest the decline in NFIP policy count is solely
connected to the new rating approach. By statute, FEMA is required to
estimate and charge actuarially sound rates for most properties. The
National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (NFIA) requires FEMA to estimate
actuarial premiums for all policyholders. 42 U.S.C. 4014(a)(1).
Additionally, FEMA is required to charge most policyholders an
actuarial premium, unless the statute requires FEMA to offer discounted
premiums, such as the annual premium increase caps and properties newly
mapped into special flood hazard areas. 42 U.S.C. 4015(c),(e) and (i).
For a limited class of properties, certain primary residential homes
built before FEMA published a flood insurance rate map (FIRM) for the
community in which the home is located, (Pre-FIRM properties), FEMA has
the authority to offer less than actuarial rates ``which would be
reasonable, would encourage prospective insureds to purchase flood
insurance . . .'' 42 U.S.C. 4014(a)(2); 4015(c). However, amendments to
the NFIA in 2012 and 2014, have reduced the types of properties
eligible for less than actuarial rates and mandated FEMA to increase
premiums on these remaining properties by no less than 5 percent a year
until the property reaches its actuarial rate. 42 U.S.C. 4014(e)(2).
FEMA began using the updated rating approach in October 2021. Prior
to the implementation of the updated approach, the NFIP policy count
decreased at rates higher than those experienced post-updated rating
approach implementation. While there was modest policy growth in the
years after Hurricane Harvey (2017), the NFIP continued to see declines
leading up to the implementation of the updated rating approach.
After implementation of the updated rating approach in April 2022,
the declining policy count began to level off. As of April 2024, the
NFIP saw only a 1.8 percent decrease in policies (reflects the year
over year average from April 2022 through April 2024), and the NFIP is
seeing growth in some areas. For example, Florida has seen considerable
growth over this same period (+2.2 percent or 37,000+ policies). While
some policyholders experienced an increase in premiums under the
updated rating approach, nearly 90 percent of all policyholders
experienced premium adjustments in line with annual increases under the
NFIP Legacy Rating System and approximately one million policyholders
saw lower premiums under updated rating approach.
Finally, to address policyholder affordability concerns, the U.S.
Department of Homeland Security (DHS) submitted to the 118th Congress
seventeen (17) legislative proposals to reform the NFIP in April 2023.
The proposals include legislative language for instituting a sound and
transparent financial framework that allows the NFIP to balance
affordability and fiscal soundness to ensure that more Americans are
covered by flood insurance. Specifically, the legislative package
includes a means-tested affordability program which will make insurance
more affordable to low-and-moderate income policyholders. Further, the
NFIP accrues $1.7 million in interest per day in debt incurred from
previous catastrophic flood disasters post-Hurricane Katrina.
Currently, the agency is paying $619 million annually on interest
payments. Canceling the NFIP's debt creates a more fiscally sound
framework that improves the NFIP's ability to pay claims for the
program's 22,648 communities that rely upon the NFIP for financial
protection against flooding.

Question 2.b. How will this drop in policyholders affect NFIP's
ability to cover their policyholders' claims?
Answer. The NFIP is dedicated to helping people withstand the
financial impact of flood risk and recover faster through flood
insurance coverage. FEMA is statutorily mandated to charge actuarially
sound rates for properties. This means that premium rates are
calculated to pay for expected losses and the cost of an individual
risk transfer. At actuarial rates, a hypothetical decrease in NFIP
policyholders would not impact the ability for the NFIP to pay claims.
The new rating approach is intended to address the NFIP legacy rates
and augment the NFIP's financial position and ability to pay claims.
Under the legacy approach, the NFIP borrowed from Treasury and paid
interest on the loans to cover claims when premium reserves were
insufficient. Currently, the NFIP pays approximately $619 million
annually in interest on its Treasury loans and has paid over $6 billion
in interest since it began to borrow after Hurricane Katrina. Once all
policyholders are paying their full risk rate, under the updated
pricing approach, premiums and reinsurance are estimated to be
sufficient to cover all claims based on expected average annual losses
up to a 1 in 20-year event.

Question 3. FEMA has released a ``mitigation discount tool'' to
help property owners assess their risk and provide insight into how
certain mitigation measures can reduce their premiums. However, it does
not show in actual dollars how this affects your premium. Does FEMA
plan to create a more comprehensive, public-facing premium calculator,
so that policyholders can see their rating factors and see how their
rating factors affect their annual premium?
Answer. Yes, FEMA is currently developing a direct-to-customer
flood insurance quoting and sales tool. The tool will be rolled out in
phases. During the first phase, customers will be able to generate a
quote and locate an insurance agent to assist with purchasing a policy.
This tool will enable property owners to discuss mitigation measures
and their potential premium impacts with agents and community
officials. Phase two will enable customers to purchase flood insurance
entirely online. The goal of the tool is to eliminate the barriers some
face accessing flood insurance, educate the public on the coverages and
benefits of a flood insurance policy, and help property owners better
assess their flood risks.

Question 4. In the ``Risk Rating 2.0 Methodology and Data Sources''
document, FEMA's contractor (Milliman) said regarding their data
reliability, ``In performing the services, we relied on data and other
information provided to us by FEMA and other sources. We did not audit,
verify, or review the data and other information for reasonableness and
consistency. Such a review is beyond the scope of our assignment. If
the underlying data or information is inaccurate or incomplete, the
results of our analysis may likewise be inaccurate or incomplete. In
that event, the results of our analysis may not be suitable for the
intended purpose.'' If Risk Rating 2.0 seeks to assess the flood risk
of each property individually, it is imperative the underlying data is
accurate and complete. Unfortunately, there have been reports to the
contrary. For example, the Office of the Flood Insurance Advocate has
reported cases where Risk Rating 2.0 incorrectly identifies latitude
and longitude for a structure.
Would FEMA support a peer review for Risk Rating 2.0, to ensure
that mitigation, other rating factors, and all data sources are
accurate and as granular as possible?
Answer. FEMA is using the best available data sources to support
the development of rates. FEMA is pairing state-of-the-art industry
technology (for example, catastrophe models) with the NFIP's mapping
data to establish a new flood risk-informed rating approach.
Catastrophe models have been used by private insurance companies to
generate rates for over a decade. This work provides a comprehensive
understanding of flood risk at both the national and local levels. Data
sources being used include:
FEMA sourced: Existing mapping data, NFIP policy and
claims data.
Other Federal Government sourced: Publicly available U.S.
Geological Survey data, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration's Sea, Lake, and Overhead Surges from Hurricanes data,
and USACE data sets.
Third-party sourced: Commercially available structural
and replacement cost data and catastrophe flood models.

Since April 2021, the Methodology Data Source, Premium Calculation
Worksheet Examples and Appendix D Rating Factors have been publicly
available online at https://www.fema.gov/flood-insurance/risk-rating.
Stakeholders and the public have the ability today to review
details about Risk Rating. For anyone interested in looking deeper into
the making of the approach, the Methodology Data Source, Premium
Calculation Worksheet Examples and Appendix D Rating Factors have been
publicly available since April 2021 on NFIP's Pricing Approach at
FEMA.gov [https://www.fema.gov/flood-insurance/risk-rating]. A 2023
Report by the Government Accountability Office which conducted an in-
depth review of the approach found that ``The new methodology
substantially improves ratemaking by aligning premiums with the flood
risk of individual properties''. The language referenced from Milliman
is standard practice to include such contracts and required according
to Actuarial Standards of Practice (ASOP), ASOP 23-Data Quality and
ASOP-41 Actuarial Communications. The statement after the one quoted in
question 4 describes Milliman's review of the data for reasonableness
and consistency. Milliman's data was used for larger rate-setting that
doesn't apply to the accuracy of latitude and longitudinal inputs for
an individual structure.

Question 5. Typically, an overhaul of the size of Risk Rating 2.0
to NFIP would warrant a rulemaking process, which would give the public
the opportunity to submit additional information and comments. The
absence of this rulemaking process concerns me and my constituents that
the agency did not consider all the stakeholders impacted by this
decision. Can you please explain why FEMA believes it had the
administrative authority to implement Risk Rating 2.0--the largest
change to NFIP in its 56-year history--without a rulemaking process?
Answer. This question is one of the issues that is currently the
subject of litigation in State of Louisiana, et al., v. FEMA (ED LA
Case No.23-1839). In response to Plaintiffs' motion for preliminary
injunction [ECF 14), the U.S. Department of Justice, on behalf of FEMA,
filed an opposition to the motion for preliminary injunction
(Opposition, [ECF 47) and explained why rulemaking was not required for
Risk Rating 2.0. The NFIP conducted extensive stakeholder engagement in
advance of implementation of the pricing approach.

Question 6. The Global Catastrophic Risk Management Act (GCRMA, 6
U.S.C. Sec. 821-Sec. 825) requires updates to the Federal Interagency
Operational Plans at the core of FEMA's strategic plans to respond to
global catastrophes. Has FEMA started updating these plans and has the
agency been coordinating with the state, local, tribal, and territorial
governments in doing so? When can the Committee expect to get an update
on this completion?
Answer. The Federal Interagency Operational Plans (FIOPs) describe
how the federal government aligns resources and delivers core
capabilities to implement the five National Planning Frameworks. The
FIOPs provide a federal concept of operations, integrating and
synchronizing national-level capabilities, for prevention, protection,
mitigation, response, and recovery to support all levels of government.
These plans also help federal departments and agencies develop and
maintain department-level operational plans. The Response and Recovery
FIOP guides federal departments and agencies in executing response and
recovery operations following a disaster or incident for which an
interagency response is required. The FIOP is reviewed and updated
periodically by an interagency collaborative planning team including
SLTT governments.
This team, led by FEMA, ensures consistency with both new and
existing policies, addresses emerging threats, and hazards, and
incorporates experience gained from interagency partners. In March
2023, FEMA revised and published the Response and Recovery FIOP to meet
the goals of its strategic plan, including highlighting the importance
of response and recovery to catastrophic disasters. The new Response
and Recovery FIOP is the first national-level plan to combine the
response and recovery mission areas and connect the stabilization of
lifelines with outcome driven recovery. It establishes the foundational
plan that guides federal agencies and departments' response and
recovery operations, replacing both the Response FIOP and the Recovery
FIOP. It provides all-hazards strategic guidance to integrate and
deliver response and recovery functions and core capabilities.

Question 7. It has been shown that FEMA's administrative costs
during disaster recovery stabilize during the first two years after
they have occurred. However, actual administrative costs are not
realized until a disaster is closed, and all financial transactions are
complete. FEMA doesn't have a grasp on their true administrative costs
until closeout, and closeout for some disasters isn't until almost 20
years or later. What can FEMA do to speed up these closeouts and get
the FEMA workforce back in the office and off these deployments?
Answer. FEMA is implementing ways to speed up the processing time
for closeouts including the Validate-As-You-Go Closeout Benefit (VCB),
increasing the Small Project Threshold to $1M, and development of an
administrative project closeout process. These efforts help to speed up
and streamline the closeout of projects and disasters, which also
reduces administrative costs. The VCB allows qualified Recipients to
close large projects by submitting a certification, instead of
submitting all the supporting documentation that is normally required
for closeout. Small projects also are closed with a certification of
review, thus increasing the Small Project threshold to $1M
significantly increases the number of projects that will be closed as
small projects. As part of an initiative to reduce the closeout
backlog, FEMA is implementing an administrative project closeout
process for Public Assistance grants. This will have a significant
impact on reducing the backlog of open grants, the average time that
grants stay open beyond their period of performance, and the associated
administrative cost.

Question 8. As originally introduced, the Disaster Recovery Reform
Act (DRRA) proposed that FEMA would incentivize communities to take
proactive steps before a disaster by increasing federal recovery
assistance available after a disaster. Can you please provide an update
on the status of the delayed implementation of these provisions?
Answer. Since the President signed Disaster Recovery Reform Act
(DRRA) into law, the following actions or initiatives have taken place
in the Public Assistance (PA) program:
Section 1206 authorizes FEMA to provide assistance to
state and local governments for building code and floodplain management
ordinance administration and enforcement. This resource provides
communities with support to effectively administer and enforce building
codes and floodplain management ordinances for a period of no longer
than 180 days after the date of the major disaster declaration. The
final policy was published Oct. 19, 2020, following a 45-day public
comment period. To support the implementation of Section 1206, the PA
program partnered with other areas within FEMA to draft the Public
Assistance Companion Guide, Disaster Recovery Reform Act Section 1206.
The PA program also developed a Building Code and Floodplain Management
Administration and Enforcement Project Application which was approved
by the Office of Management and Budget on Aug. 17, 2023. The project
application provides help text and resources to guide applicants and
recipients that may be unfamiliar with the provision.

Section 1208 requires FEMA to develop guidance and annual
training for state, local, tribal and territorial governments, first
responders and utility companies. The Healthcare Facilities and Power
Outages Guidance for State, Local, Tribal, Territorial, and Private
Sector Partners [https://www.fema.gov/sites/default/files/2020-07/
fema_DRRA-1208-healthcare-facilities-power-outages_guide.pdf] was
released on August 22, 2019. It highlights the prioritization of power
restoration for hospitals and nursing homes and the need to coordinate
response plans before power outages occur.

Section 1215 expanded the definition of management costs
to include both direct and indirect administrative expenses by the SLTT
government. It also allows FEMA to reimburse PA management costs up to
12 percent of the total award amount (up to 7 percent for the recipient
and 5 percent for the subrecipient). In November 2018, FEMA issued the
Public Assistance Management Costs Interim Policy to implement the new
management costs authority. In March 2023, PA simplified documentation
and information requirements to streamline the program. This change
significantly reduces detailed documentation as a starting point for
applicants to demonstrate their actual costs incurred, and only request
detailed documentation if additional review is necessary to clarify
costs.

Section 1219 provides for arbitration of disputes from
the Civilian Board of Contract Appeals (CBCA) in lieu of a second
appeal, under the PA program. The CBCA arbitrates at no cost to the
parties. However, each party is directly responsible for all other
expenses it incurs in the arbitration process. FEMA published a Fact
Sheet providing additional guidance to help applicants understand their
options and rights.

Section 1228 requires FEMA, in coordination with the
Federal Highway Administration, to issue guidance regarding the
eligibility of inundated and submerged roads under the PA program. In
April 2021, FEMA published the Public Assistance Guidance on Inundated
and Submerged Roads policy. The policy will be incorporated into the
Public Assistance Program and Policy Guide v5 to be published later
this year.

Section 1233 authorizes funding for earthquake risk
reduction activities under the HMGP and BRIC. Specifically, DRRA
Section 1233 revised the Stafford Act by adding a new Section 404(g) to
allow recipients of hazard mitigation assistance to leverage such
funding to support building capability for earthquake early warning
(EEW) systems. EEW systems use seismic instrumentation to monitor
seismic activity in real time to detect significant earthquakes near
the source and transmit those signals to a seismic monitoring network
that can quickly send out a warning to alert people within the region
before shaking arrives. Section 404(g) lists three categories of
activities that support building capability for EEW: 1) regional
seismic networks; 2) geodetic networks; and 3) seismometers, Global
Positioning System receivers, and associated infrastructure. The FEMA
Fact Sheet [https://www.fema.gov/sites/default/files/2020-09/fema_drra-
earthquake-early-warning-systems_fact-sheet_September-2020.pdf]
published on September 30, 2020 explains how Section 1233 is
implemented under the Hazard Mitigation Assistance grant programs.

Section 1235(b) authorized the Consensus-based Codes,
Specifications, and Standards Policy for consistent and appropriate
implementation of the consensus-based design, construction and
maintenance codes, specifications, and standards for PA to promote
resiliency and achieve risk reduction. FEMA's policy implementing this
provision was issued for PA on December 20, 2019. An update to the
policy is currently open for public review and comment.

Section 1237 prohibits FEMA from recovering funds from a
local government that received PA if the DHS Office of Inspector
General finds that the local government relied on inaccurate
information provided by a FEMA Technical Assistance Contractor. To
address the identified deficiency, FEMA issued a memo to Region VI on
February 15, 2019, and relevant project worksheets were reinstated. In
this instance, FEMA interpreted DRRA Section 1237 to apply solely to a
specific recoupment. FEMA acknowledges that in future instances where
DRRA 1237 may apply, evaluation may be made on a case-by-case basis.

Section 1238(b) supports the addition of center-based
childcare to the definition of eligible Private Non-Profit facilities.
A Fact Sheet describing this change was published in July 2019.

Section 1241 directs FEMA to develop guidance, including
best practices, for post-disaster evaluation of buildings by licensed
architects and engineers to ensure that design professionals properly
analyze the structural integrity and livability of buildings and
structures after an array of natural hazard events, including:
earthquakes; hurricanes; floods; tornadoes; tsunamis; landslides and
other land instabilities; volcanoes; snow, hail, and ice storms; and
fire; as well as damage from explosions. FEMA P-2055, Post-disaster
Building Safety Evaluation Guidance [https://www.fema.gov/sites/
default/files/2020-07/fema_p-2055_post-
disaster_buildingsafety_evaluation_2019.pdf] was published in November
2019.

Question 9. Recent reports suggest that there's been a competition
issue across the country, and in Mississippi, in FEMA's Building
Resilient Infrastructure and Communities program. For example, FEMA, in
its recent updates to policies, such as the Interim Policy on
Consensus-Based Codes and the Public Assistance Program and Policy
Guide, has faced criticism for omitting major plumbing, mechanical, and
electrical codes approved by the American National Standards Institute
(ANSI). While FEMA has clarified that funding is not contingent on
specific code adoption, concerns persist about the exclusion of
important hazard-resistant design criteria. Can FEMA confirm its
commitment to include all consensus-based codes, including those
approved by ANSI, in its current policy review and future marketing
materials? Additionally, can FEMA provide a timeline for the release of
its upcoming Interim Policy on Consensus-Based Codes and the Public
Assistance Program and Policy Guide?
Answer. The adoption and enforcement of building codes,
specifications, and standards is an important mitigation activity that
provides significant resilience benefits. The importance of these
activities is explicitly highlighted as one of the four intended BRIC
program priorities, as referenced in the BRIC Fiscal Year (FY) 2023
Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO): ``For FY 2023, the priorities for
the program are to incentivize natural hazard risk reduction activities
to include those that . . . increase funding to applicants that
facilitate the adoption and enforcement of the latest published
editions of building codes.'' For BRIC scoring in the National
Competition, there are a maximum of 20 points (out of a possible 200)
for building code criterion under the FY 2023 funding cycle. The BRIC
program is currently in the process of developing the FY 2024 NOFO.

Question 10. The State of Mississippi, in conjunction with the
Southern Mississippi Planning and Development District and the coastal
communities, have completed the MS Coastal Map Revision Project. A
total of fifteen (15) Letter of Map Change applications were submitted
through FEMA's Letter of Map Change portal on Monday March 11, 2024,
representing each of the counties along the MS Gulf Coast and the
comprising communities. This project has been closely coordinated with
region 4 over the last 6+ years. At a recent Transportation and
Infrastructure Economic Development, Public Buildings and Emergency
Management Subcommittee hearing, you committed to ensuring these
updates are included appropriately in the Risk Rating 2.0 calculations.
Question 10.a. Can FEMA confirm funds have been allocated for the
review of this project?
Answer. Yes, FY 2024 funding is available for this project, and
FEMA's Region 4 office has re-allocated funds so work can begin
immediately.

Question 10.b. What is the anticipated timeline for the Mississippi
Coastal Map Revision Project from application submission through
production of the Preliminary Flood Insurance Rate Maps?
Answer. Preliminary products are expected to be released in
Calendar Year 2025 based on the schedule provided by the Cooperating
Technical Partner who will be managing the map issuance. Prior to
preliminary product issuance, the submittal requires a review and
digital FIRM production work that will extend into 2025.

Question to Kristen D. Bernard, Deputy Inspector General for Audits,
Office of Inspector General, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, from
Hon. Rick Larsen

Question 1. The report for the House Department of Homeland
Security Appropriations Bill, 2022 included language directing OIG to
consider inequities in the delivery of disaster assistance to disaster
survivors. On page 23-24, the report states:

``The Committee is aware of concerns raised about inequities in
the delivery of disaster assistance to disaster survivors,
especially through FEMA's Individual and Household Program
(IHP), including concerns expressed by constituents, media
reports and a recent GAO Report, Disaster Assistance Additional
Actions Needed to Strengthen FEMA's Individuals and Households
Program GAO-20-503. Among these concerns are that FEMA's
programs provide disproportionately less assistance to minority
communities and those in urban and rural disadvantaged
communities; and that FEMA's application process and procedures
are too complicated, causing many to discontinue their
applications or forego appeals due to a mistaken belief that
they are not eligible. In addition, FEMA's attempts to prevent
fraudulent applications may be so restrictive as to
inadvertently screen out many who may appropriately qualify for
assistance. The OIG is directed to review FEMA's application
process and procedures for IHP, including its methods to
prevent fraudulent applications, and to brief the Committee on
its findings within 120 days of the date of enactment of this
Act. The briefing shall detail whether recommendations from
oversight entities, including the OIG, may have inadvertently
led FEMA to develop policies and procedures that are overly
restrictive and, as a result, may be preventing disaster
survivors who need IHP from receiving that assistance.''

Please provide a summary of the briefing provided to the
Appropriations Committee that was requested in the House Department of
Homeland Security Appropriations Bill, 2022 report language. If no
briefing was provided, provide a written response to the requests
outlined in the report language.
Answer:
Background
On July 15, 2022, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Office
of Inspector General (OIG) provided written correspondence to the
Senate Appropriations Committee and House Appropriations Committee,
Homeland Security Subcommittees (SAC-HS and HAC-HS, respectively),
serving to satisfy the mandated reporting included in the Joint
Explanatory Statement [https://docs.house.gov/billsthisweek/20220307/
BILLS-117RCP35-JES-DIVISION-F.pdf] for the Omnibus Appropriations bill
for Fiscal Year 2022 (H.R. 2471, Consolidated Appropriations Act,
2022).
Our correspondence provided links to three audit reports that
addressed certain aspects of FEMA's applicating process and procedures
for the Individuals and Household Program (IHP):
FEMA Did Not Sufficiently Safeguard Use of Transportation
Assistance Funds, OIG-19-66 (September 30, 2019)
FEMA Has Made More than $3 Billion in Improper and
Potentially Fraudulent Payments for Home Repair Assistance since 2003,
OIG-20-23 (April 6, 2020)
FEMA Has Paid Billions in Improper Payments for SBA
Dependent Other Needs Assistance since 2003, OIG-20-60 (August 12,
2020)

Our correspondence explained that of the eight recommendations we
issued to FEMA, seven were open and unresolved (meaning FEMA did not
concur with and did not implement seven of the eight recommendations).
These recommendations related to documentation and verification to
discern eligibility, and performance of risk assessments. As of April
1, 2024, the seven recommendations remain unresolved and unimplemented.
Because FEMA never implemented these seven recommendations, it is
reasonable to conclude that FEMA was not influenced by the
recommendations. The Department/FEMA, not DHS OIG, is responsible for,
and has statutory authority for, all operational and programmatic
decisions related to its programs, including IHP assistance.
Staff Briefing
On August 29, 2022, DHS OIG also conducted a staff-level briefing
for SAC-HS and HAC-HS. DHS OIG provided an overview of IHP and
explained that it is one of several assistance programs designed to
support disaster survivors. Through IHP, FEMA provides assistance in
the form of rent, home repair or replacement, transportation repair or
replacement, funeral expenses, personal property, medical, dental, or
other miscellaneous expenses. Each type of assistance may have distinct
eligibility requirements that vary by disaster and can vary by state.
We also briefed SAC-HS and HAC-HS about the three completed audits
referenced above. We reiterated that seven of the eight recommendations
remained open and unresolved and provided information about three
ongoing audits. We again stated that FEMA did not agree with and did
not implement those seven of the eight recommendations that we issued,
and therefore it was inappropriate to conclude that FEMA was influenced
by our recommendations.
Ongoing Audits
The three ongoing audits addressed during the August 29, 2022
briefing have been completed. The reports disclose similar findings and
recommendations:
FEMA Did Not Prevent More than $3.7 Billion in Improper
Payments from the Lost Wages Assistance Program, OIG-22-69 (September
16, 2022) [https://www.oig.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/assets/2022-09/
OIG-22-69-Sep22.pdf]
The Identities of DHS Employees Were Linked to More than
$2.6 Million in Potentially Fraudulent Lost Wages Assistance, OIG-22-73
(September 27, 2022) [https://www.oig.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/
assets/2022-09/OIG-22-73-Sep22.pdf]
Ineffective Controls Over COVID-19 Funeral Assistance
Leave the Program Susceptible to Waste and Abuse, OIG-23-42 (August 22,
2023) [https://www.oig.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/assets/2023-08/OIG-
23-42-Aug23.pdf]

As of April 1, 2024, these three reports also have eight
recommendations that remain unresolved. Here is a summary of the more
recent unresolved recommendations:
6 unresolved recommendations for OIG-22-69: FEMA does not
agree with our report message or recommendations because the agency
believes it will never execute another Lost Wages Assistance type
program in the future. FEMA's belief is unresponsive to the
recommendations which are aimed to improve processes for when FEMA
faces a new challenge in the future and must build another program from
the ground up.

1 unresolved recommendation for OIG-22-73: FEMA did not
agree with our recommendation that it develop and implement a process
to review state administrative plans for consistency and ensure they
include fraud prevention and mitigation strategies.

1 unresolved recommendation for OIG-23-42: FEMA continues
to disagree with our recommendation to resolve questioned costs
totaling $24.4 million for expenses deemed ineligible by FEMA's
Individual Assistance Program and Policy Guide and determine the amount
of debt owed by recipients for erroneous payments. FEMA argues the
costs we questioned were eligible because it had broad authority to
determine eligible costs for funeral assistance.
GAO Audit
In a related audit issued in September 2022, FEMA Made Efforts to
Address Inequities in Disadvantaged Communities Related to COVID 19
Community Vaccination Center Locations and Also Plans to Address
Inequity in Future Operations, OIG-22-74 [https://www.oig.dhs.gov/
sites/default/files/assets/2022-09/OIG-22-74-Sep22.pdf], we made two
recommendations. One recommendation addressed collecting demographic
data of applicants for FEMA assistance, recipients, and subrecipients.
In response, FEMA began collecting certain demographic information from
applicants on a voluntary basis during the IHP registration process. At
the time we closed the recommendation, 88.65 percent of the applicants
provided demographic data. According to FEMA officials, this data will
enable FEMA to respond to a recommendation from the Government
Accountability Office to ``help ensure the availability and use of
quality information that includes (1) information requirements, (2)
data sources and methods, and (3) strategies for overcoming information
challenges--to support federal agencies involved in disaster recovery
in identifying access barriers or disparate outcomes'' (GAO-22-10439)
\1\.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Disaster Recovery: Additional Actions Needed to Identify and
Address Potential Recovery Barriers, GAO-22-104029 (December 2021)
https://www.gao.gov/assets/720/718175.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FEMA Rulemaking
Finally, on January 2024, FEMA announced significant changes
through an Interim Final Rule for Individual Assistance with a goal to
reach more survivors and deliver assistance faster and to reduce equity
issues. According to FEMA, with these updates, survivors of disasters
declared on or after March 22 will have access to a wider range of
assistance that is easier to understand and tailored to their unique
needs.\2\ We will consider a review of the implementation of this new
regulation as we plan future work.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ https://www.fema.gov/fact-sheet/fema-updates-individual-
assistance-program
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[all]