Major federal  government agencies, the Red Cross, NVOAD, and other voluntary  organizations are included in the NRF. FEMA Became the Primary Mass Care Agency Because the Red Cross Cannot Direct Federal Resources, and the Shifting Roles Present Several Implementation Issues

FEMA replaced the American Red Cross as the primary agency for mass  care in large part because the two organizations agreed that the primary  agency needs to be able to direct federal resources. In addition, the NRF places increased responsibility on  FEMA for coordinating with voluntary organizations, but FEMA does not  have sufficient staff resources to meet this responsibility. VALs are FEMA staff members who coordinate the activities of  voluntary organizations with FEMA. A key FEMA official said that this standardized  training should be complete by summer 2008. NVOAD Has Several Characteristics That Help It Carry Out Its ESF-6 Role, but Is Constrained by Limited Staff Resources

NVOAD is in a unique position to coordinate voluntary organizations  active in disaster assistance under ESF-6. Using  lessons learned from Katrina, NVOAD has identified ways to potentially  improve information sharing with its members, such as through enhanced  use of web technology. We found that these conference calls were not an effective way of  communicating after the hurricanes. For example, in response to the Act, FEMA hired a Disability  Coordinator to integrate disability issues into federal emergency planning  and preparedness efforts. Key Gaps in Federal and State Mass Care Planning Efforts for Individuals with Disabilities Were Identified after the Hurricanes

After the 2005 Gulf Coast hurricanes, reports from the Senate Committee  on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, DHS, and NCD identified  a lack of planning as one of the most significant problems related to the  provision of mass care to the disabled. FEMA Has Begun Addressing the Issues with Mass Care for the Disabled, but Has Generally Not Coordinated with NCD as Required

FEMA has taken several steps to help improve planning for the disabled  population. In response to such problems, the  Red Cross has developed an intake form intended to assist volunteers in  determining whether a particular shelter can meet an individual’s needs  and also developed new training on serving the disabled. Other major national voluntary  organizations that we examined had increased their attention to services  for the disabled, but did not identify a need to improve their services for  this population. The Red Cross Has Taken Steps to Help Local Chapter Officials Serve the Disabled, including Developing a Shelter Intake Form and Training

After Hurricane Katrina, officials from the government and disability  organizations identified two main concerns with the mass care services  provided by the Red Cross to individuals with disabilities. Red Cross headquarters officials told us that some local chapters are still  not fully prepared to serve individuals with disabilities after disasters. The  Public Assistance reimbursement program was not designed for a disaster  of Katrina’s magnitude because it only offered reimbursement to voluntary  organizations in the disaster zone, even though evacuees dispersed  throughout the country. Voluntary organizations also  faced significant communication problems as they sought reimbursement,  but FEMA has not taken steps to address these communication issues. In addition, we found that some of the information on FEMA’s Web site  about the Public Assistance program was not presented in a user-friendly  format that would help voluntary organizations successfully navigate  reimbursement policies and procedures. If FEMA does not take steps to  address these issues, it will encounter difficulties in meeting its NRF role  of coordinating with voluntary organizations, and the nation is likely to see  some of the same coordination problems that occurred after the Gulf  Coast hurricanes. To obtain information about the rationale  for, and implications of, the shift in the primary mass care role in the  National Response Framework (NRF) from the Red Cross to the Federal  Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), we reviewed letters between  FEMA and the Red Cross documenting reasons for the shift in the primary  agency role from the Red Cross to FEMA, the National Response  Framework, information about the National Shelter System, the Post  Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act, and information about the  responsibilities of Voluntary Agency Liaisons. National Council on Disability.
Why GAO Did This Study

Using lessons from the 2005 Gulf Coast hurricanes, the federal government released the National Response Framework (NRF) in January 2008. This report examines (1) why the primary role for mass care in the NRF shifted from the Red Cross to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), and potential issues with implementation, (2) whether National Voluntary Organizations Active in Disasters (NVOAD)--an umbrella organization of 49 voluntary agencies--is equipped to fulfill its NRF role, (3) the extent to which FEMA has addressed issues with mass care for the disabled since the hurricanes, (4) the extent to which major voluntary agencies have prepared to better serve the disabled since the hurricanes, and (5) the extent to which FEMA has addressed issues voluntary agencies faced in receiving Public Assistance reimbursement. To analyze these issues, GAO reviewed the NRF and other documents, and interviewed officials from FEMA, voluntary agencies, and state and local governments.

What GAO Found

FEMA and the Red Cross agreed that FEMA should be the primary agency for mass care in the NRF because the primary agency should be able to direct federal agencies' resources to meet mass care needs, which the Red Cross cannot do. The shifting roles present several implementation issues. For example, while FEMA has enhanced responsibilities for coordinating the activities of voluntary organizations, it does not currently have a sufficient number of specialized staff to meet this responsibility. NVOAD has characteristics that help it carry out its broad role of facilitating voluntary organization and government coordination, but limited staff resources constrain its ability to effectively fulfill its role in disaster response situations. NVOAD held daily conference calls with its members after Hurricane Katrina, but these calls were not an effective means of sharing information, reflecting the fact that NVOAD had only one employee at the time of Katrina. FEMA has begun taking steps in several areas to improve mass care for the disabled based on lessons learned from the Gulf Coast hurricanes. For example, FEMA hired a Disability Coordinator to integrate disability issues into federal emergency planning and preparedness efforts. However, FEMA has generally not coordinated with a key federal disability agency, the National Council on Disability, in the implementation of various initiatives, as required by the Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act of 2006. The Red Cross has taken steps to improve mass care services for the disabled, but still faces challenges. For example, the Red Cross developed a shelter intake form to assist staff in determining whether a particular shelter can meet an individual's needs. However, Red Cross officials said that some local chapters are still not fully prepared to serve individuals with disabilities. Other voluntary organizations had not identified a need to improve services for individuals with disabilities, and we did not identify concerns with their services. FEMA has partially addressed the issues faced by local voluntary organizations, such as churches, in seeking Public Assistance reimbursement for mass care-related expenses after the hurricanes. At the time of the hurricanes, a key FEMA reimbursement program was not designed for a disaster of Katrina's magnitude, but FEMA has changed its regulations to address this issue. Local voluntary organizations also had difficulty getting accurate information about reimbursement opportunities. Key FEMA staff had not received training on reimbursement policies and sometimes did not provide accurate information, and some of the information on FEMA's Web site was not presented in a user-friendly format. FEMA has not addressed these communication issues.