DHS Did Not Collaborate with Non- Federal Stakeholders As Fully As Planned or Required in Developing the NRF

While DHS included non-federal stakeholders at the initial and final stages  in the process of revising the December 2004 Plan, it did not collaborate  with them as fully as planned in its revision work plan or as required by  the Post-Katrina Act. However, DHS deviated from its work  plan after the first draft was completed in April 2007. However, rather than sending this first draft to  stakeholders for comment, DHS conducted its internal, federal review of  the draft document for approximately 5 months until September 2007. FEMA officials said that DHS did not release this April 2007 draft for  comment because the draft required further modifications DHS considered  necessary. The government affairs committee chair of the International Association  of Emergency Managers testified, “The document we saw bore no  resemblance to what we had discussed so extensively with FEMA and  other stakeholders in the December 2006 through February 2007 timeline.”  Additionally, the National Emergency Management Association  representative, who served on the Steering Committee, expressed his  concern that its association had been effectively shut out of the process,  testifying that the collaborative process in rewriting the 2004 Plan “broke  down…with no stakeholder input, working group involvement, or steering  committee visibility.”

			After the Internal, Federal Review, DHS Provided All Stakeholders an Opportunity to Comment before Final Publication and Considered All Comments in Finalizing the New Framework

After the approximate 5-month internal, federal review period, DHS  released a draft of the newly renamed National Response Framework for  public comment on September 10, 2007. However,  DHS did not incorporate the NAC by amending its approved September  2006 work plan for revising the 2004 Plan or establish the NAC in time for  the Council to incorporate non-federal stakeholder input into the revision  of the 2004 Plan, as directed by the October 2006 Post-Katrina Act. FEMA and the Post- Katrina Act Have Recognized the Importance of Including Non-Federal Stakeholders in Developing National Response Doctrine, but FEMA Lacks Guidance and Procedures for Future NRF Revisions

While FEMA has recognized the importance of partnering with non-federal  stakeholders to achieve the nation’s emergency management goals, both in  congressional testimonies as well as in its January 2008 strategic plan,  FEMA has not yet developed guidance and procedures for how future  revisions of the NRF will be managed or how the newly established  National Advisory Council will be integrated into the revision process in  accordance with the Post-Katrina Act. Standards for Internal Control in  the Federal Government state that management guidance, policies, and  procedures are an integral part of any agency’s planning for, and  achieving, effective results. Developing such policies and procedures for  how the NRF will be revised in the future and how FEMA will integrate the  NAC and other non-federal stakeholders in the process is essential for  helping to ensure that FEMA attains its goal of partnering with nonfederal  stakeholders to help achieve the nation’s emergency management goals. Recognizing the importance of collaboration, the Post-Katrina Act requires  that the FEMA Administrator partner with non-federal stakeholders from  state, local, and tribal governments, the private sector, and  nongovernmental organizations to build a national system of emergency  management that can effectively and efficiently utilize the full measure of  the nation’s resources to respond to all disasters, including catastrophic  incidents, and acts of terrorism. The 2008 NRF, while it states that it  merits periodic review and revision, does not contain such language  regarding the circumstances and time frames for its review and revision. We recommended, among other things,  that the Department of Defense develop a thorough process to guide its  coordination with the states. While the NRF is published by DHS, it belongs to the nation’s  emergency response community that is collectively responsible for  effectively implementing the NRF’s provisions should another catastrophic  disaster like Hurricane Katrina occur. Appendix I: Scope and Methodology

This report addresses the following questions: (1) To what extent did the  Department of Homeland Security (DHS) collaborate with non-federal  stakeholders in revising and updating the December 2004 National  Response Plan into the January 2008 National Response Framework  (NRF)? To determine what  happened during the revision process and the extent to which DHS  involved non-federal stakeholders in that process, we interviewed FEMA  officials and non-federal stakeholders who served in key positions in the  revision process and the chairman of FEMA’s National Advisory Council  (NAC).
Why GAO Did This Study

Hurricane Katrina illustrated that effective preparation and response to a catastrophe requires a joint effort between federal, state, and local government. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), through the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), is responsible for heading the joint effort. In January 2008, DHS released the National Response Framework (NRF), a revision of the 2004 National Response Plan (2004 Plan), the national preparation plan for all hazards. In response to the explanatory statement to the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2008 and as discussed with congressional committees, this report evaluates the extent to which (1) DHS collaborated with non-federal stakeholders in revising and updating the 2004 Plan into the 2008 NRF and (2) FEMA has developed policies and procedures for managing future NRF revisions. To accomplish these objectives, GAO reviewed DHS and FEMA documents related to the revision process, analyzed the relevant statutes, and interviewed federal and non-federal officials who held key positions in the revision process.

What GAO Found

While DHS included non-federal stakeholders--state, local, and tribal governments, nongovernmental organizations, and the private sector--in the initial and final stages of revising the 2004 Plan into the NRF, it did not collaborate with these stakeholders as fully as it originally planned or as required by the October 2006 Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act (Post-Katrina Act). As the revision process began in 2006, DHS involved both federal and non-federal stakeholders by soliciting and incorporating their input in determining the key revision issues and developing the first draft in April 2007. However, after this first draft was completed, DHS deviated from its revision work plan by conducting a closed, internal federal review of the draft rather than releasing it for stakeholder comment because the draft required further modifications DHS considered necessary. DHS limited communication with non-federal stakeholders until it released a draft for public comment 5 months later on September 10, 2007. The following day, non-federal stakeholders testified at a congressional hearing that DHS had shut them out during that 5-month period. In addition, the Post-Katrina Act required that DHS establish a National Advisory Council (NAC) for the FEMA Administrator by December 2006 to, among other things, incorporate nonfederal stakeholders' input in the revision process. However, FEMA stated the necessary time to select quality NAC members required additional time, and FEMA did not announce the NAC's membership until June 2007. The NAC did not provide comments on a revision draft until one month before DHS publicly released the final NRF in January 2008. FEMA anticipates that the NRF will be revised in the future; however, FEMA does not have policies or procedures in place to guide this process or ensure a collaborative partnership with stakeholders. FEMA has emphasized the importance of partnering with relevant stakeholders to effectively prepare for and respond to major and catastrophic disasters, and the Congress, through the Post-Katrina Act, requires such partnership. In addition, the Standards for Internal Controls in the Federal Government calls for policies and procedures that establish regular communication with stakeholders and monitor performance over time as essential for achieving desired program goals. Furthermore, previous GAO work on the Department of Defense's civil support plans and the administration's national pandemic influenza implementation plan has shown the need for participation of state and local jurisdictions in emergency planning. Especially in view of a new administration, the experience of the previous revision process illustrates the importance of collaborating with stakeholders in revising a plan that relies on them for its successful implementation. While the NRF is published by DHS, it belongs to the nation's emergency response community. Developing such policies and procedures is essential for ensuring that FEMA attains the Post- Katrina Act's goal of partnering with non-federal stakeholders in building the nation's emergency management system, including the periodic review and revision of the NRF.