FP&S application and award numbers are for fiscal year 2007 funding and reflect all fiscal year 2007  awards made through July 2009. FEMA received about 25,000 applications for AFG, SAFER, and FP&S grants in fiscal  year 2007 and awarded more than 5,000 grants. As of July 2009, FEMA Had Met Four of Five AFG Statutory Requirements for Distributing Fiscal Year 2008 Grants, but Had Not Fully Met One of Three Fiscal Year 2008 Program Requirements

			Although FEMA Met Most AFG Statutory Requirements, It Did Not Fully Track EMS Data to Ensure That It Met One Statutory Requirement for Fiscal Year 2008

FEMA met four of five statutory requirements related to AFG grants for  fiscal year 2008. Specifically, the AFG 2008 grant guidance specified  two requirements for FEMA to distribute grant awards: (1) volunteer  departments are to receive at least 22 percent and (2) combination  departments are to receive at least 33 percent of the total appropriation. We also analyzed fiscal year  2007 data to determine whether FEMA met the requirement related to  distributing funds to combination departments since the separation  between volunteer and combination departments occurred. 5). FEMA Has Taken Actions to Assist Grant Applicants and Involves the Fire Service Community in Establishing Grant Criteria and Reviewing Grant Applications

FEMA has developed various tools to assist grant applicants with the  application process and involves the nine major fire service organizations  in developing criteria for annual fire grant funding priorities and in the  peer review process. For example, each year, FEMA brings together a  panel of fire service professionals representing the leadership of the nine  major fire service organizations to conduct a criteria development meeting  to develop the program’s priorities for the coming year. Peer Review Panel Process Is Designed to Support Independent Assessment of Application Merits

FEMA’s peer review process—in which members of the nine major fire  service organizations participate in assessing grant applications—also  helps ensure that the fire service community is involved in making grant  awards. AFG Program Office officials stated that while they strive to  provide an even chance to as many fire departments and other  organizations as possible to serve on peer review panels, representatives  of departments that are invited sometimes fail to appear to serve on the  panel without informing FEMA. In addition, they also stated that they are considering  conducting outreach efforts to expand peer review participation, such as  announcing opportunities to serve on an upcoming peer review panel at  workshops. Grant Priorities Are Generally Perceived as Clear by Grant Applicants, but Are Not Consistently Aligned with the Scoring Matrix and Grant Application Questions

Seventy-eight percent (28 of 36) of the grant applicants that we  interviewed described the grant guidance as being clear to a great or to a  very great extent, 7 said that it was clear to a moderate extent, and 1  applicant said that he did not know. However, 10 applicants provided  suggestions for how FEMA could further clarify its grant guidance— including its grant priorities. For example, the  fiscal year 2008 SAFER guidance states that continuity—which refers to  whether an applicant’s recruitment and retention activities are designed to  continue beyond the grants’ period of performance—is a priority for  recruitment and retention grants. It is important that FEMA ensure that its grant guidance is not only clear  but also consistently aligned with the application questions and scoring  matrix. Developing grant  guidance and application questions that are consistent with funding  priorities could help FEMA ensure that grant funds are awarded in  accordance with the agency’s priorities. Moreover, 61 percent of the 36 grant applicants that we interviewed (22 of  36) stated that the feedback they received from FEMA regarding why their  applications were turned down was helpful to little or no extent. AFG Program Office officials acknowledged that they  could strengthen efforts to improve feedback to applicants who are turned  down for grants following the peer review process. Thus, we  addressed the following questions:    To what extent has the Federal Emergency Management Agency  (FEMA) met statutory and program requirements for distributing the  grant funds to a variety of applicants and activities? To review the extent to which FEMA met statutory and program  requirements for distributing fire grants to a variety of applicants and  activities, we reviewed relevant statutory requirements from sections 33  and 34 of the Federal Fire Prevention and Control Act of 1974 (called the  Fire Act and the SAFER Act, respectively, for purposes of this report). To determine the actions FEMA has taken to provide assistance to grant  applicants and involve the fire service community in the grant process, we  collected and reviewed pertinent FEMA documents, such as program  guidance, and observed FEMA’s fiscal year 2010 criteria development  panel process and the fiscal year 2008 FP&S peer review panel process.
Why GAO Did This Study

The Department of Homeland Security, through the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), awards grants to fire departments and other organizations for equipment, staffing, and other needs. As of July 2009, FEMA had received about 25,000 and 22,000 applications for its fiscal years 2007 and 2008 fire grant programs, respectively, and had awarded more than 5,000 grants in both years. GAO was congressionally directed to review the application and award process for these grants. This report addresses the (1) extent to which FEMA has met statutory and program requirements for distributing the grant funds; (2) actions FEMA has taken to provide assistance to grant applicants and involve the fire service community in the grant process; and (3) extent to which FEMA has ensured that its grant process is accessible, clear, and consistent with requirements, including its grant guidance. GAO analyzed relevant laws and interviewed 36 randomly selected grant applicants to obtain their views, but the results are not generalizable.

What GAO Found

FEMA met seven of eight statutory requirements and two of three FEMA established program requirements for distributing fiscal years 2007 and 2008 grant funds. (GAO used fiscal year 2007 data for two requirements because not all fiscal year 2008 funds had been awarded by July 2009.) For example, FEMA met the statutory requirement that volunteer and combination fire departments (which have both paid and volunteer firefighters) collectively receive at least a minimum of 55 percent of fiscal year 2008 grant funds, and also met the program requirement that volunteer departments receive at least 22 percent. GAO was unable to determine whether FEMA met the statutory requirement that at least 3.5 percent of fiscal year 2008 grant funds be awarded for EMS. FEMA reported that its system is not designed to separately track grants awarded to fire departments for EMS purposes and, therefore, it could not determine if it met this requirement. FEMA reported that while it conducted research to determine that it met this requirement for 1 year, doing so was laborious. Establishing procedures to track awards for EMS purposes would allow FEMA to readily determine if it met statutory requirements. FEMA assists grant applicants by sponsoring workshops and involves representatives of the fire service community in establishing criteria and reviewing applications. Each year, FEMA convenes leaders of nine major fire service organizations to conduct a criteria development meeting to develop the program's criteria and funding priorities. FEMA's peer review process--in which members of the fire service organizations assess grant applications--also helps ensure that the fire service community is involved in the grant process. FEMA officials stated that they strive to provide an even chance for as many fire departments and other organizations as possible to serve on peer review panels. They also stated that they are considering conducting outreach efforts to expand peer review participation, such as announcing opportunities to serve on an upcoming peer review panel at workshops. FEMA has taken actions to ensure that its fire grants award process is accessible and clear to grant applicants--28 of 36 applicants GAO interviewed found the guidance to be clear--but GAO also identified inconsistencies between the stated grant application priorities and the application questions and scoring values. For example, the fiscal year 2008 guidance for the grant that funds the recruitment and retention of firefighters states that continuity--maintaining recruitment and retention efforts beyond the life of the grant--was a priority for grant awards. However, no grant application question addressed this priority and the scoring values did not include it. Thus, it is difficult for FEMA to ensure that grant funds are awarded in accordance with the agency's funding priorities. Further, four of the nine major fire service organizations voiced concerns about feedback FEMA provided to rejected applicants, and 22 of the 36 applicants stated that the feedback was helpful to little or no extent. FEMA officials stated that they could strengthen efforts to improve feedback. Providing specific feedback to rejected applicants could help FEMA strengthen future grant application processes.