As required by the 9/11 Act, FEMA changed the definition it used to  identify the UASI regions included in its risk analysis model. However, FEMA has not assessed  how UASI regions’ collaboration efforts have helped build regional  preparedness capabilities. Of these  446 projects, 303 projects funded a single preparedness capability. 1). FEMA Does Not Assess How Collaborative Efforts Help Build UASI Regional Preparedness Capabilities

While executive, departmental, and agency guidance all direct FEMA to  assess how regional collaboration builds national preparedness  capabilities, FEMA has not yet established measures to do so. However, FEMA  has no measures in place to assess the extent to which the funds  appropriated by Congress—approximately $5 billion for the UASI program  since 2003—have achieved the goal to build regional preparedness through  collaboration efforts. FEMA’s Federal Preparedness Report acknowledges this limitation, citing  a lack of specific targets that define how or whether national priorities— including the National Priority to Expand Regional Collaboration—are  achieved. While these factors are related to states’  and urban areas’ efforts to enhance regional collaboration, they do not  provide a means to assess how regional collaboration activities help build  preparedness capabilities. While we previously reported challenges FEMA  faces in developing and implementing the comprehensive assessment  system, FEMA could build upon its current efforts to assess overall  preparedness by developing and including measures related to the  collaboration efforts of UASI regions and their effect on building regional  preparedness. However, developing measures to assess  how UASI regions’ collaborative efforts enhance regional preparedness  capabilities could provide FEMA with more meaningful information on the  national return on investment for the approximately $5 billion in grant  expenditures for regional collaboration through the UASI program to date. UASI Officials Described Program Features That Support Regional Collaboration but Cited Continuing Challenges; Some UASI Regions Increased their Membership in Response to Changes in the 9/11 Act

UASI program officials described program features that support regional  collaboration, many of which reflect practices we have identified that can  enhance and sustain collaboration. Of the 49 UASI regions we surveyed, 46 said  they have active mutual aid agreements, of which 38 identified that such  an agreement either “greatly helps” or “somewhat helps” measure regional  capability-building. In addition, 44 of the 49 UASI  regions we surveyed reported that their UASI-wide training and exercises  are an activity they use regionwide that builds regional capabilities. missions, goals and objectives)  from the full spectrum of stakeholders on the design and management of  preparedness programs.” The report notes that these challenges are  common to the management and coordination of homeland security  preparedness initiatives but that the resulting recommendations will help  to overcome those challenges, noting, for example, that “efforts are  already underway in updating policy, and coordinating preparedness  assistance.” Moreover, as FEMA implements the recommendations from  our report on the National Preparedness System to improve development  of policies and plans, national capability assessments, and strategic  planning—all of which contain preparedness goals and objectives—should  help better align local, state, regional, and federal missions. Some UASI Regions Reported Changes in Membership Planned or Undertaken in Response to FEMA’s Use of MSAs to Assess Risk

A provision within the 9/11 Act required FEMA to perform a risk  assessment for the 100 largest MSAs by population, beginning in fiscal year  2008. UASI officials’ responses to the grant guidance  varied. Of the 27 UASI regions that said there were jurisdictions within the  MSA that weren’t part of their UASI region:    Twenty-two said that they either had taken or had plans to take some  action(s) in response to FEMA’s risk calculation change; 5 UASI regions  said they had not taken and did not plan to take any of the actions cited  (e,g., initiating a dialogue and assessing the need to include new  jurisdictions) to expand their membership. Seventeen UASI regions reported that they already assessed and evaluated  the need to include new jurisdictions and 3 UASI regions said they plan to  do this, while 7 UASI regions said they had no plans to assess and evaluate  the need to include new jurisdictions. Appendix II: Results of GAO’s Telephone Survey of 49 UASI Regions

In the absence of objective measures to determine the impact of the Urban  Area Security Initiative (UASI) regions’ collaboration efforts on regional  preparedness, we surveyed UASI regions to solicit officials’ views on the  impact of program activities on regional collaboration and challenges they  faced to support regional collaboration.
Why GAO Did This Study

From fiscal year 2003 through fiscal year 2009, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) allocated about $5 billion for the Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI) grant program to enhance regional preparedness capabilities in the nation's highest risk urban areas (UASI regions). The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) administers this program. The Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007 (9/11 Act) required FEMA to change the size of the geographical areas used to assess UASI regions' risk. The conference report accompanying the Consolidated Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2008 directed GAO to assess FEMA's efforts to build regional preparedness through the UASI program, and determine how the 9/11 Act change affected UASI regions. This report addresses (1) the extent to which FEMA assesses how UASI regions' collaborative efforts build preparedness capabilities, and (2) how UASI officials described their collaboration efforts and changes resulting from the 9/11 Act. GAO surveyed all 49 UASI regions that received funding prior to the 9/11 Act change, and visited 6 regions selected based on factors such as length of participation. GAO also reviewed FEMA's grant guidance and monitoring systems.

What GAO Found

Although FEMA has gathered and summarized data on UASI regions' funding for specific projects and related preparedness priorities and capabilities, it does not have measures to assess how UASI regions' collaborative efforts have built preparedness capabilities. An executive directive, Departmental policy, and agency guidance all require that preparedness priorities and capabilities be measurable so that FEMA can determine current capabilities, gaps, and assess national resource needs. To report on the performance of the UASI program, FEMA has gathered data on UASI regions' funding for projects and the goals and objectives those projects support, including the National Priority to Expand Regional Collaboration. However, FEMA's assessments do not provide a means to measure the effect UASI regions' projects have on building regional preparedness capabilities--the goal of the UASI program. FEMA acknowledged a lack of specific measures that define how or whether national priorities--including expanding regional collaboration--are achieved. In the absence of measures, FEMA directed states to describe their collaborative activities. However, these state activities do not provide a means to assess how regional collaboration activities help build preparedness capabilities. FEMA has an effort underway to establish a comprehensive assessment system to appraise the nation's preparedness capabilities. FEMA could build upon its current efforts to assess overall preparedness by developing and including measures related to the collaboration efforts of UASI regions and their effect on building regional preparedness. This could provide FEMA with more meaningful information on the return on investment of the $5 billion it has allocated to the UASI program to date. UASI officials described program activities that they said greatly or somewhat helped support regional collaboration, reflecting factors GAO identified that can enhance and sustain collaboration, and also described a variety of actions taken in response to the 9/11 Act change to assess risk. Regarding program activities that support regional collaboration, of the 49 UASI regions GAO surveyed, 46 said they have active mutual aid agreements in part to share resources among jurisdictions, and 44 described training and exercises as activities they use to build regional preparedness capabilities. Some UASI regions reported changes in membership in response to FEMA's change in the size of the geographical areas used to assess UASI regions' risk. For example, of the 49 regions GAO surveyed, 27 reported that additional jurisdictions were included within the geographical area FEMA used to assess risk that were not included in the region's membership. However, 17 of these regions reported that they had assessed and evaluated the need to include these new jurisdictions in their membership and 3 UASI regions said they plans to do this, while 7 UASI regions said they had no plans to do this.