We’ve all heard the term, “I don’t know what I don’t know.” When it comes to your disaster recovery efforts, however, what you don’t know could cost you valuable grant dollars under the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) Public Assistance (PA) Program. With all of the changes in FEMA PA policy in recent years — including a new Public Assistance delivery model, several pilot programs related to Direct Administrative Costs and alternate procedures for debris removal and permanent work — the list of what you don’t knowmight have grown.
When evaluating FEMA’s Public Assistance Alternative Procedures (PAAP) —outlined in Section 428 of the Stafford Act — the true benefits and risks for state, local, tribal governments and private not-for-profits (PNP) need to be considered. It is our hope that this article will allow eligible applicants to make decisions on the pros and cons of the Alternative Procedures and how best to utilize them to achieve a more positive disaster recovery.
Following many major disasters (e.g., Hurricane Andrew, Hurricane Katrina, Superstorm Sandy), FEMA and their oversight entities (Inspector General and Congress) evaluated the effectiveness of response and recovery efforts, leading them to implement new policies or procedures simplifying the process and the timeliness of support provided. After Hurricane Katrina FEMA implemented the Post Katrina Emergency Reform Act, which reorganized the agency and provided substantial new authorities. In response to the devastation caused by Sandy, President Obama signed into law the Sandy Recovery Improvement Act of 2013, commonly referred to as SRIA.
The intent of SRIA was to streamline administrative procedures and improve the effectiveness of several disaster assistance...