FEMA and DHS: What's the Difference?

Abstract 

FEMA has operated within the DHS for close to two decades. This consolidation has contributed to major inefficiencies and exposed vulnerable communities to natural disasters. The ensuing study delves deeper into this issue and identifies the challenges within the integration of DHS and FEMA. Research focuses on specific events, which FEMA failed to respond effectively. The paper addresses three strategies, which could lessen the impact of the identified challenges. Findings are based on pertinent legal materials, articles and other scholarly references. The study finds that removing FEMA from the DHS would significantly increase its performance.

Introduction 

After the 9/11 strategy in 2001, the US realized that its national security sectors was experiencing several vulnerabilities. The first response involved consolidating FEMA along with 21 other agencies into the department of homeland security (DHS) through the Homeland Security Act of 2002, passed and signed by Congress and President Bush respectively (Institute of Medicine, 2015). Removing FEMA from DHS would allow the organization to report directly to the president and be a member of the President’s Cabinet. In the past decade, FEMA has experienced increased inefficiencies from responses to hurricane Katrina, Maria and Harvey to the California wildfires (Knapp, 2019). FEMA should be removed from the DHS and established as an independent agency to enhance accountability and procedure, resource allocation, leadership challenges and disaster response.

Factually, there have been blames games in the way the Hurricane Katrina was handled. The disaster was unmitigated and left a large portion of the country destroyed. Experts have spent resources and energy trying to determine the individuals who failed and the way they failed, leading in a great deal of blame games (Barnosky et al., 2020). The blames would have been unnecessary if at all a well polished, efficient and ideal plan was in place. The breakdown in the command chain was evident on who had responsibility and authority, and who did not. The confusion in the chain of command was a contributing factor to the failure of rescue and recovery operations when Katrina disaster happened. It displayed the gaping holes in the nation’s response (Barnosky et al., 2020). Significantly, by placing the preparedness and response under FEMA the loop hole of accountability will be sorted out. During emergency operations, accountability and procedure is vital (Barnosky et al., 2020). By allowing FEMA to handle issues as an entity, uncertainty within the command chain will be eliminated and the ability to handle emergencies will be improved.

The reorganization of the DHS in 2003 significantly reduced FEMA funding. Notably, FEMA has endured several funding cuts from the DHS hindering disaster relief. For instance, in 2018, the DHS announced that it would be moving $155 million from FEMA to border security (WUSF, 2019). This action was taken prior to hurricane Dorian affecting parts of Florida (WUSF, 2019). The public assistance funds represent the largest allocation of federal funds allocated for short and long term disaster recovery (Institute of Medicine, 2015). According to the Institute of Medicine (2015), these funds have been historically restricted to restoring pre-disaster conditions including function and structure. As a standalone agency, FEMA can advocate for expansion of public assistance funding to cover post-disaster restoration programs. Furthermore, it would enable FEMA to take control of its numerous programs without reporting to a higher agency.

Leadership issues and power struggles inhibit decision-making and success for FEMA and DHS. In February 2019, Brock Long resigned as FEMA administrator after leadership conflicts with secretary of the DHS, Kirsten Nielsen (Knapp, 2019). This resignation came at a challenging time causing FEMA to respond to hurricane Harvey and Maria and the California wildfires ineffectively (Knapp, 2019). FEMA and DHS have continuously failed to agree on leadership roles and responsibilities. Barnosky et al. (2020) indicates that FEMA was facing a 37% staff shortage by the end of 2017. Also, half of the workforce was not certified for disaster response (Barnosky et al., 2020). This highlights the high rate of inefficiencies in FEMA and DHS ranks. Removing FEMA from DHS would provide much needed independence in decision-making and solving staff shortages.

FEMA’s role is diminished in the DHS, leading to poor response to major natural disasters. Recently, FEMA lost its disaster preparedness function that it has acted upon since its formation (Barnosky et al., 2020). DHS has experienced flaws in coordinating efforts between its headquarters and state and local governments, because it lacks regional offices from which response teams can be launched in case of a disaster (Barnosky et al., 2020). These inefficiencies reflect on the operations of FEMA since its ideal approach is to be locally executed and state managed (Barnosky et al., 2020). Restoring FEMA as an independent agency can enable the agency to establish a structure that is properly integrated with state and local response operations.

Conclusion 

The challenges reveal a necessity for FEMA and policymakers to identify better ways of increasing preparedness and responsiveness. Restructuring FEMA and fixing budget issues cannot be addressed while it is still part of the DHS. Therefore, removing and reestablishing FEMA as an independent structure offers the flexibility to align operations as it sees fit. Additionally, as an independent agency of the US executive branch, FEMA will have a direct line to the president rather than going through the DHS. This allows administrators to present their grievances and advice the president on effective measures. To this end, a major reorganization would allow FEMA to achieve its objectives of preparing and responding to natural disasters.

References

Barnosky, J. T., Roberts, P., & Acosta, J. (2020, January 28). What Can FEMA Learn from the Historic 2017 Hurricane and Wildfire Seasons? Georgetown Journal of International Affairs . https://gjia.georgetown.edu/2020/01/28/what-can-fema-learn-from-2017/ 

Institute of Medicine. (2015). Healthy, Resilient, and Sustainable Communities After Disasters: Strategies, Opportunities, and Planning for Recovery (2015) . National Academy of Sciences.

Knapp, H. (2019, February 13). Managing an Administrative Disaster: Establishing FEMA as an Independent Agency. GWC . https://www.getches-wilkinsoncenter.cu.law/2019/03/12/managing-an-administrative-disaster-establishing-fema-as-an-independent-agency/ 

WUSF. (2019, August 13). Relocation of FEMA Funds tothe Border Causes Concerns as Major Hurricane Heads toward Florida . https://wusfnews.wusf.usf.edu/post/relocation-fema-funds-border-cause-concerns-major-hurricane-heads-toward-florida