Developing a Rebuilding Plan

• Simplifed roles and responsibilities, and re-trained federal staf;

As discussed in Disaster Recovery Today #4000, it is important not only for Subrecipients to control the inspection environment, but to also be a part of all discussions and decisions regarding their own overall recovery process. Remember, FEMA is not in the design/build business. They are there to lend assistance, but ultimately the fnal disposition of a project belongs to you. FEMA’s Changing Role The Public Assistance (PA) Program is based on a partnership of FEMA, state and local ofcials. The roles and responsibilities of these entities are being more clearly defned and responsibilities more fexibly based on the capabilities of state and local partners. In FEMA’s 2018-2022 Strategic Plan, a common theme is that disasters are federally supported, state managed and locally executed. FEMA realized that the PA Program had not evolved to meet the changing needs of its customers during the last 20 years. One of the shortfalls included using a one-size-fts-all approach to process projects, regardless of the project’s size or cost. Following an in-depth review and analysis of how FEMA administered the PA Program, which averages $4.7 billion in assistance each year, the need for signifcant changes in the way FEMA implements the Public Assistance Program was clear. As a result, FEMA developed a new business model for PA Program delivery based on a lean management principle and is implementing those changes. The delivery model has three basic elements, which support a simplifed and streamlined grant application process:

• Cloud-based customer relationship and program management software known as The PA Grants Manager and Grants Portal; and • Pooled resources so multiple disaster operations can tap into trained experts when developing PA projects called Consolidated Resource Centers (CRC). Previous to the new delivery model, FEMA developed and funded every Project Worksheet (PW) using the same process regardless of project size, complexity or risk. The PW template in use then was primarily free‐form felds which allowed and even encouraged varying interpretations at every touch point through the entire project development and funding process. Additionally, Project Specialists, who developed PWs, were assigned projects without regard to their relevant skills and/or abilities to develop the projects. The following changes have been incorporated under the new delivery model construct: • Process fows are separated into three paths so that the levels of efort and expertise necessary to develop and review PWs are commensurate with project complexity and/or risk. • Standardized PW templates have content controls and directly relate to the type of infrastructure impacted and/or the work necessary for recovery.

Continued on page 12

ID 145724096 © Susan Sheldon | Dreamstime.com

10

DISASTERRECOVERYTODAY.COM

Made with FlippingBook - PDF hosting