Case Study Of Fema's Sandy

time of crisis by R. David Paulison, who unlike Brown, has had a career focused on disaster

Since its inception, FEMA has dealt with quite many disasters. In all these disasters, at least, people’s lives and property have been saved. Public opinion on the performance of FEMA is quite divergent. However, there is a feeling that FEMA has several weaknesses that if corrected will help the agency achieve its objectives and even exceed public expectations about its performance. In particular, FEMA’s responses to 9/11 attacks and

As Hurricanes Katrina, Rita, and Wilma successively lashed the gulf coast starting in late August 2005, nature’s fury exposed serious weaknesses in the United States’ emergency response capabilities. Not all emergencies pose this magnitude of challenge. In the United States, the initial—and usually major—responsibility for disaster response rests with local authorities. This “bottom-up” system of emergency management has a long history and continues to make sense in most circumstances. Core Challenges for Large-Scale Disaster

Many Americans watching the Government response to Hurricanes Rita and Katrina as it play out in the media could not believe the finger pointing that was going on between our elected leaders as many victims struggled to get their life in order. With the National Response Framework initial responsibility remains with the local elected officials and each level of the government above that will monitor and remain ready with assistance if requested. This will allow needed resources to get where they are needed without the internal bickering of the past. The Emergency Support Function Annexes within the National Response Framework ensures multi-agency interoperability and encompasses the other components of the NRF.

Despite warnings of the impact, Hurricane Andrew the response was negligent and ill prepared. As predicted, the devastation was catastrophic. (20) Governor Chiles was either not informed as to how the state would be affected or was lax in his duties. The Governor waited too long before requesting help for the state. Governor Chiles felt that the state itself could handle the damages that arose after impact and refused government assistance. Once he realized the state could not handle the devastation on its own, government also waited for a formal request from the Governor before stepping in. The reaction from FEMA after the request was slow and ineffective waiting for word from Chiles. In essence, no one actually surveyed the damages caused by the hurricane and once surveyed properly; people had already waited too long and were in dire

As the Assistant Administrator of National Preparedness with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (F.E.M.A.) when Super Storm Sandy made landfall on October 29, 2012, in New Jersey it brought with it storm surges of more than 11 feet, killing more than 100 people (including 43 in New York of which 34 occurred in Queens and Staten Island), destroying or damaging thousands of homes, and leaving more than 8 million people without power.

Even though it is the responsibility of the federal and state governments to aid citizens during times of disaster, the people devastated by Hurricane Katrina were not effectively facilitated as according to their rights as citizens of the United States. The government’s failures to deliver assistance to citizens stem from inadequate protection systems in place before the storm even struck. The Federal Emergency Management Agency and the Department of Homeland Security were the two largest incumbents in the wake of the storm. The failure of these agencies rests on the shoulders of those chosen to head the agency. These directors, appointed by then president George W. Bush, were not capable of leading large government agencies through a

For future disasters, there needs to be more communication between different levels of government. Federal and local governments should work together to carry out the tasks they are legally assigned to. Rather than levels of government blaming each other for being irresponsible, they should work together and delegate tasks to help as many people as possible in an efficient manner. There needs to be significantly more effective leadership as well. Poor leadership was detrimental to FEMA’s practices during Hurricane Katrina. Preparedness is also essential in future disasters. FEMA was shown to be unprepared for Katrina’s landfall because of their incompletion of the Hurricane Pam project. Strategies to evacuate residents and choices on how to distribute medical care were undecided on, which is something that could have been avoided with proper and thorough

The Federal Emergency Management Agency, or FEMA, is responsible for coordinating the government’s role in preparation, prevention, response and recovery from domestic disaster, whether they be natural or man-made. FEMA.gov lists 1849 total disasters declared since 1953, with an average of 32 each year (13). This particular agency has generated a lot of praise and but just as much criticism. Over the course of FEMA’s history, there are many lessons to be learned and FEMA is always looking for ways to be more effective. This paper will examine the history of FEMA, evaluate its performance over the years and pinpoint lessons to be learned and actions to be taken.

The Hurricane Katrina disaster highly challenged the operations of FEMA thereby leading to great changes in the agency. The Storm that is ranked as the third most intense U.S. landfalling intense caught the FEMA and at large the Department of Homeland Security unprepared thereby leading to severe losses. The hurricane claimed more than 1200 individuals and a total property of around $108 billion, of which could have minimized if FEMA could have carried out its operations effectively (Bea, 2006).

This case study covers the response efforts of government officials and volunteers after hurricane Sandy to help restore services in certain locations. The main focus was on the Rockaway peninsula in New York city. Based on the economic status determined how soon they were able to receive recovery assistance for their basic needs. (Subaiya, S., Moussavi, C., Velasquez, A., & Stillman, J.2014) Low income households worried the most about the essentials,

In the United States, people who live in poverty are already one of the most vulnerable populations and it is this population that is heavily impacted by public policy relating to natural disasters. Often, public policies relating to disaster preparedness and recovery are not discussed until after a natural disaster takes place which is too late to do any good for the people affected and who are devastated almost beyond comprehension. The role of government in disaster preparedness and recovery became a “hot button” issue especially after Hurricane Katrina when the federal and local governments seemed to protect/help those who already had resources and not those with little to no resources. According to a Gallup Poll by Jones & Carroll (2005), forty-nine percent of respondents said that FEMA was most helpful to them while thirty-one percent of respondents said that nothing was helpful to them during recovery from Hurricane Katrina. This information indicates that there is a gap in services disaster relief policies and programs that needs to be filled.

The liberation behind Mother Nature’s persona, has demonstrated to be at times overwhelming. Accidents that causes destruction, violence or even bereavement can be callous and merciless. The understanding that we have no control over what happens in life is kind of hard to fathom, simply because there are professions that are trained to make a positive influence within the society. Agencies across America are not trained to hurt people, there trained to make a difference. So why is it that there has been many failures when it comes to a response time, such as the effects of Hurricane Katrina? Well the answer is simple it could narrow down to leadership, complacency, communication, vision, untrained responders, and unappreciative individuals. What are the key success factors in managing large, multi-agency and multi-jurisdictional response programs? How can we determine or measure “success” in response? How can we design drills and tests that specifically evaluate the key success factors for response? All of these questions can be directed to the statement above, and will correlate with each other. Leadership, communication, and vision is the key to triumph.

Hurricane Katrina exposed huge issues in the United States disaster preparedness and response programs. In 2005, the structure for homeland security was unable to manage catastrophic events like Hurricane Katrina. Unified management of national response

On August 29, 2009, Hurricane Katrina struck the United States Gulf Coast. It was a Category 3 Hurricane, according to the Saffir Simpson Scale. Winds gusted to up to 140 miles per hour, and the hurricane was almost 400 miles wide . The storm itself did a tremendous amount of damage, but the storm’s aftermath was cataclysmic. Many claimed that the federal government was slow to meet the needs of the hundreds of thousands of people affected by the storm. This paper will examine the four elements of disaster management – preparedness, response, recovery, and mitigation – as well as an analysis on the data presented.