To declare, or not declare...that is the question...

Washington, IL November Tornado Source: imugr

While never having had the responsibility of sitting in a County Executive's position or position of even greater responsibility at the state level, I would imagine that when a disaster strikes, they are conflicted: on the one hand they worry about the safety of their constituents, and on the other, they want the event to cause enough damage so that their jurisdiction can qualify for federal assistance. In a time when cities are declaring bankruptcy and tax bases are eroding, elected officials have to navigate the emotional fallout of a disaster as well as figure out how to pay for the subsequent response and recovery.

Although the disasters of 2013 didn't have the gravitational pull that Superstorm Sandy had, the Oklahoma Tornadoes, The Rim Fire in California, and the Colorado flooding all caused significant damage and all received Major Disaster Declarations.

However, 2013 also had several events that didn't qualify for Individual and/or Public Assistance, adding new voices and national coverage to growing discontent on how exactly the declaration process works. While some sort of declarations were given to the Yarnell Fire in AZ, The Fertilizer Plant explosion in TX, and the November Tornado outbreak in Illinois, in each instance there was an outcry that more should have been done to support the communities and survivors of those events.

Even though the above events didn't meet designated thresholds that would have triggered the full breadth of federal assistance, a Bill (H.R. 3295) was introduced in the House of Representatives with the intent of amending the criteria under which resources are offered dubbed the: "Fairness in Federal Disaster Declarations Act of 2014."

This Bill, which was introduced on January 21st, would amend the criteria used to evaluate a request for a major disaster declaration by weighting the factors used to determine Individual and Public Assistance, as well as request that economic factors of the impacted locality and the state's financial situation be taken into account when determining eligibility.

When the Congressional Act of 1803 was passed, considered the first piece of disaster legislation, it provided assistance to Portsmouth New Hampshire, a town recovering from a major fire. Prior to that localities were left to fend for themselves in the wake of a diaster. The premise on which our Emergency Management infrastructure is based is that events are to be handled at the lowest level of government possible. By amending the rules on how federal assistance is meted out, would we be making more events eligible? Would it work against the goals of creating resilience and bolstering preparedness in communities? Would the Bill ultimately end up paying for deferred infrastructure improvements? Not only that, but who's paying for the additional dollars given to disaster survivors?

While the current criteria used to trigger federal assistance following an event may have its flaws, I believe more questions and a more thorough investigation of Bill H.R. 3925 will need to be undertaken as it seems to pose more questions than it answers.

The True Costs of Disasters

A great video about the "true" costs of disasters, economic losses, and what's perpetuating this cycle of loss.

For those interested in a more thorough examination...you can find the report here:

http://www.preventionweb.net/english/hyogo/gar/2013/en/home/GAR_2013/GAR_2013_2.html

It means nothing unless people act.

I read an article in the Wall Street Journal entitled "Typhoon exposed limits of Warning System." In the article it talked about a new LIDR system that will replace the existing Doppler radar system in the Philippines used to do the same thing: forecast an incoming storm, but do so with added bells and whistles that will enhance early warning capabilities.

I find it strange that in the midst of ongoing recovery efforts, the government continues to invest in advanced weather forecasting technology, as if it were a limitation of technology that caused the loss of life and not a failure of the framework designed to prevent it. From everything that I've read and from the reports that have come out, the warnings weren't the problem. Days in advance of Yolanda making landfall, there were warnings from the government and PAGASA indicating that this wasn't going to be your average storm, and implored that people respond by evacuating. While the article acknowledges that community action based on the forecasts is needed, it feels like the upgrade to the LIDR system is spending money and resource on addressing something that wasn't broken to begin with, while failing to acknowledge where the real vulnerability lies--in connecting with and empowering communities to take action once information is known.

How is it that a country that averages 20 typhoons a year not know "the drill"? Leading up to Sandy's landfall, people didn't leave because they didn't believe the warnings would match the dire reality forecasted. After communities weather 1,2...or 20 storms, complacency, or hubris can affect their attitude towards the real danger these storms represent. However, it wasn't until I saw this video report from the Wall Street Journal that a new aspect of why people didn't heed to warnings as they should have came to light. As part of the warnings that came from PAGASA, the term "storm surge" was used to describe the tsunami-like wall of water that did so much of the damage; something many Filipino's didn't fully understand. One gentleman in the video goes as far as to call the term "english" and ignored the reality it represented.

While I have no doubt that confusion and unfamiliar terminology surrounding the most deadly aspect of Yolanda's impact played a role in the massive loss of life, I wonder why, given the history Filipino's have with enduring typhoons and the dangers they represent, more widespread proactive action wasn't taken as a precautionary measure.

As recovery gets underway, many are looking to understand where the breakdown occurred and why more action wasn't taken at the local level. If warnings were issued, and a storied history of Category 5 Typhoon's hitting the Philippines known, with Typhoon Bopha hitting last December, why wasn't more done to move people out of harm's way? And why is a technological upgrade seen as a move that will help mitigate loss of life when the reason people failed to leave had more to do with protection of personal property than skepticism surrounding Yolanda's forecasted impact?

Technology is a tool. Higher resolution maps are great, early warnings with higher probabilities on storm impacts and locations are even better; however (insert broken record here) if the people who stand the most to gain (i.e. not die) from the information that these newfangled systems provide are not paying attention or don't care, then you might as well not have any warning system at all. The problem hasn't been the ability to forecast a storm--it's been communicating it in such a way that generates action and interest amongst the people who it will impact.

In Mississippi and Louisiana, people didn't leave when Katrina was bearing down because they didn't believe it was going to be as bad as the forecasts warned. In Galveston when Ike hit, people didn't believe that the island would be all but washed away. In New York, people heeded the warning when Irene blew ashore and when Sandy came, pushing a significant storm surge, people stayed and payed the price. In each of those instances we knew; we knew because history told us, the Army Corps of engineers warned us, and because modern day meteorology showed us where, when, and how severe. To continue to say that advances in severe weather forecasting are mitigating the loss of life and helping people be better prepared, at least where Typhoons and Hurricanes are concerned, is a load of crap. The technology currently used to forecast is sufficient, it's the ability of those whose responsibility it is to turn that information into action at a community level is where the challenge lies. While it's easy to point the finger, I recognize that motivating any large group of people to act is no small task...but when you have history, science, and the blunt trauma of reality on your side...I have to believe that more can and should be done.

Advanced systems and fancier graphics are great but when the dust settles and it's up to friends, neighbors, and search and rescue teams to shoulder the grim burden of counting the dead, the flashy 3D modeling doesn't mean a thing.

If disaster preparedness and risk reduction initiatives can't take hold in the Philippines, a country continually rocked by Earthquakes, Volcanic eruptions, and Typhoons...why would Anytown, USA devote one dollar more than was absolutely necessary to Preparedness if they haven't experienced a disaster in recent memory?

The unfortunate circumstances that have brought us to this moment are tragic...but lets not let this opportunity to champion the preparedness cause slip through our fingers. We need to be able to point to a success story...to be able to show the value in investing in education programs and Disaster Risk Reduction, if there is any hope of it taking hold in vulnerable communities around the world, especially those in our backyards.

Leaving Communities Behind in Recovery

We have all the tools we could possible want, we have the deepest wells from which to pull lessons learned and best practices from to avoid repeating mistakes previously made, we are united in our desire to help communities get back on track following disasters, and we are a relatively close knit community of professionals...so why is it so hard to get it together when we turn on the response machine?

As the kinks get worked out of supply chains and aid streams into areas that continue to have great need, I sense a groundhogs day scenario emerging in communities in the Philippines.

After speaking with colleagues on the ground in Tacloban, the situation that's been described sounds strikingly similar to what many Haitians felt disenfranchised by or disconnected to following the earthquake in 2010. The correlation between Haiti, the Philippines, and the aid mechanism setup is that instead of communities being viewed as active participants in the process, by providing a needed voice in determining how best to distribute aid dollars, they are viewed as victims in need of saving, as recipients of aid only. With the understanding that taking a community of tens of thousands and synthesizing their wants and needs down is the role of the political structure, this article in Foreign Policy about corruption in the Filipino political system is reason to look for an alternative way to give voice to the network of community-based nonprofits and informal community leaders during the recovery process.

Remember that sweet graphic of the cluster wheel of excellence, the one that highlights the clusters at work? Well I went back and did a little reading, and while it wasn't even close to thorough (so please correct me if I'm off base), I didn't read anything that suggested that integration of a local voice in the coordination structure was a priority. There was mention of working through regional and country offices to aid in the warning of an eminent disaster, or on select mitigation projects, but in a post-disaster setting, there is little that indicates any efforts should be made to be inclusive of local populations in how aid should be allocated to reshape and rebuild their communities.

This disconnect is a problem.

And while the premise that the very constituents the coordination mechanism is setup to advocate for are the one's being excluded feels Shakespearean it's so tragic...shades of this disconnect can also be found in the communities working to recover from disasters in the US. While community-based entities are a much stronger force within domestic disaster response and recovery...there are still challenges with integrating the voices of those recovering into post-disaster activities while setting and managing their expectations.

I'm sure there are a great number of examples of community-led initiatives that address this challenge, the one that seems to have had great success in the face of significant destruction is Joplin's Citizen Advisory Recovery Team (CART). The damage caused by the Joplin Tornado provided a unique opportunity to re-imagine what their community could be, and CART provided a conduit for community voices to be heard within the planning and development process. While community-based entities are the backbone of connecting unmet homeowner needs with available resources throughout long term recovery, the ability to capture and articulate a communities collective wants and desires and have them be accounted for in land use planning, zoning considerations, and development ideas is unique.

As the aid machine starts churning out grants to organizations playing needed roles in the provision of immediate aid to communities in the Philippines, let's not forget the people for which that aid was donated on behalf of and the role they should have in how it's used. What I'm suggesting isn't easy, and the responsibility of inclusion shouldn't rest solely on responding organizations, but a concerted effort should be made to ensure that starting now the representation in attendance at cluster meetings reflect the communities being served.

Shock Troops of Disaster

While I finish the last piece in the Sandy Anniversary Trilogy, I thought I would share a 10 minute video on the impacts of the Long Island Express Hurricane of 1938. There's lots of great footage of the storm's impacts and how a region recovered before there was National VOAD, FEMA, or NOAA. While essentially a WPA promotional video, it does a great job of capturing some of the tremendous impacts the hurricane had on communities across Long Island and New England.

https://archive.org/details/ShockTro1938

Human Resilience

Source: Sethdcohen.com

We talk about a community’s ability to cope with and recover from disasters in terms of resilience, but for the most part fail to extend the definition to include how to better mentally and emotionally prepare the people who will be affected. Disaster impacts are quantified by physical damage done to homes, infrastructure, and the total economic losses that result. While these factors are central in determining the severity of an event, it’s a sterile way of classifying the scope of something that exacts a heavy human toll.

According to a Gallup poll, the clinical diagnosis of depression in zip codes heavily affected by Sandy increased by 25% in the weeks following the storm. This coming at a time when Health and Human Service organizations that remained operational were stretched thin and left to deal with the overwhelming number of storm-related needs. What the poll didn’t measure were the number of individuals who were on medications for a pre-existing mental illness that stopped taking them due to facilities being taken off line, medication being lost in the storm, or not being able to contact their case worker due to lack of power, public transportation outages, and an absence of reliable information. 

In addition to the challenges posed by a lack of medications and reliable information, many substance abuse clinics worried/worry about the rise in abuse and relapses as a result of Sandy-related stresses. But the worry extends beyond substance and drug abuse, PTSD in adults and children, acute stress-related behaviors, flashbacks, hoarding, and a host of other personal mental issues continue to plague the survivors in their ability to recover. 

While organizations like the Staten Island Mental Health Society, Long Island Mental Health Services, and other nonprofit human service organizations have setup support groups, free crisis counseling, and other Sandy-related programming, the scale of the ongoing trauma point to an area needing urgent attention, understanding, and additional resources to adequately ensure support is there for those who need it. 

The greatest challenge facing those who preach preparedness is that there is no way for a person to understand how they will react in the face of an event until they're faced with an event. Training can help, but for the average person, training isn't realistic. Up to this point, check lists like the one put out by the American Psychological Association, the Disaster Distress Hotline, self care, and having a strong network of friends and family have been the promoted best practices to help individuals prepare for post-event psychological trauma. To enhance our knowledge of the short and long term psychological affects natural disasters have on people, the Feinstein Institute was recently awarded a $600,000 grant from the CDC. Over the next 2 years, a study will be conducted aimed at deepening our understanding of how to better prepare people to cope with the impacts of natural weather events that are forecast to become more common. 

As a stronger emphasis is placed on whole of community response, stronger advocacy will be needed to ensure that human resilience is made a key value and takeaway as a result of Superstorm Sandy. While building codes can uniformly address needed changes to how we protect ourselves, and flood maps will tell us how high to build, resilience in people is a far more dynamic and individualistic challenge, one that will require ongoing thought and resource to ensure that the communities we're working to make stronger can weather the next storm.

The Great Shakeout

On Oct 17th almost 18 million people will participate in one of the largest organized annual preparedness events in the US, the Great Shakeout.

India's well coordinated preparedness and aggressive early recovery cleanup illustrates the power of having plans and how exercising those plans can reduce the loss of life and minimize confusion around roles and responsibilities in the aftermath of an event. The Great Shakeout is an opportunity to spend some time thinking through the "what if's" of an earthquake. It's a chance to take an honest look at your kit (if you have one) and figure out what still needs to be added, as well as going over the plan: where to meet and when, collecting copies of important documents, etc... I'm convinced that one of the main reasons people ignore preparedness is because it's uncomfortable to think about so it's pushed from our minds. This delay only works against our best interests when an earthquake strikes. While the event gives individuals a chance to take stock, it's also an opportunity for municipalities to go over their planning and think through how preparedness can be better messaged and what response and recovery will look like between local and state partners, etc...

The Shakeout is an opportunity to ask the "stupid" questions, to figure out what you'll do, and take some time to learn about what your village, city, or town plans to do to help minimize loss of life and property.

Are you in an area where there is the risk of and Earthquake? Are you ready? www.shakeout.org

9/11 Day of Service

I’m in NYC right now meeting with nonprofits involved in Superstorm Sandy recovery, lending a hand and providing perspective as it relates to their involvement in recovery efforts. This is a very apropos time to be blogging about volunteers, community preparedness, and disasters given my location and the significance of today.

While today’s tragic origins will not be forgotten, a hopeful spin has turned a day of remembrance into a day of action. What started in 2002 as a way to honor a family member who passed helping others get out of the towers, has grown into so much more. 9/11 has become a day of Service and National Remembrance used as a means of paying tribute to those who died, honoring those who bravely acted on behalf of others, and re-connecting with the sense of community we felt in the days and weeks that followed as we looked to do something, anything to help. 

For me, 9/11 was the first time I can clearly remember the palpable desire to do something, to be involved; I was comforted by the fact that I wasn't alone as I saw just how powerful well meaning individuals can be when united by a common cause.

Join the legions of people using today as an opportunity to give back...check out: http://www.911day.org/ for inspiration and ideas on what you can do and how you can do.

National Preparedness Month

September is National Preparedness month, a time to make sure that you have everything you need should an event impact your community; a time to go over the checklist of what to do, where to go, when to meet, emergency contacts, etc…It’s also an opportunity to create a kit and learn about what to do if this is something that you've put off.

During September I'm going to make an effort to focus content on preparedness, highlight resources, articles, and information to help grow your awareness of the potential threats in your area, as well as how to cope should an event strike.

But before sharing resources related to preparedness, I think it's important to share how success is being defined at a National level:

"A secure and resilient Nation with the capabilities required across the whole community to prevent, protect against, mitigate, respond to, and recover from the threats and hazards that pose the greatest risk." (National Preparedness Goal, Pg. 1)

For more on the overarching plan and details surrounding each aspect of preparedness: Prevention, Protection, Mitigation, Response, and Recovery, see the full report below: 

http://www.fema.gov/media-library-data/20130726-1828-25045-9470/national_preparedness_goal_2011.pdf

Let's get Ready...to get ready.

Renters vs Owners

Disasters indiscriminately destroy whatever is in their path; its unbiased destruction puts many on equal footing regardless of socioeconomic status. While it's true that vulnerable populations tend to be disproportionately impacted by disasters, a flood doesn't care how much money you make, and where a tornado touches down has nothing to do with the strength of your investment portfolio. So if the damage caused by these community altering events doesn't discriminate, why do we when we respond?

Look pretty similar to me

Once the dust settles, the rush is on to cleanup and get back to the new normal; however, it's during response/recovery activities that something strange happens, organizations will choose to help one family over another. Of course every organization has the right to determine how they prioritize need based on their mission, but the result is that some families don't receive assistance as quickly because they rent and don't own their homes.

Now when I say "help," I refer to the cleaning and debris removal that needs to be done following an event. I understand that renter's have every opportunity to buy insurance for their belongings, but because they don't own the property, they are seen differently in the eyes of some response organizations.

This differentiation has to do with three factors:

1. Liability. Finding the property owner to get a release signed so volunteer groups can safely and legally work on the property.
2. The perception that Rental Properties are Income Properties and as such it is the responsibility of the landlord to take care of their tenant needs--not voluntary resources.
3. Slumlords / Absentee Landlords. There is a general reluctance to help those individuals continue to profit from their questionable business practices.

Liability
There that word is again...who knew trying to help people could be so litigious. In order for groups to use Volunteers, they need to ensure that everyone on site has signed a release of liability and that the homeowner has signed one as well. Oftentimes trying to find and schedule a time when the landlord can meet to sign the necessary paperwork is difficult if not impossible, which is why many renter's are passed over.

Income Properties
Rental properties are income generating properties, this is true, and a myopic view in my opinion. Just like there are butcher's and accountants, there are landlords, people who make a living off renting property. When someone who has several rental properties in a community and all of them are impacted, two things happen: 1) The livelihood of the landlord is put at risk and 2) There are fewer housing units in that community for displaced people to go. 

Slumlords
This is a difficult situation; based on my experiences I've noticed that undocumented families tend to live in units where absentee landlordism is usually the case...as a result, a lot of help that could be given is not because of fear on part of the family and a reluctance on the part of organizations to help a landlord who clearly has no interest in upkeep on their properties.

While renter's are not completely without options, with SBA providing low interest rate loans up to $40,000 to help repair or replace damaged personal items, it still doesn't address the hurdles renter's face in order to receive assistance following disasters.

If a community has surplus rental units available, the issue of re-location for many renters can be dealt with; however, what happens to renters and homeowners in a community like Minot, ND? Minot suffered a critical housing shortage before flooding impacted their community in 2011 displacing the majority of the town. A real consequence of a scenario like this can be that the fabric of a community can dissolve due to families moving to other states and areas where housing stock is available. In the case of Minot, FEMA built temporary housing units, but the lack of housing in rapidly growing communities is a real concern given the challenges renters face when trying to recover from disaster.

I feel that this is something that communities don't realize will be an issue until it's too late, but am unaware of it being a part of the larger community resilience conversation. Regardless of who holds the deed, those four walls and a roof provided more than just shelter for a family, they provided stability and a base to grow this 'whole of community' movement. And while I don't have a clear idea of the steps that need to be taken to bring clarity to this issue, I hope that the groups who work in homes regardless of ownership status continue to do so, as they are providing a great service to help communities fully recover.

Disaster Response in the Digital Age

Have you ever seen a competition cooking show where each chef had to prepare a meal based on the same ingredients? The results are always diverse, utilizing different ingredients in ways unique to each Chef's background and training. While there isn't a TV showcasing the development taking place, we are experiencing something similar in disaster response, a renaissance if you will of application creation aimed at increasing efficiencies of response organizations active in disaster response and recovery.

This list represents a small fraction of the applications/companies with applications that have been created in response to the growing number of disasters and their impacts on communities. This list does not include the wealth of googledoc spreadsheets, excel files, or access databases that are created ad hoc to deal with the onslaught of information needing attention following an event.

Crisis Cleanup
GRT Mobile Solutions
Project SGE 2.0
Palantir
Jointly.us
CERTify (an app for CERT Team coordination)
ArcGIS
WebEOC
Help Me Help
GeoOp (used by the SVA after the Christchurch Earthquakes)
HelpBridge
Crisis mappers
Ushahidi
Google Crisis Maps
Needmapper
Ready QLD (Queensland, Australia's app)
Recovers.org

While the creation of tools to help communities work with the myriad of groups that aid in response and recovery is great, and certainly welcomed, there is a growing concern that we're progressing too fast and not approaching this in a thoughtful or strategic manner. Just because you can go to an all you can eat buffet doesn't mean that you have to eat until you vomit right? Well the same idea applies--just because we can create an unlimited number of apps that marry GIS,workflow, and damage assessment data, doesn't mean we should...without first putting some parameters around what it is we're trying to accomplish and how these tools can help advance an overall plan. As it stands it feels like each response organization is using and in some cases pushing a unique application which can lead to competition for the one app to rule them all.

We're Not Speaking the Same Language
A consistent issue brought up after events is the lack of access to real-time information, data that can be used to help inform the decision making process during response and recovery. Due to privacy issues, organizations on the ground are reluctant to share information with one another or anyone else for that matter until after they've left. This is a problem, but it doesn't encompass the whole problem. Even if groups were better about sharing information, it couldn't be done easily because the applications that are currently being used don't "speak the same language." There are multiple apps doing the same thing but because of the way they've been built, they can't share info, and given that collaboration and cooperation are the cornerstones of successful response--this inability to share is becoming a problem. Everyone is pushing for faster and more efficient, which is great, but rare is the instance where all responding groups are using the same technological platform to work from so those gains in efficiency are marred when trying to work together.

It's understood that timely information is key to promoting a coordinated response effort, what isn't understood is what information we're talking about. I believe that the wealth of apps created to help communities is great, I just want to ensure that all of the apps created can "talk" to one another so that information can be shared in real time...that way, an established response organization and spontaneous groups are working with the same data sets. Experience tells me that no platform is going to be used 100% of the time by 100% of the groups active in response, if we know that then we should be working to provide a framework so that whatever applications are being used can easily interface with everything else out there to aid in response activities.

Disaster Data-Standard
In essence what I'm talking about is the creation of a disaster data standard. Core data sets that can be the foundational elements of any application mobile or otherwise, think of it like a disaster API. If the foundation upon which all the apps are built is the same, then communication and the sharing of info should no longer be an issue. It turns out that I'm not the only on who's been thinking this way, Nethope, a tech focused nonprofit has spearheaded something called the Open Humanitarian Initiative, a broad-ranging effort with the goal of creating a unified data set that will aid in the delivery of disaster response in the information age. This presentation gives you a more detailed view of what their aim is:

Open Humanitarian Initiative - 2013 Plan from Gisli Olafsson

Technology is a tool, not a solution
In the midst of the conversation on the mass proliferation of technology and how it can impact disaster response, it's important to remember that technology is only as powerful as those who wield it, and that during times of crisis people tend to go with what's easiest and most comfortable. While the agencies responding may be well versed in the latest and greatest, if all disasters begin and end at the local level, it's important that those who will be there long after the National groups have left are comfortable with whatever system has been left for them, if they're not, a new system will be cobbled together and people will start over.

Access to reliably accurate and timely information is essential to gaining situational awareness following a disaster. When every responding organization holds a different piece of the puzzle to gaining situational awareness, efforts are hampered and gaining unity of effort becomes exceedingly difficult. But don't take my word for it, the former Minister of Science and Technology of South Africa said it much better in 2005 at the Southern African Telecommunications Networks and Applications Conference :

“The tsunami that devastated South Eastern Asian countries and the north-eastern parts of Africa, is perhaps the most graphic, albeit unfortunate, demonstration of the need for global collaboration, and open ICT* standards. The incalculable loss of life and damage to property was exacerbated by the fact that responding agencies and non-governmental groups were unable to share information vital to the rescue effort. Each was using different data and document formats. Relief was slowed, and coordination complicated.” 

*Information and Communications Technology 

Dolla Dolla bills y'all

According to this NYTimes article, NY State Attorney General Eric Schniederman is questioning why so much of the money raised in response to SuperStorm Sandy remains unspent. While the article talks about why non-profit agencies and organizations have yet to spend/allocate all of the money received in response to the plea for financial support following Sandy, what it also does is highlight the mentality people have around money and disasters—a touchy subject to be sure.

The message being pushed when a disaster strikes is that 'cash is king,' that your dollars are far more valuable than a tractor-trailer of unsorted, used clothing. While a donation of your old clothing sound like a good idea in theory, in reality, it isn’t and I've seen firsthand the unintended impact of how those donations can do more harm than good. Money is good because it's flexible, requires little in the way of logistics and personnel to manage it, and can respond to dynamic post-disaster needs that shift every 24-48 hours. Once an organization starts receiving donations however, everyone has ideas on how that money could/should be spent. 

Some organizations tout their ability to turn your donations into goods and services on the ground quickly, those groups are often criticized because many question whether due diligence is undertaken to ensure that the dollars are being spent on those who truly need it. Then there are those organizations/groups who hold off on spending donations they receive, citing the need to wait and see what happens when the dust settles, they are criticized for not being responsive enough and for lacking transparency. 

It seems that even with the best intentions at heart, someone, somewhere isn't going to like how you're doing things and take you to task for it. So what's right when it comes to spending: fast and furious or slow and cautious? The answer that I've found is a healthy mix of both.

The Robin Hood Foundation awarded over $60 Million dollars following the 12.12.12 concert for Sandy Relief to local and national organizations, and did so in record time. The rationale being that they were just the name, they didn’t have the “do” capacity to spend the money on response and recovery activities, so why hold onto it? While the money was awarded to a wide variety of agencies and organizations, Robin Hood still drew criticism that they were spending the money too quickly and not being thoughtful enough about who it went to and whether some should be held for longer-term community needs.

On the flipside, as the NY Times article expounds upon, there are questions about the millions the Red Cross raised and why it hasn't been spent; but local groups aren’t immune either, groups like Occupy Sandy are feeling the heat as well. They have money in the coffers but are looking to see how far FEMA, insurance, and any additional financial assistance individuals, businesses, and the communities as a whole receive before applying their additional financial resources. Unfortunately, the thoughtful approach is rarely seen as thoughtful, it’s seen more as deceitful and usually draws harsh criticism. 

The bottom line where money is concerned is everyone will have an opinion: it's being spent too fast, it’s not being spent fast enough, it’s not being spent on the right things, etc. This butting of heads is unavoidable but the discussion it generates is central to holistic community recovery, and I believe that part of that discussion should focus on a greater degree of transparency around how donated dollars are being spent, not on the rate of expenditure.

This NewsOK article illustrates a great example of what it means to lose sight of where the donations are going. Following the Moore, OK tornadoes, a Red Cross text to give campaign raised several million dollars and Donors believed all of the money received via that campaign would be funneled to the recovery efforts—this was not entirely true and it was only after considerable pressure that this became the case. 

If we as a community of practice are going to encourage individuals to donate money to our organizations instead of giving clothing, then we have an obligation to show donors how their money is being spent in simple, unfettered terms. At the same time, those of you who donate money need to do your homework and understand that if you do not expressly communicate where your donation is to go, that organizations will apply it to their greatest need at that time or put it toward their general fund. While the debate over the ethics of such actions is heated, it’s common practice and you should be aware of it.

Just as important as educating and communicating with donors, is ensuring community leaders get a crash course in disaster economics before they have to go through it. Part of our jobs in promoting community resilience is to work harder on the front end so that when something does happen there is a familiarity with the process and expectations that will be placed upon them as it relates to the financial side of recovery efforts.

While the road to recovery is a long and bumpy one, educating donors and communities alike on the financial realities and timetables that come with building back better needs to take place. While you will never satisfy all of the people all of the time, working to educate around the realities communities will face can only help everyone in the long run.

Bigger isn't always better

As part of my history in responding to disasters I've had the good fortune to spend time in Haiti, albeit under difficult circumstances. One of those times followed the January 12, 2010 Earthquake...which is why reading the report issued by the GAO was and continues to be so infuriating.

The Governmental Accountability Office released an interim report on the efforts of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) 3 years on...remember to take deep breaths. 

Haiti Reconstruction: USAID Infrastructure Projects Have Had Mixed Results and Face Sustainability Challenges 

The Highlights:

• Of the $651 million Congress allocated for Haiti reconstruction to the USAID, only $204 million has been spent three years later. And much of that has gone to questionable use.
• USAID is building a power plant, port, and industrial park all of which the GAO has concluded will not be able to be maintained upon their completion without continued outside support. Not only that but the projects were poorly mapped out and budgeted for and will likely require an additional $120-$190 Million to complete.
• USAID has reduced its permanent housing construction targets in Haiti. USAID initially underestimated the funding needed for its New Settlements housing program. As a result, the agency increased the amount allocated by 65 percent, from $59 million to $97 million, and decreased the projected number of houses to be built by over 80 percent, from 15,000 to 2,649. The estimated number of beneficiaries was reduced from 75,000 to 90,000 to its current estimates of approximately 13,200 to 15,900.

The Report makes the following recommendation:

The GAO recommends that Congress consider requiring regular reports from the State Department on USAID’s progress. It also recommended that USAID hire an engineer to oversee construction of the port and suggested the organization put community support programs in place for housing development projects.

Excuse me...I need to go scream.

Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/06/25/194956/gao-slams-usaids-haiti-rebuilding.html#.UdFZLD4Y1rU#storylink=cpy

How is this possible? How was regular reporting and proper fiduciary oversight not part of the agreement in receiving $651 Million dollars?! I realize that implementing programs of this size and scope is not easy, especially in Haiti where nothing goes according to plan, corruption is commonplace, and the government wants things like flush toilets in new houses with no municipal septic system to process the waste produced. Be that as it may, the findings in the report do not paint a happy picture, and I hope for the sake of those still living in tent camps struggling with getting back to life as it was can expect better now that more eyes will be on recovery programming.

We Can't do it Alone = We Need a Plan

I came across this post on Bill Driscoll Jr.'s tumblr blog recently and it communicates the need for unified approach to how non-profits engage in disaster work. Bill is the Executive Director of Nechama, The Jewish Response to Disaster...I encourage you to give it a read:

Longform: We Can’t do it Alone = We Need a Plan

http://billdriscolljr.tumblr.com/ 

The reality of disaster recovery is that no one person, government agency, or voluntary organization can do it alone. This staggering and sobering realization for survivors and responders alike, comes consistently post disaster.

Recently the concern and potential complications created by the threat of augmenting Federal disaster funds had been consistently in news. Federal budget negotiations seemed to be fixated around disaster recovery dollars. While Federal support can be critical to disaster recovery for both individuals and municipalities, many disasters in the United States go “undeclared”, meaning that they are smaller in size and do not meet the criteria for a Presidential declaration and the accompanying Federal support. We do know the answer to the questions “what if FEMA support isn’t available?” and “what would the recovery look like?”

When a disaster goes “undeclared” and does not generate a Presidential declaration, the burden of recovery falls on individuals themselves, any insurance settlement, available state programs and available charitable or voluntary organization support.  That said, even in a Federally declared disaster area, non governmental organizations (NGOs) and community based organizations, faith based or not, still provide many of the missing pieces of a disaster survivor’s recovery.  FEMA’s own “sequence of delivery” literally begins and ends with voluntary agencies. [See herehttp://www.fema.gov/pdf/about/regions/regioni/sequence2008.pdf]

Amidst the recent budget posturing in Congress, FEMA released the National Disaster Recovery Framework (NDRF), which details “the plan” for future Federal support to state recovery operations. A clearer and updated national plan for the delivery of government related disaster recovery operations is a welcome and important addition to the disaster response and recovery community. That said, no sooner than we can pat those on the back that participated in and crafted the NDRF do we need to focus on what still lacks within this dedicated and passionate community (Full disclosure: I participated in a stakeholders session). The disaster recovery community is comprised of not only government responders but an inspired lot of nonprofit and faith based NGOs.

There is no equivalent to the NDRF for the NGOs active in disaster work and yet this is the part of the community that most consistently engages to help survivors post disaster. The needs that are generated by disaster (even those that do not receive official Federal designation) compel most NGO operations to action, many of which are volunteer and donor driven.

For me, someone that is engaged in disaster response and recovery on a daily basis in the charitable and nonprofit sector, the lack of a consistent field-wide plan or framework is apparent at every disaster event I deploy to. There continues to be lack of consistently agreed upon or valuable structure for NGO coordination both from a distance and on the ground. I believe focusing on an NGO-centric complimentary plan to the National Disaster Recovery Framework needs to be a top priority for the entire disaster response and recovery community. The discussion, research and development of  a “parallel” plan began a few years ago but the process to create what is known as the  “National Nonprofit Relief Framework” has been stuck in neutral. Its originally targeted release date of December 2010 has come and gone. The BP oil spill in 2010 and 2011’s six months of what seemed like nonstop tornadoes, floods, and tropical storms have played a major role in the stall. We as a community have been quite busy…

Many NGOs that are national in scope and have disaster related programs are members of coalitions like National Voluntary Organizations Active (National VOAD) in the hopes that greater communication will lead to collaborative partnerships. National VOAD and the numerous related state level forums are fantastic and beneficial but they are by design, right or wrong, not operational in nature. The members’ relationships and values within the National VOAD community, however, can and will help spawn a renewed effort for a nonprofit relief / recovery framework. Tremendous amounts of aid and hope are delivered by a diverse group of VOAD and NGO partners at each disaster. The potential to do more by strategically pooling resources under the framework of a tactically coordinated plan will only serve to grow the efficiency and effectiveness of our already impressive community. The potential growth is exciting. 

I hope the NDRF completion brings new light and enthusiasm to complete, “whole community” planning through renewed focus on the means by which nonprofits and NGOs collaborate in disasters alongside resources brought to bear by Federal down to local level government.

As expressed by the outpouring of charitable giving by donors following tragedy and disaster, we collectively seem to understand the norm that donated dollars are different than Federal ones and can be utilized and dispersed for varied and perhaps no less effective reasons. Simply no one agency whether or public or private can do it alone. As such we should be constantly driving toward enhancing and improving the way we coordinate and collaborate pre and post disaster.

We in nonprofits are at the mercy of proving that donations are being spent effectively and efficiently.  In order to improve our current collective measures we should move with vigor toward a comprehensive and consistent recovery coordination framework so we are better prepared the next time disaster strikes our country.

Failure isn't a four letter word

When we fall short of reaching our goals we tend to quietly sweep it under the rug and move on; no one shouts from the rooftops about how they missed the mark, which is both surprising, and not.

It’s not surprising because no one likes admitting when things don’t go according to plan, especially when there are expectations associated with the outcomes: donor, beneficiary, volunteer, and otherwise.

It is surprising however, in light of the talk about “professionalizing” the disaster response sector. In working for a smaller disaster-response non-profit I was forced to do more with less, as a result, I needed to know a little about a lot. Because I’m kind of a dork, I started reading management books to help broaden my horizons and understanding around non-profit type things, books like: ‘the 5 dysfunctions of a team’, and ‘the 4 secrets every great manager should know’, etc… And while there were a lot of commonalities, the one thing that was repeatedly said was: don’t be afraid to fail, and failure is the greatest teacher.

If that’s true, why is it that the business world is embracing failure and being rewarded for it through innovation and massive profits, while we in disaster response manage to avoid the subject entirely and have to fight for dollars? If we’re serious about “professionalizing” what we do, I believe open and honest conversations about where gaps persist are needed so that planning can take place, benchmarks can be set, and communication can be directed to ensure accountability in our evolution as a sector of practitioners.

We push for transparency around: financial stewardship, the communication of program impacts, our role within community response and recovery, etc...However, I’ve yet to read an article by an organization about a time where they didn’t accomplish what they set out to do. Is that due to a fear that if we tell funders that we came up short that we won’t get grants renewed and funding will dry up? Is it complacency? Is it a lack of definition around roles and responsibilities? Or is it that we’re just not failing? Of course I don’t want our Search and Rescue personnel to fail, nor do I want to prolong a communities recovery so that we can "figure things out", but if we continually come to the same conclusions as to the challenges and gaps faced when conducting response and recovery operations, why aren’t we as a sector jumping on the failure bandwagon by trying new things and seeing what works?

Recognizing the need for an open dialogue/forum on the subject of failure, Engineers without Boarders began the site: www.admittingfailure.com. A place where stories of magnificent flops can be shared and what was learned as a result. After watching the Occupy Sandy debrief trailer the questions of why we aren’t embracing failure as a sector keep coming up in my head.

So maybe we don't need to shout it from the rooftops, but how about we submit 3 things we could've done better as response transitions to recovery in Moore, OK and the surrounding communities. Submit them to NVOAD to begin a base of institutional response knowledge, put them into a hat, pull them out, and talk about them so that we can figure out ways to ensure that the next time we respond that the same challenges don't persist. 

Honesty is the best policy and failure is the best teacher...if we can't be honest with each other enough to admit where we can be better, how are we going to learn from our mistakes in an effort to avoid making them again in the future?

A Scar on the Earth

Earth Observatory - Moore, OK

In the image above, you can clearly see the path of Moore's EF-5 that did so much damage. The scar is a reminder of why being prepared and giving as much warning as possible to communities in the path of these storms is so vital. In addition to the lead time meteorologists can give communities of a storms anticipated path, it takes the will of those in positions of power to institute substantive changes to ensure that when storms of this magnitude impact populated areas, that the damage is minimized. For communities in Tornado Alley that 'will' should center on promoting stronger building codes, specifically with Tornados in mind. While momentum has been building around this issue, there is still no movement on adopting stronger codes so that when the repair and rebuild of Moore and the surrounding communities gets underway, they have to build back stronger.

The prevailing mindset is that to build homes to withstand these severe wind events would not be economical, however engineers are coming out saying that is a fallacy as illustrated by the 'Insight' article below. As population densities and suburban sprawl continue to transform the midwest, more communities are going to get "in the way", and by looking at the graphic below, they already are:

map created by IDV Solutions

Just like new flood maps take time to create, changing building codes isn't something that can happen overnight, but the 'can do' attitude that exists in Tornado country means that no one is going to wait to rebuild, revised codes or not. By waiting too long to strengthen codes many homeowners may face a similar fate next time the sirens go off.

Additional Reading:
Oklahoma’s Building Codes Don’t Factor For Tornadoes (kgou.org)
Insight - In U.S. tornado alley, building practices boost damage (uk.reuters.com)

$1.4 Million dollar grant to Presbyterians for Volunteer Housing?!?!

Please read this press release found on Disaster News first to get background so that we start on the same page.

Now, please forgive the incredulity as I know what it takes to find housing for 50+ volunteers in disaster areas during immediate response, it's not easy, and even when it does work, there are always problems. But when learning about the grant from the Red Cross to Presbyterian Disaster Assistance (PDA) for $1.4 million dollars to "setup and coordinate volunteer housing" my jaw dropped.

Before I get into it, if anyone has any additional information on the details of this grant and would like to share them...please do, because it's in the details that I hope an explanation can be found. In going to the PDA site, you need to search to find any mention of it and in the world of disaster response this is a big deal...so what gives, where's the pomp and circumstance?

In the immediate aftermath of a disaster the need for housing is great, for displaced families, for first responders from outside the immediate area, for Federal officials, and also for Volunteers groups. Depending on the size/scope/type of disaster, the availability or lack thereof of housing can create a panic. This could be seen in the New York metro area following Sandy where housing was scarce and the need was great, and the influx of people overwhelmed what little was available. I spent several weeks knocking on doors before finding suitable space on Staten Island and on Long Beach on Long Island. All that to say, I understand what goes into setting up volunteer housing.

The reason why my jaw dropped is because setting up volunteer housing for 50+ people had a price tag closer to $1-2,000 mostly spent on infrastructure improvements: showers, shelving, secure storage, etc...and PDA now has $1.4 million?

To better understand how PDA does Volunteer housing, I found this document that outlines their Volunteer Village model. In the document you will see that the individuals responsible for running these villages are volunteers, so there is no cost for personnel to run the sites. In addition, there is a $20/person/night charge for staying on-site, presumably to cover utilities and upkeep. In addition to that, these villages don't take individuals...so it's not a holistic volunteer housing solution because it doesn't accommodate Individual Volunteers who need a place to sleep.

So what exactly is PDA going to do with $1.4 Million dollars? Even if they setup 100 volunteer housing sites in the mid-atlantic region, as far as I understand it, they are a cost neutral proposition. Even if PDA took between 5-10% and used it for admin/salaries...there's still well over $1 Million to spend on this and I just don't see how.

I would love to see what the plan is, how many sites will be setup, when, and for how long? How many Volunteers are to be housed under the terms of the grant? Where is this money going exactly? How do Long Term Recovery Groups feel about this in the Mid-Atlantic region? Is PDA a pro-bono subcontractor now?

A lot of questions come to mind and I'm short on answers. I realize I'm owed nothing, but a greater degree of transparency would be helpful especially as articles are beginning to pop up asking where, why, or why not Sandy Recovery funds have been spent...and this massive grant, a first of its kind if I'm not mistaken, is flying under the radar.

A Lesson in Sharing

We talk about learning from the past so that we don't make the same mistakes in the future, systems are setup to help facilitate the sharing of lessons learned...but how effective are we at actually sharing?

How many of you know what LLIS.gov is? More importantly, how many of you actually have access to it? That repository of information is an example of a body of "best practice" that sits under-utilized due to access issues. LLIS is the "Lessons Learned Information Sharing site hosted by DHS. Lessons learned do no good when they're locked away...especially when there are communities out there thirsty for information; for better or worse, the sharing of what we do needs to be done better.

Lessons tend to be shared at conferences amongst smaller groups of people who have a lot of the same experiences and knowledge base. Given the variety of individuals who are getting involved at a local level and the growth of local actors in response activities, the need to know what's working and especially what isn't, has to be pushed out on a broader scale. The folks at Occupy have created a mini-documentary chronicling what worked and didn't and I would imagine that based on the success of their operations, many will watch and try to replicate what they did when a disaster strikes in their community. By Occupy chronicling what they did, how they did it, and intentionally pushing it out to the world, they are taking a more aggressive approach to transparency then I've seen the response community do in the past. And while it may not be perfect, I imagine it will be honest, straightforward and will resonate with those would-be responders in communities preparing for the next event.

I look forward to watching the full length production from Occupy and am hopeful that it isn't a prescriptive "how to" video but more of a chronicle of their experiences for others to learn from. Either way, I think the sharing of this information is a step in the right direction and hope that it spurs conversations about how it can be done better by more people in all facets of disaster.