Newswise — FEMA's performance in the California wildfires appears to have improved since Katrina, reflecting more professional leadership, but it still falls short on prevention efforts, says a University of Maryland expert.
Scott Fosler, a visiting professor and senior fellow at the University of Maryland School of Public Policy, played a major role in the overhaul of FEMA in the 1990s. As president of the National Academy of Public Administration, Fosler and his team wrote the blueprints for the transformation of FEMA in response to a congressional request. "In the 1990s, FEMA was then viewed as an embarrassing federal failure," Fosler says. His team recommended a comprehensive overhaul of the agency's mission, structure and role in national emergency management.
FOSLER QUOTE:
"FEMA has improved since Hurricane Katrina, in part by restoring professionalism at the top," Fosler says. "However, the key issue before the country remains the same: will we have an effective national emergency management system that can prevent or mitigate disasters before they occur, as well as respond to them afterwards?"
"In the 1990s, FEMA was transformed from a dysfunctional agency that reacted to emergencies, to a highly professional agency that anticipated disasters, and worked cooperatively with state and local government and the private sector to mitigate the impact of disasters before they occurred. The current administration dismantled that successful model, and its dysfunctional response to Hurricane Katrina was one result."
ADDITIONAL FOSLER QUOTES:
"The priority need in response to the devastating California fires is to limit the loss and suffering and to attend to those who have borne it. It appears that the response to this disaster has been a vast improvement over the egregious experience with Hurricane Katrina, although it's obviously too early to make a complete assessment. We can only applaud and support those who have been doing their best to cope with this disaster."
"We should not let the moment pass without considering the broader implications of what is happening in California for the country's overall emergency management capacity, if for no other reason than actions taken in the recovery stage of this disaster will establish the foundation for how we deal with the next one. And there will be a next one."
"Could the disaster have been mitigated, its impact muted? What could have been done differently to prevent, or at least limit, the extent to which some, if not each, of these factors contributed to the conflagrations, and the death, injury, and loss they caused?"
"Once the flames have been extinguished, will the recovery phase of this disaster take these considerations into account in planning for the next emergency? The recovery phase is the time and place to begin planning for the next emergency because the danger is still fresh in everyone's minds, and the option is still open of not simply rebuilding and reconstituting everything that led to this disaster."
RSS