Federal Program-Based Indicators of Community-Level Hazard and Climate Resilience - Kathleen Boyer
1. Federal Program-Based
Indicators of Community-
Level Hazard and Climate
Resilience
FEMA, NOAA and Other Federal Partners (CEQ, DOE, DOI, DOT, EDA, EPA, NIST, NTIA, USDA, USACE)
2. What is Hazard and Climate Resilience?
2
E.O. 13653-
Climate and
PPD-8-
Preparednes
s: Ability to
anticipate and
withstand
losses;
recover
quickly from
change and
disruption.
Actions
toward this
capability…
3. About the Project – Purpose and Phase I
Broad research community trying to identify resources and data to
measure community resilience
National Academies Resilience Roundtable, other Federal
agencies (NIST, EPA), universities and NGOs (BRIC,
Rockefeller)
The goal of this project is to identify the Federal contribution to
measuring community resilience
• Feds should contribute to community resilience measurement and –
more specifically – we should do better at making our data available
• Start with some high level messaging about the relationship between
community resilience and what government does
Measurement data is limited right now, but we can start by
looking at community participate in Fed programs that try
support resilience concepts and actions
4. Milestones to Date, In Process, Next Steps
July-Oct 14 Nov-Dec 14 Jan-Apr 15 Apr-July 15 May-Dec 15-> 2016 ->
Project Start
Literature
review
Framework
Initial indicator
selection
(inherent vs.
adaptive-
actionable)
Multi-Agency
interviews
Multi-Agency
Workshop
Expanded on
potential
indicators
Lots of
potential ideas
but sparse data
Start with Fed
program
participation
as baseline
Obtain Fed
commitments
Proof of
Concept (Map)
Research
Report and
White Paper
MitFLG
Concurrence
(April 30th)
Implement
Phase I
Blueprint
Get data,
visualize data,
write full
narrative,
activate website
Risk MAP-
FIMA
Integration
NAS Meeting
Develop Phase
II: From Options
Paper, look at
expanding
indicators,
thinking about
analysis
options, adding
risk layers,
identifying
outcome
studies and
metrics,
incentive
studies
1st Report
Update:
Annual update
to baseline
participation
metrics, with
risk layers
where available,
and some
analysis of
community-level
meaning of
multiple points
of participation
(what does it
mean)?
5. Federal Program-Based Indicators of
Community Hazard and Climate Resilience
Categories of Resilience (Drawn from and align with other
frameworks and concepts)
1. Promoting Healthy, Safe and Prosperous
Communities (Social, Org, Cultural)
2. Enhancing and Providing Resilient Lifeline
Facilities and Infrastructure and Housing (Built)
3. Enhancing and Providing Resilient Natural
Resources (Environment)
4. Empowering Communities with Actionable
Climate/Hazard Risk Information
5. Enhancing Community Climate/Hazard Risk
Management
Inherent
Capacity
but still
Actionable
Adaptive
Capacity
7. About the Project
The community-level resilience assessment “vortex” –where messaging gets more
complicated, hundreds of potential variables
High-Level Messaging About Resilience, Types of Relevant Federally Supported
Actions, Fed Data – A “Slice” of the Overall Resilience Measurement Challenge
By giving the Fed program-based
perspective, can then lead communities
to resilience assessment as a next step
Fed Program
Linked Indicators
and Data
Broader
Resilience
Indicators and
Data
Value of program-based
indicators is that they are
action-based by nature
Editor's Notes
Your communities desired state –whether you are still trying to get to it (development) or whether you think you’re there already – is subject to constantly changing conditions, risks and threats.
Federal landscape of resilience – numerous Federal programs and initiatives, private sector actions, academic studies
Literature does support the concept that certain activities result in resilience, but a lot of it does try to understand the relationship between different activities.
We are not at an “indexing” stage yet – but purposefully. We are avoiding rating and scoring communities. And just because a community participates in a lot of Federal programs doesn’t necessarily correlate to it being more resilience that a community with lesser points of participation.
Program examples:
National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP)
Community Rating System (CRS)
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan
Hazard Mitigation Assistance (HMA)
Citizen Corps Communities (2011)
U.S. Fire Administration Firewise
NOAA Storm Ready and Tsunami Ready Communities
Climate Information and Applications Programs
Local Energy Assurance Plans
Community Energy Strategic Plans
Sustainable Communities Partnership Initiative
Smart Growth (EPA Technical Assistance Piece)
categories representing a community's overall construct
Points back to first slide show the circles – what is hazard and climate mitigation “proper” vs. the outer circles that also influence resilience
6
Staying above the vortex – here is a little information about what actions are in the direction of better resilience, depending if you have relevant unaddressed risks, but you need to better know what your needs are so you might want to do a resilience assessment. Don’t necessarily have to tackle a full scale resilience assessment. What are your risks, what options are available to you to start managing those risks.
And you can tackle it in a way that makes sense to you. If in your community you esp. care about your public school system, and your investing a lot of resources to make schools better, you might start with a risk and resilience assessment just around schools. Are you in a hurricane area and do you have a good preparedness plan, evacuation etc? Do you want to build safe room?