Summary

The nation's management of disasters was strongly criticized after Hurricane Andrew leveled much of South Florida and Hurricane Iniki devastated the Hawaiian island of Kauai in 1992. Even before these storms, the federal government's response to major disasters like Hurricane Hugo and the Loma Prieta earthquake drew intense criticism. The government's response to Hurricane Andrew, in particular, raised doubts about whether the Federal Emergency Management Agency was capable of responding to such catastrophes and whether it had learned any lessons from Hurricane Hugo and the Loma Prieta earthquake. GAO has testified repeatedly in 1993 on the inadequacy of the federal strategy for responding to disasters. This report summarizes GAO's analyses, conclusions, and recommendations.

GAO found that: (1) the Federal Response Plan lacks a provision for a comprehensive assessment of damages and the needs of disaster victims; (2) the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) needs a disaster unit whose primary mission is planning for and responding to catastrophic disasters; (3) the Red Cross and its large network of volunteers is suited to provide mass care and coordinate the efforts of other federal agencies; (4) the Department of Defense (DOD) is the only organization capable of providing, transporting, and distributing sufficient quantities of items needed in the most severe catastrophic disasters; (5) federal response time could be reduced by encouraging agencies to do as much advance preparation as possible prior to disaster declaration; (6) FEMA needs to use its existing resources to better prepare state and local governments for catastrophic disaster response; and (7) FEMA provides state and local governments with approximately $100 million annually in civil defense grants.