STATE OF CALIFORNIA Budget Change Proposal - Cover Sheet DF-46 (REV 10/20)
Fiscal Year Business Unit Department Priority No. 2021-22 0690 Governor’s Office of Emergency Services
Budget Request Name Program Subprogram 0690-111-BCP-2021-MR 0385-Special Programs and Grant Management Budget Request Description Long Term Recovery Support
Budget Request Summary The Governor’s Office of Emergency Services requests $37.818 million ongoing ($22.128 million Federal Fund and $15.690 million General Fund) to support the increasing workload associated with long-term recovery efforts. This includes permanent funding to support 104 permanent positions provided in 2018-19 with three-year funding and 110 new positions.
Requires Legislation Code Section(s) to be Added/Amended/Repealed ☐ Yes ☒ No
Does this BCP contain information technology Department CIO Date (IT) components? ☐ Yes ☒ No If yes, departmental Chief Information Officer must sign.
For IT requests, specify the project number, the most recent project approval document (FSR, SPR, S1BA, S2AA, S3SD, S4PRA), and the approval date. Project No.Click or tap here to enter text. Project Approval Document: Approval Date:
If proposal affects another department, does other department concur with proposal? ☐ Yes ☐ No Attach comments of affected department, signed and dated by the department director or designee.
Prepared By Date Reviewed By Date Budget Office 5/14/2021 Heather Carlson 5/14/2021 Department Director Date Agency Secretary Date Lisa Ann L. Mangat 5/14/2021 Department of Finance Use Only
Additional Review: ☐ Capital Outlay ☐ ITCU ☐ FSCU ☐ OSAE ☐ Dept. of Technology
PPBA Date submitted to the Legislature Stephen Benson 5/14/2021
A. Budget Request Summary The Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES) requests $37.818 million ongoing ($22.128 million Federal Fund and $15.690 million General Fund) to support the increasing workload associated with long-term recovery efforts. This includes permanent funding to support 104 permanent positions provided in 2018-19 with three-year funding and 110 new positions.
B. Background/History Over the past 5 years, the state has experienced an unprecedented number of emergencies and disasters—including severe drought, catastrophic wildfires, power grid/outage challenges, earthquakes, intensive storms with severe flooding, civil unrest, and COVID-19. In fact, 15 of the most destructive fires in the state’s history have occurred since 2015 and five of the six most destructive fires in state history occurred in August and September of 2020. California will be recovering from these complex disasters for at least the next decade, while continuing to respond to and recover from future disasters. The recovery phase of a disaster starts during response but can take many years and even decades to complete depending on the severity of the event. Immediately after a federal disaster, the Recovery Directorate (Recovery) provides staffing and management for the Joint Field Office (JFO) that is established to ensure coordination with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). In addition to assisting local and tribal governments, special districts, certain private nonprofit organizations, individuals, businesses, and agricultural communities impacted by disasters, Recovery supports state agencies and local governments in receiving FEMA reimbursement for emergency protective measures, response, and recovery for each disaster. This helps state agencies and local entities recoup the costs of emergency services and ensures they can continue providing regular programmatic services. Recovery acts as the recipient for all federal grants and all the entities Recovery serves statewide are “subrecipients.” Recovery also prepares and coordinates recovery and mitigation efforts through projects, provides grants for mitigation of future hazards and threats, and supports California communities before, during, and after disasters. Figure 1, below, shows the number of federally declared disasters in California1. As shown in Figure 1, the number of all federally declared disasters in California has increased over the last 17 fiscal years. Since the beginning of 2018-19, Cal OES has responded to a total of 57 federal and state disasters. That increase is anticipated to continue because of climate change, longer wildfire season, and earthquake history. Recovery must continue to help California communities rebuild structures and the economy and mitigate future disasters.
1 Includes Fire Management Assistance Grants (FMAGs), Emergency Declarations, and Major Disaster Declarations (DRs) Analysis of Problem
Figure 1: Federal Disaster Declarations
Figure 1 Table: Federal Disaster Declarations Fiscal Year Fire Health Earthquake Storms Other Total 2003 4 0 1 0 1 6 2004 17 0 0 2 0 19 2005 8 0 0 2 1 11 2006 12 0 0 0 1 13 2007 12 0 0 0 0 12 2008 6 0 0 0 0 6 2009 9 0 1 1 0 11 2010 6 0 1 1 0 8 2011 4 0 0 0 0 4 2012 6 0 0 0 0 6 2013 8 0 0 0 0 8 2014 13 0 1 0 0 14 2015 10 0 0 0 0 10 2016 9 0 0 4 0 13 2017 28 0 0 0 0 28 2018 14 0 0 2 0 16 2019 10 2 1 0 0 13 2020 21 0 0 0 0 21 Recovery’s three sections: Interagency Recovery Coordination (IRC), Recovery Operations, and Hazard Mitigation are collectively responsible for administering billions of dollars in state and federal grant funds made available to hundreds of eligible jurisdictions and subrecipients statewide. Recovery currently manages one state and ten different federal funding sources for past disasters and non-disaster grant programs. The $6.6 billion in funds currently awarded to California and obligated on behalf of the subrecipients for all open disasters spanning the last decade include:
Analysis of Problem
• $4.9 billion: FEMA – Public Assistance Program (PA) Funds any emergency or permanent work for a building, public works, system, equipment, or natural feature. Eligible costs include labor, equipment, materials, contract work, as well as direct and indirect administrative costs. • $756.6 million: FEMA – Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) Funds any sustainable action that reduces or eliminates long-term risk to people and property from future natural hazard events or disasters. • $702.9 million: Cal OES – California Disaster Assistance Act (CDAA) Grants Similar to FEMA PA grants, funds emergency and permanent work with state funds. This is for state-only disasters that did not reach the threshold for federal declaration or the state match for federal funds. • $493.9 million: FEMA – Fire Management Assistance Grants (FMAG) Funds 75 percent of the mitigation, management, and control of fires on publicly or privately owned forests or grasslands, which threaten such destruction as would constitute a major disaster. The FMAG grants can be federally funded only or as a combination of federal and state funding. • $27 million: FEMA – Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM) Grants Funds hazard mitigation projects, reducing the risks they face from disasters and natural hazards. This pertains to PDM grants that are still open. BRIC, noted below is replacing this program going forward. • $6.7 million: US Department of Health and Human Services Immediate Services Program (ISP) Grant Provides immediate, short-term disaster relief and crisis counseling services for up to 60 days after a major disaster declaration. • $3.5 million: FEMA – Legislative Pre-Disaster Mitigation (L-PDM) Funds cost-effective hazard mitigation activities that complement comprehensive mitigation programs, and reduce injuries, loss of life, and damage and destruction of property. L-PDM is a pre-disaster grant program. L-PDM funding is the same as the ear marked funding that will be provided this year. • $3 million: FEMA – Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA) Grants Funds projects that reduce or eliminate the risk of repetitive flood damage to buildings insured by the National Flood Insurance Program. • $263,000: FEMA – National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP) NEHRP is a pre-disaster grant program to reduce the human, economic, and societal losses caused by earthquakes. • $206,000: US Department of Transportation Hazardous Materials Emergency Preparedness (HMEP) Grants Allows grantees the flexibility to implement training and planning programs that address differing needs for each location based on demographics, emergency response capabilities, commodity flow studies, and hazard analysis. • FEMA – Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) Grants New program. Application review still in process. California submitted 29 projects to the national competition for $343 million. Each state is guaranteed $600,000, and the total available funding is $500 million. BRIC funding available in future years is expected to increase substantially. As noted above BRIC is replacing the PDM grants. Additionally, Cal OES advocates for individuals and households that are eligible for direct federal funding and facilitates coordination between these individuals and appropriate federal agencies. One example is the Individuals and Households Program (IHP) from FEMA, Analysis of Problem which provides financial and other services directly to eligible individuals and households affected by a disaster, who have uninsured or under-insured necessary expenses and serious needs. The PA recovery and mitigation federal funding streams are extraordinarily complex and follow a set of phases known as the Grants Management Life Cycle. Depending on the grant, the Grants Management Life cycle can take years to complete. The following outlines the phases for a FEMA grant as an example: • Pre-Award: After a disaster, initial assessments take place before California can apply for federal funds. During the first 30 days after a declaration, Cal OES PA works with the subrecipients and FEMA to develop the award package for a grant. Cal OES provides an extensive series of trainings and applicant briefings to ensure projects are viable and will maximize federal funding. If the events do not qualify for federal funds, the data is used for state-funded projects. In Hazard Mitigation Assistance (HMA) program the technical assistance and program outreach represents a significant portion of pre grant work and can take approximately nine months. This pre-award outreach and assistance is a critical step toward developing projects that are feasible and cost effective. Additionally, HMA and Hazard Mitigation Planning work with local jurisdictions to apply for grant funding that is used to develop, review, and approve Local Hazard Mitigation Plans, which are a prerequisite for applying for hazard mitigation funding. • Award: During the initial PA award phase, which can last an average of two years, FEMA approves the award package and allocates funding. Cal OES obligates the funds for each project, conducts site visits, provides technical assistance, administers quarterly progress reporting, holds subrecipients accountable to timelines, and promotes successful completion of projects. As projects are completed, Cal OES reimburses claims. This phase can take many years and sometimes decades to complete. For HMA grants, Cal OES reviews applications for projects and recommends projects for FEMA approval. This phase takes three to six months. Once FEMA receives the list for HMA projects, it takes on average more than a year for FEMA to provide approval, but can take as little as three months, or in some cases, up to ten years. HMA works closely with FEMA and the subapplicant during the review period to provide technical assistance on the projects. • Appeal: For PA projects that are denied by FEMA, Cal OES engages in an extensive appeal process on behalf of the subrecipients to ensure all possible federal funds are awarded. The PA appeal phase takes a minimum of 210 days. Appeals are rare in the HMA grants but when they do occur, they can take approximately nine months. • Post-Award: Funds are released to the applicant who must maintain, monitor, and report upon. The payment process includes checks and balances through multiple units, the Accounting Office, and the State Controller's Office through FI$Cal. Depending on the project, the post-award phase takes an average of three years but it lasted 20 years for the Northridge earthquake. For HMA grants, the post-award process is 36 months, but extensions can be approved for various reasons. For example, one HMA project from the 2007 Southern California Fires and Debris Flow was approved in 2015 and has received extensions with a final date in 2025. • Closeout: FEMA administers performance evaluation, financial and appeal reconciliation, final reporting activities, appeal resolution, and debt actions. Cal OES manages these steps through tremendous oversight and expertise to responsibly coordinate, manage, and maintain compliance. The PA closeout phase for federal events can take a minimum of 210 days but in some cases has exceeded three years. The closeout of the state event can take an additional 180 days. The HMA closeout phase can take six months • Post-Closeout: As necessary, FEMA performs debt collection actions, audits, and other adjustments which may continue after grant closeout. In this phase, Cal OES responds to Analysis of Problem
federal inquiries for up to three years after a disaster has been closed, performs closeout functions on each project and the overall event, and reconciles funds. For HMA grants, the last three months of the 36-month period of performance are for closeouts but this phase can last an additional three months for reconciliation.
C. State Level Consideration Cal OES’s mission is to protect lives and property, build capabilities, and support communities for a resilient California. The Cal OES Strategic Plan contains the following goals to support this mission: Goal 2: Strengthen California’s ability to plan, prepare for, and provide resources to mitigate the impacts of disasters, emergencies, crimes, and terrorist events. Goal 3: Effectively respond to and recover from both human-caused and natural disasters. Goal 4: Enhance the administration and delivery of all state and federal funding and maintain fiscal and program integrity. Recovery has the authority and responsibility to carry out its mission deriving from statute, executive orders, California Code of Regulations (CCR), and through Cal OES-generated guidance documents and policies including, but not limited to, the following: • The California Emergency Services Act Identifies Cal OES as responsible for the state’s emergency and disaster response services for disasters and emergencies, including responsibility for activities necessary to prevent, respond to, recover from, and mitigate the effects of emergencies and disasters to people and property. • The California Disaster Assistance Act (CDAA) Authorizes Cal OES to administer a disaster assistance program providing financial assistance for costs incurred by local governments as a result of a disaster, with Recovery acting as the grantor for the program. • CCR Title 19, Division 2, Chapter 6, Article 1 Establishes the State’s Public Assistance Program, administered by Recovery, Public Assistance Division, to provide assistance to state agencies, local governments, and special districts. • CCR Title 19, Division 2, Chapter 6, Article 2 Establishes the state private nonprofit organizations Assistance Program, administered by Recovery, Public Assistance Division, to allow eligible private nonprofits to receive state assistance for costs incurred while assisting local agencies during a state disaster. • California Disaster Recovery Framework Establishes the state recovery coordination structure consistent with the federal model to facilitate the delivery of state and federal disaster assistance to impacted communities, while also describing the concepts and principles to promote effective state recovery assistance. • State Hazard Mitigation Plan Required under Code of Federal Regulation (CFR) 44 Part 201, this is a prerequisite for accessing federal hazard mitigation funding. This plan outlines the state’s strategy to reduce risks from natural hazards. • Stafford Act CFR 44 Part 201 Requires the state to coordinate all state and local activities related to hazard evaluation and mitigation. • Stafford Act CFR 44 Part 206 Analysis of Problem
Establishes the state as the Grantee to which all hazard mitigation funds are awarded. • Executive Order N-10-19 Directs state agencies to adapt to the impacts of climate change on its water by creating a Water Resilience Portfolio document encouraging resiliency in the State’s water infrastructure. • Executive Order B-18-12 Requires state agencies to implement sustainable building practices, improve ecological efficiency and reduce costs to the State and environmental impacts from state operations. • Statewide Wildfire Home Hardening Program Assembly Bill 38 (Chapter 391, Statutes of 2019) Requires Cal OES to enter into a Joint Powers Agreement with CAL FIRE to develop a comprehensive wildfire mitigation program for defensible space and home hardening. Cal OES Hazard Mitigation staff are leading this effort.
D. Justification Recovery simultaneously manages grants for disasters spanning more than ten years which are in different phases of completion. This is referred to as “steady-state” workload. Figure 2: Open Disaster Projects by Fiscal Year, below, illustrates the number of open FEMA PA project worksheet versions, the number of open Damage Survey Reports (DSRs) for state-only disasters, and the number of open HMA projects on the first day of each fiscal year going back to 2010- 11. The total number of open projects for Cal OES has been increasing since 2017. Figure 2: Open Disaster Projects by Fiscal Year
Analysis of Problem
Figure 2 Table: Open Disaster Projects by Fiscal Year FEMA FEMA Cal OES HMA Cal OES HMA Project Project State-Only Branch State-Only Branch Worksheet Worksheet DSRs projects DSRs projects Total Open Fiscal Year Versions Versions approved approved approved approved Projects obligated obligated over 1 year over 1 year in the last in the last over 1 year in the last ago ago year year ago year FY 10/11 4043 466 107 430 40 23 5109 FY 11/12 4022 474 94 1688 122 30 6430 FY 12/13 4274 517 96 642 179 41 5749 FY 13/14 3314 559 120 468 46 23 4530 FY 14/15 2037 539 127 398 31 24 3156 FY 15/16 1607 486 116 380 109 35 2733 FY 16/17 1362 487 113 392 175 36 2565 FY 17/18 1269 444 131 115 217 39 2215 FY 18/19 1214 633 142 3068 145 49 5251 FY 19/20 3837 678 137 871 183 50 5756 FY 20/21 4339 852 143 1185 266 149 6934 Recovery has 95 permanently funded positions. Given the surge in disasters, the increasingly widespread impacts, the length of debris removal operations, and the subsequent increase in FEMA funded projects, Cal OES received 104 positions to support Recovery efforts in 2018-19. However, funding for these positions was approved for three years with the understanding that Cal OES would assess the ongoing workload need and come back with an ongoing proposal in the 2021-22 budget development process. Since that time, California has continued to experience major disasters which has increased the staffing needed to support the recovery efforts for all open disasters. Cal OES has utilized temporary help positions to address this need in the short term; however, these resources are needed on a permanent basis for the following reasons: Ensure projects are completed within the federal reimbursement timeframe. Federal reimbursement for management costs of approved projects will offset General fund- Cal OES receives a significant amount of federal reimbursement for management costs associated with managing the grants. Management costs can be claimed for up to eight years after a federally declared disaster. The current rate for management costs is seven percent of the total disaster costs for PA grants and ten percent for HM grants. Workload exclusively from a federally approved project is reimbursed 100 percent with federal management costs thus it offsets the General Fund. If the work is not completed in the first eight years or management costs are depleted before the close of a project, personnel costs to manage and close the disasters will be charged to the General Fund. If a project is not approved by FEMA, the work associated with it is a General Fund cost. Positions that work on multiple disasters such as grant payment processing, charge the hours spent on federal disasters to federal funds. The management cost covers many recovery-related personnel expenses. Thus, without an appropriate number of staff to process and close these FEMA approved projects in a timely manner, there will be a delay in receiving federal reimbursements or potentially a significant cost to the General Fund. In 2018, Cal OES had 5 staff dedicated to closing out projects and managed to complete 86 of them in one calendar year. In 2019, with 20 staff dedicated to closing out projects, the team was able to complete 502 in the same time frame. The higher number of projects closed increased the management costs distributed to Cal OES from $42 million dollars in 2018 to $239 million dollars in 2019. Analysis of Problem
Recovery complexities for jurisdictions with multiple disasters Recovering from one disaster is difficult enough, but certain parts of the state have endured multiple disasters over the last few years. Their recovery is made more complex as their limited resources have to be stretched beyond capacity. Some of the rural counties that have fewer staff rely heavily on Cal OES. If we do not have sufficient staff to support the locals, their recovery will be hindered. Conversely, in large metropolitan areas with multiple disasters, their inability to recover from multiple disasters will impact California’s commerce and economy. Cal OES’s ability to provide technical support and expedite the payment process is vital to all government entities who have multiple disasters. Upward trend in new disasters Since the beginning of 2018-19, Cal OES has responded to 57 new federal and state disasters including two of the most devastating wildfires in California’s history. Steady-state workload for these two events will continue for at least the next eight years. HMA currently manages 305 active grants. An additional 157 grants are under FEMA review, and HMA is developing applications to distribute the funds obligated from five disasters and through the annual BRIC/FMA grant programs. Based on the 6,642 PA projects that have been approved since July 1, 2020, and the number of projects that are in the review queue now, the trend of steady-state workload increase is expected to continue for the foreseeable future. Need for continuity and retention of institutional knowledge Because California has experienced an unprecedented high number of disasters, Cal OES needs a skilled and committed workforce. Limited-term positions are less sought after and retention in them is a challenge as newly hired employees seek permanent positions. With the departure of each employee, there is a loss of institutional knowledge and valuable technical recovery skills which take years to learn. Thus, Recovery operates with reduced institutional knowledge and inexperienced temporary staff who are not adequately knowledgeable to meet workload demands. Maintaining federal compliance and enhanced status Cal OES must maintain a core cadre of programmatic specialists and managers to administer grants, maintain comprehensive program knowledge, and retain expertise to meet future recovery and mitigation needs. This expertise is critical to ensure compliance with federal programmatic requirements, to maximize federal reimbursement for subrecipients, and to maintain California’s Enhanced2 mitigation status. The ability of the HMA staff to meet programmatic deadlines and obligations at 100 percent compliance is required to maintain the higher level of hazard mitigation funding at 20 percent of the total cost of the disaster, rather than the standard level at 15 percent. Missing even a single deadline will result in the loss of tens, if not hundreds of millions of dollars of future hazard mitigation funding for the state. Over the last three years, California has received an additional $263.1 million due to having enhanced status. Reduce cost of future disasters California has spent hundreds of millions of dollars in General Fund over the last decade on disasters. The only way to reduce the fiscal impact of disasters is to plan and mitigate for future events. A study by the National Institute of Building Sciences found mitigation funding can save the nation $6 in future disaster costs for every $1 spent on hazard mitigation. Cal OES needs the resources to properly plan and mitigate for future events to decrease the fiscal and physical impact.
2 A State with a FEMA approved Enhanced State Mitigation Plan is eligible to receive increased funds. The Enhanced State Mitigation Plan must demonstrate that a state has developed a comprehensive mitigation program, effectively uses available mitigation funding, and is capable of managing the increased funding. Analysis of Problem
At the same time as managing this tremendous backlog of open disasters, during the response phase and immediately following a new disaster, Recovery has been increasing its coordination and recovery work at the onset of the disaster. Specifically, within the State Operations Center (SOC), Recovery starts collecting data on the severity of the damage, and partners with FEMA on potential recovery project development and approval. By starting earlier, Recovery leverages the data available during response to a disaster and aids the local jurisdictions in faster recovery. Table 1: Local Proclamations and Requests for Assistance Received shows the number of requests that the Declarations Unit has supported for the last eight years. This increase--resulting from climate change, human-caused disasters, and California's natural hazards, such as earthquakes--has put a strain on workload, redirection of steady-state staff from one recovery project to the next, and the need for adequately staffed and funded recovery and mitigation efforts. Due to the magnitude of the 2017 wildfires, almost all Recovery positions were redirected to the field causing a backlog in the management of the older disasters. This backlog led to two consecutive years of position and funding requests that were addressed with permanent position that were only funded for three years or limited- term positions which will expire in June 2021. With the additional spike of disasters in 2020 and the long recovery from the pandemic, which impacted every sector of the economy, a permanent solution is needed. Table 1: Local Proclamations and Requests for Assistance Received Proclamations and Year Requests Received 2013 75 2014 362 2015 230 2016 150 2017 627 2018 198 2019 284 2020 1,170 Disaster recovery and mitigation are multi-year processes often requiring up to eight years. A project may take three or four years of work before a significant amount of federal funding can be reimbursed to local jurisdictions. The PA workload for the newest disasters including Coronavirus (COVID-19) Response will extend through multiple years. As the number of natural and human-caused hazards has increased, the complexity of recovery and mitigation efforts for many of these disasters has also increased. Recovery is charged with having the capacity to effectively support recovery and mitigation efforts across the State on a long-term basis after traditional response and recovery efforts have ended. Using a multiagency partnership approach, the Interagency Recovery Coordination (IRC) Section addresses the needs and interests of the stakeholders within the community by working collaboratively with the Federal Disaster Recovery Coordinator (FDRC), Public Assistance, Individual Assistance, and Hazard Mitigation to identify and integrate long-term whole-community solutions for state, community, individual, and family disaster recovery. The IRC Section also manages the six state Recovery Support Functions (RSF) to support the jurisdictions by facilitating problem solving, providing technical assistance, improving access to resources, building capacity, and promoting community planning. For example, in the Housing RSF, Cal OES will develop an interagency housing action plan to ensure the coordinated action of all state and federal agencies, stakeholders, and related entities in the support of local and Tribal governments, and to reduce duplicative or counterproductive objectives. The support of the Housing RSF is long-term and available throughout the lifecycle of the disaster. As a result of the increased disasters, the Hazard Mitigation program workload has also increased, growing by over 1,200 additional applicants for the estimated mitigation funding Analysis of Problem
for which California is eligible. This results in additional workload for the grants management and quality assurance programs, as well as for the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) planning program, since applicants are only eligible if they maintain an approved LHMP. In addition to the increased workload due to additional funding available from recent disasters, the Hazard Mitigation program is also charged with implementing the Statewide Wildfire Home Hardening Program, the first step in demonstrating state-mandated progress in line with Assembly Bill 38 (Chapter 391, Statutes of 2019), which directed Cal OES and CAL FIRE to create a Joint Powers Authority to facilitate a Statewide Ignition Resistant Construction program. The Hazard Mitigation program is also charged with other critical special projects to continue to build mitigation capabilities including creating partnerships with other agencies and across jurisdictions, enhancing mitigation planning and implementation, and performing detailed analyses of past disaster funding and future risk to guide hazard mitigation investment decisions. Descriptions of the various programs and increased workload to support the resource request are included in Attachment A.
E. Outcomes and Accountability Cal OES implements strategic objectives and performance metrics to document outcomes and ensure accountability. Conducting site visits, providing technical assistance, and administering quarterly progress reporting holds subrecipients accountable to timelines, promotes successful completion of projects, and facilitates timely grant closeouts, in accordance with FEMA programmatic requirements. Ongoing evaluation of programs provides identification of programmatic and administrative issues and provides Cal OES with opportunities to implement additional quality control and assurance measures to improve program implementation. Standard operating procedures include the following elements to facilitate effective administration of Recovery programs: • Technical Assistance Workshops • Applicant Briefings • Documented and transparent grant policies • Checklists • Documentation and sharing of frequently asked questions • Review and analysis of quarterly reports • Site visits to discuss project status • Early evaluation of closeout phases: Physical, Administrative, and Financial
• New closeout correspondence with firm and enforceable timeline
F. Analysis of All Feasible Alternatives Alternative 1: Approve $37.818 million ongoing ($22.128 million Federal Fund and $15.690 million General Fund) to support the increasing workload associated with long-term recovery efforts. This includes permanent funding to support 104 permanent positions provided in 2018- 19 with three-year funding and 110 new positions. Pros: Analysis of Problem
• Provides adequate permanent staffing to support the increased demand for statewide recovery and mitigation activities. • Maximizes federal funds available to California for each disaster. • Minimizes impact to the General Fund by offsetting costs with federal funds in the timeline allowed. • Allows Cal OES to effectively fulfill its statutory roles in disaster recovery operations. • Retains trained and experienced staff to continue working on new recovery and mitigation projects. • Allows Cal OES to provide technical and programmatic support to local government for long-term recovery and mitigation. • Reduces risk of future disaster damage. • Provides necessary capacity to maintain California’s Enhanced Status. Cons: • None. Alternative 2: Partially approve this request and establish permanent funding for 104 positions that would be unfunded in 2021-22. Pros: • Provides permanent funding for the permanent positions provided to support the increased demand for statewide recovery and mitigation activities. • Allows Cal OES to fulfill some of its statutory roles in disaster recovery operations. • Helps reduce some risk of future disaster damage. Cons: • Increases future General Fund liability due to delays resulting in projects closing outside of the timeline allowed for federal reimbursement. • Limits the support to manage and sustain recovery and mitigation workload. • Increases reliance on temporary help, which reduces continuity of programmatic knowledge and assistance to local government. • Increases overtime costs and staff burnout for existing staff. • Limits technical and programmatic support to local government for long-term recovery and mitigation. • Limits ability to reduce risk of future disaster damage. • Jeopardizes capability necessary to maintain Enhanced Status. Alternative 3: Deny this request to maintain and modify current organization within the Recovery. Pros: • No immediate increase to General Fund obligations. Cons: • Increases future General Fund liability due to delays resulting in projects closing outside of the timeline allowed for federal reimbursement. • Recovery will not be able to sustain current activities or provide additional services. Analysis of Problem
• Limits the support to manage and sustain recovery and mitigation workload. • Increases overtime costs and staff burnout for existing staff. • Increases reliance on temporary help, which reduces continuity of programmatic knowledge and assistance to local government. • Limits ability to reduce risk of future disaster damage. • Jeopardizes capability necessary to maintain Enhanced Status. • Leaves Cal OES with unfunded positions to support this ongoing program. • Loss of federal administrative costs if work is not completed within eight years of a disaster declaration. • Loss of technical knowledge and expertise to effectively fulfill its statutory roles in disaster recovery and mitigation operations. • Lack of resources to prepare for and staff large-scale recovery and mitigation operations leading to staff burn out and turnover. • Loss of recovery and mitigation funding for local government and state departments. • Loss of technical and programmatic support to local government for long-term recovery and mitigation.
G. Implementation Plan Implementation will begin July 1, 2021.
H. Supplemental Information Attachment A – Program description and workload increase
I. Recommendation Approve Alternative 1 for $37.818 million ongoing ($22.128 million Federal Fund and $15.690 million General Fund) to support the increasing workload associated with long-term recovery efforts. This includes permanent funding to support 104 permanent positions provided in 2018- 19 with three-year funding and 110 new positions.
BCP Fiscal Detail Sheet BCP Title: Long Term Recovery Support BR Name: 0690-111-BCP-2021-MR Budget Request Summary Personal Services Personal Services FY21 FY21 FY21 FY21 FY21 FY21 Current Budget BY+1 BY+2 BY+3 BY+4 Year Year Positions - Permanent 0.0 110.0 110.0 110.0 110.0 110.0 Total Positions 0.0 110.0 110.0 110.0 110.0 110.0 Earnings - Permanent 0 15,112 15,112 15,112 15,112 15,112 Salaries and Wages 0 2,340 2,340 2,340 2,340 2,340 Overtime/Other Total Salaries and Wages $0 $17,452 $17,452 $17,452 $17,452 $17,452 Total Staff Benefits 0 8,312 8,312 8,312 8,312 8,312 Total Personal Services $0 $25,764 $25,764 $25,764 $25,764 $25,764 Operating Expenses and Equipment Operating Expenses and Equipment FY21 FY21 FY21 FY21 FY21 FY21 Current Budget BY+1 BY+2 BY+3 BY+4 Year Year 5301 - General Expense 0 2,568 2,568 2,568 2,568 2,568 5302 - Printing 0 216 216 216 216 216 5304 - Communications 0 1,287 1,287 1,287 1,287 1,287 5306 - Postage 0 216 216 216 216 216 5320 - Travel: In-State 0 1,087 1,087 1,087 1,087 1,087 5322 - Training 0 431 431 431 431 431 5324 - Facilities Operation 0 2,784 2,784 2,784 2,784 2,784 5326 - Utilities 0 216 216 216 216 216 5340 - Consulting and Professional Services - External 0 50 50 50 50 50 5342 - Departmental Services 0 1 1 1 1 1 5346 - Information Technology 0 1,712 1,712 1,712 1,712 1,712 539X - Other 0 1,486 1,486 1,486 1,486 1,486 Total Operating Expenses and Equipment $0 $12,054 $12,054 $12,054 $12,054 $12,054 Analysis of Problem
Total Budget Request Total Budget Request FY21 FY21 FY21 FY21 FY21 FY21 Current Budget BY+1 BY+2 BY+3 BY+4 Year Year Total Budget Request $0 $37,818 $37,818 $37,818 $37,818 $37,818 Fund Summary Fund Source Fund Source FY21 FY21 FY21 FY21 FY21 FY21 Current Budget BY+1 BY+2 BY+3 BY+4 Year Year State Operations - 0001 - General Fund 0 15,690 15,690 15,690 15,690 15,690 State Operations - 0890 - Federal Trust Fund 0 22,128 22,128 22,128 22,128 22,128 Total State Operations Expenditures $0 $37,818 $37,818 $37,818 $37,818 $37,818 Total All Funds $0 $37,818 $37,818 $37,818 $37,818 $37,818 Program Summary Program Funding Program Funding FY21 FY21 FY21 FY21 FY21 FY21 Current Budget BY+1 BY+2 BY+3 BY+4 Year Year 0385 - Special Programs and Grant Management 0 37,818 37,818 37,818 37,818 37,818 9900100 - Administration 0 6,527 6,527 6,527 6,527 6,527 9900200 - Administration - Distributed 0 -6,527 -6,527 -6,527 -6,527 -6,527 Total All Programs $0 $37,818 $37,818 $37,818 $37,818 $37,818
Analysis of Problem
Personal Services Details Positions Positions FY21 FY21 FY21 FY21 FY21 FY21 Current Budget BY+1 BY+2 BY+3 BY+4 Year Year 0765 - Sr Envirnal Scientist (Spec) (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1139 - Office Techn (Typing) (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 1303 - Personnel Spec (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1379 - Office Asst (Typing) (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1402 - Info Tech Spec I (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1403 - Info Tech Supvr I (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1414 - Info Tech Spec II (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1415 - Info Tech Spec III (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1432 - Support Svcs Asst (Gen) (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3336 - Sr Structural Engr (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 3756 - Engring Geologist (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 3786 - Waste Mgmt Engr (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 4159 - Assoc Mgmt Auditor (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4542 - Accounting Administrator II (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4546 - Accounting Officer (Spec) (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4549 - Accounting Administrator I (Supvr) (Eff. 07-01- 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2021) 4588 - Assoc Accounting Analyst (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 4800 - Staff Svcs Mgr I (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4801 - Staff Svcs Mgr II (Supvry) (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4802 - Staff Svcs Mgr III (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 4923 - Program Mgr II (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4924 - Program Mgr I (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 4926 - Emergency Svcs Coord (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5142 - Assoc Pers Analyst (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5157 - Staff Svcs Analyst (Gen) (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 5160 - Pers Techn I (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 5284 - Assoc Budget Analyst (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 5393 - Assoc Govtl Program Analyst (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0.0 42.0 42.0 42.0 42.0 42.0 5758 - Research Data Spec II (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 5795 - Atty III (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 6317 - Program Mgr III (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 7500 - C.E.A. (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Analysis of Problem
Positions FY21 FY21 FY21 FY21 FY21 FY21 Current Budget BY+1 BY+2 BY+3 BY+4 Year Year 8025 - Disaster Assistance Programs Spec I (Eff. 07- 01-2021) 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 8030 - Disaster Assistance Programs Spec II (Eff. 07- 01-2021) 0.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 8085 - Sr Emergency Svcs Coord (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 OT00 - Overtime 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Positions 0.0 110.0 110.0 110.0 110.0 110.0 Salaries and Wages Salaries and Wages FY21 FY21 FY21 FY21 FY21 FY21 Current Budget BY+1 BY+2 BY+3 BY+4 Year Year 0765 - Sr Envirnal Scientist (Spec) (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0 92 92 92 92 92 1139 - Office Techn (Typing) (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0 476 476 476 476 476 1303 - Personnel Spec (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0 98 98 98 98 98 1379 - Office Asst (Typing) (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0 35 35 35 35 35 1402 - Info Tech Spec I (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0 250 250 250 250 250 1403 - Info Tech Supvr I (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0 176 176 176 176 176 1414 - Info Tech Spec II (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0 98 98 98 98 98 1415 - Info Tech Spec III (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0 109 109 109 109 109 1432 - Support Svcs Asst (Gen) (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0 34 34 34 34 34 3336 - Sr Structural Engr (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0 138 138 138 138 138 3756 - Engring Geologist (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0 96 96 96 96 96 3786 - Waste Mgmt Engr (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0 96 96 96 96 96 4159 - Assoc Mgmt Auditor (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0 75 75 75 75 75 4542 - Accounting Administrator II (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0 90 90 90 90 90 4546 - Accounting Officer (Spec) (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0 185 185 185 185 185 4549 - Accounting Administrator I (Supvr) (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0 82 82 82 82 82 4588 - Assoc Accounting Analyst (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0 221 221 221 221 221 4800 - Staff Svcs Mgr I (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0 986 986 986 986 986 4801 - Staff Svcs Mgr II (Supvry) (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0 540 540 540 540 540 4802 - Staff Svcs Mgr III (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0 315 315 315 315 315 4923 - Program Mgr II (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0 385 385 385 385 385 4924 - Program Mgr I (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0 706 706 706 706 706 4926 - Emergency Svcs Coord (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0 690 690 690 690 690 5142 - Assoc Pers Analyst (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0 140 140 140 140 140 5157 - Staff Svcs Analyst (Gen) (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0 1,355 1,355 1,355 1,355 1,355 5160 - Pers Techn I (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0 42 42 42 42 42 5284 - Assoc Budget Analyst (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0 70 70 70 70 70 Analysis of Problem
Salaries and Wages FY21 FY21 FY21 FY21 FY21 FY21 Current Budget BY+1 BY+2 BY+3 BY+4 Year Year 5393 - Assoc Govtl Program Analyst (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0 4,600 4,600 4,600 4,600 4,600 5758 - Research Data Spec II (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0 84 84 84 84 84 5795 - Atty III (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0 130 130 130 130 130 6317 - Program Mgr III (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0 110 110 110 110 110 7500 - C.E.A. (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0 150 150 150 150 150 8025 - Disaster Assistance Programs Spec I (Eff. 07-01- 0 930 930 930 930 930 2021) 8030 - Disaster Assistance Programs Spec II (Eff. 07-01- 0 785 785 785 785 785 2021) 8085 - Sr Emergency Svcs Coord (Eff. 07-01-2021) 0 743 743 743 743 743 OT00 - Overtime 0 2,340 2,340 2,340 2,340 2,340 Total Salaries and Wages $0 $17,452 $17,452 $17,452 $17,452 $17,452
Staff Benefits Staff Benefits FY21 FY21 FY21 FY21 FY21 FY21 Current Budget BY+1 BY+2 BY+3 BY+4 Year Year 5150450 - Medicare Taxation 0 256 256 256 256 256 5150500 - OASDI 0 1,082 1,082 1,082 1,082 1,082 5150600 - Retirement - General 0 310 310 310 310 310 5150630 - Retirement - Public Employees - Miscellaneous 0 3,950 3,950 3,950 3,950 3,950 5150900 - Staff Benefits - Other 0 2,714 2,714 2,714 2,714 2,714 Total Staff Benefits $0 $8,312 $8,312 $8,312 $8,312 $8,312 Total Personal Services Total Personal Services FY21 FY21 FY21 FY21 FY21 FY21 Current Budget BY+1 BY+2 BY+3 BY+4 Year Year Total Personal Services $0 $25,764 $25,764 $25,764 $25,764 $25,764
Attachment A Recovery Directorate Deputy Director, Recovery Front Office, and Special Project Unit Perm 3-Year TH to New Funded Perm 5 2 4 0
The Cal OES Recovery program has evolved to address the complexities of the recent disasters. The need for statewide leadership and strategic recovery efforts have increased. Managing multiple disasters which affect numerous counties requires an unprecedented level of coordinated with FEMA and local government leadership. As such, the workload in the Recovery Deputy Director’s office, which includes the Front Office and the Special Projects Unit, has increased significantly in the areas of correspondence and communication with federal and local partners, developing reports and issue papers for leadership, reporting out data and coordinating data collection from various units of Recovery. This work has greater consequence fiscally and programmatically than ever before. Interagency Recovery Coordination Section Assistant Director and Support Unit Perm 3-Year TH to New Funded Perm
1 1 1 1 Community resilience is the ability to recognize risk, resolve social stresses, anticipate shocks due to hazard events, adapt to changing conditions, and recover rapidly from hazard events to a new and better normal. The Interagency Recovery Coordination Assistant Director (AD) coordinates long-term recovery and mitigation efforts including the development of proactive plans and procedures to ensure communities can respond to disasters and disruptions so that essential functions and services are resumed rapidly, loss is minimized, and resources, including infrastructure and housing, are repaired or replaced quickly. Prior to the 2018 Camp Fire, all long-term recovery coordination was managed at the executive level of Cal OES and the Unified Coordination Groups during the response phase of the disaster; those management units disband when the State Operations Center stands down leaving a void for a level of coordination in the recovery phase. The need for a greater synchronization was identified and established in the California Disaster Recovery Framework (CDRF), which links local, state, tribal, federal governments, as well as private and nongovernmental organizations with roles in the recovery process and provides a pre-and post-disaster recovery strategy for the State. This is aligned with the National Disaster Recovery Framework (NDRF) to support seamless coordination and integration of federal resources during disaster recovery and mitigation operations, so that the State can deliver their recovery support with federal partners efficiently and effectively. Interagency Recovery Coordination Branch Branch Manager and Support Unit Analysis of Problem
Perm 3-Year TH to New Funded Perm
1 1 1 1 This Branch coordinates, trains, and provides guidance to state and local agencies, nonprofit organizations, the private industry, and general public, regarding how best to promulgate resiliency efforts throughout local communities. This Branch also identifies community functions that are critical for absorbing, rebounding from, and adapting to hazard risks; facilitates hazard- focused community preparedness and risk management actions that reduce long-term vulnerabilities; and supports post-disaster community recovery and redevelopment that integrates community resilience objectives. Recovery Support Functions Division Division Manager, Division Support Unit, and Recovery Support Function Units I and II
Perm 3-Year TH to New Funded Perm
3 7 4 0 The Cal OES Recovery Support Function (RSF) Division coordinates the assessment of disaster impacts across recovery areas, identification of local unmet needs, and delivery of information on and implementation of available technical assistance, grants, loans, philanthropic funding, and materials to support communities with recovery projects and programs. The RSF Division supports and enhances delivery of the State’s federal assistance programs and recovery operations through the Joint Field Office, and identifies and addresses areas of long- term recovery need in coordination with other state and federal partners. The Division consists of three units to manage the coordination with state agencies and communities before a disaster to build their capabilities for effective recovery management, and after a disaster to support efficient and resilient recovery in six critical areas of recovery: community planning and capacity building, economic, health and social services, housing, infrastructure, and natural and cultural resources. The RSF Division developed and maintains multiple tools that support recovery counties, as well as individual jurisdictions, in identifying the information and resources needed to support and manage a swift and effective recovery. The Recovery Data Repository identifies pre-existing disaster vulnerability and resiliency, initial disaster impact, and continuing impact and need data indicators which inform declaration and assistance requests for multiple cost recovery and financial assistance sources, as well as potential opportunities for recovery technical assistance to support community recovery efforts. California’s MAX-TRAX Recovery Project Management System, recognized nationally as a best practice for state process and tool management, contains both operational information about recovery needs and project status, as well as available state and federal resources available for communities captured in the California Recovery Resource Library. The Library contains 1,425 resources for cost recovery and recovery financing, including the resources available for jurisdictions to support local cost match requirements, decreasing the additional financial burden on communities during recovery. Figure 1 below shows the current progress in supporting local communities’ recovery projects with resources and technical assistance from the six RSFs for the ongoing long-term recovery efforts in Butte County from the Camp Fire. Analysis of Problem
Figure 3: Camp Fire Recovery Project Milestones Status
Figure 1 Table: Camp Fire Recovery Project Milestones Status Recovery Support Function (RSF) In Progress Completed Total
CPCB RSF 12 15 27
ECON RSF 15 0 15
IS RSF 46 6 52
HSS RSF 14 12 26
HOUSING RSF 36 3 39 In addition to their ongoing work for Camp Fire, more than two years after this disaster, the RSF Division is also currently focused on supporting the over 25 counties across the state impacted by the 2020 California Wildfires, support which is anticipated to continue for years to provide the assistance needed for communities to rebound and resume pre-disaster levels of tax base and economic health. The proposed positions are necessary to continue this work for the recent major disaster events, recovery efforts from the cascading impacts of COVID-19, and any future disasters; without these positions, communities will not have the support they need to recover as efficiently, effectively, and resiliently, making them more at risk to future disasters and cascading impacts from not having a robust economic and community recovery. Recovery Analytics, Engineers and Specialists Division Division Manager, Recovery Analytics Unit, and Engineers and Specialists Unit
3-Year TH to Perm New Funded Perm 5 2 7 0
Recovery Analytics Unit Data and analytics have become a primary driver of strategy and process improvement as well as goal-oriented outcomes. As California is confronted with the response to and recovery from an unprecedented number of disasters which increase in size and scope each year, being Analysis of Problem fueled by climate change, it is imperative that Cal OES understand where to drive value and efficiency from within the organization; that which gets measured gets better. The transition to data driven recovery requires a focus on data analytics and a dedicated team to elevate analytical strategies, advance new visions of problem solving, and identify what types of capabilities must be built. Cal OES has implemented several new software platforms, including Salesforce, PowerBI, Urban Footprint, Tableau, Smartsheet, and Mission Edge. In order to take full advantage of adopted technologies, the Analytics Unit is necessary to be the subject matter experts to setup, configure, train, and optimize these tools so that relevant performance metrics can be established and published in a format that can easily be consumed at every level of the organization. Data Analytics supports every program within Recovery and their more than 250 employees by providing technical assistance in several critical areas including GIS, data extraction, and dashboard development and maintenance. Each of these functions enhances performance management, organizational communications, and situational awareness producing objective driven outcomes which is more critical than every as Recovery adapts to operating distributed teams within a telework environment, as well as into the future as recovery operations will become more complex with emerging disasters. Engineers and Specialists Unit The Engineers and Specialists Unit provides the Recovery with access to a wide range of technical expertise required for effective participation in all phases of emergency management: Preparedness, Response, Recovery, and Mitigation. The Unit includes positions for civil, structural, waste management, and geological engineers, as well as environmental planners and scientists. These positions are necessary, not only to develop and inform preparedness and mitigation plans, but also to deploy into the field during recovery operations to ensure these operations are in compliance with all state and federal regulations. This capability helps to ensure compliance, and mitigates delays and challenges, in the most complex and sensitive response and recovery operations, such as household hazardous waste and debris removal. These subject matter experts also provide crucial technical expertise to jurisdictions after wildfires and other disasters, evaluating burn scars and impact areas for potential ongoing hazards, such as watershed impacts, that could adversely affect drinking water or identify areas where deadly debris flows, or mudslides, are possible. Prior to the formation of this unit the skillset and capability needed to undertake these highly technical tasks had to be contracted out during a disaster and largely neglected under blue skies. By funding these permeant positions Cal OES will be able to support the recovery from recent disasters as well as work on prevention and mitigations plans during steady state to assist local jurisdictions lessen the impact of future disasters. The Engineers and Specialist Unit is also responsible for the statewide Safety Assessment Program (SAP), which is highly regarded as a standard to train emergency second responders. The training has been reviewed and approved by FEMA’s Office of Domestic Preparedness. Based on Applied Technology Council-20/45 methodologies and documentation, the SAP training program provides engineers, architects, and code-enforcement professionals from across California with the basic skills required to perform structural safety assessments following disasters. These resources are critical to maintain in a constant state of readiness in order to respond to no-notice events, such as earthquakes, and to evaluate and prioritize critical infrastructure to protect life and mitigate additional impacts. Recovery Planning & Quality Control Division Division Manager, Recovery Planning Unit, and Quality Control and Monitoring Unit Analysis of Problem
Perm 3-Year TH to New Funded Perm
7 7 2 0
Recovery Planning Unit Disaster recovery depends on the effective planning and strong coordination already in place when disaster strikes. The Recovery Planning Unit is focused on assisting all California communities with their recovery planning and coordination, and how they interface with existing planning efforts across the State. The California Disaster Response Framework (CDRF), in alignment with the National Disaster Response Framework (NDRF), documents and solidifies the collaboration of all 58 California counties and their emergency management teams, as well as over 70 state agencies, multiple universities, localities, tribes, and nonprofit organizations. The Recovery Planning team updates the CDRF with new concepts, plans, and resources each time California recovers from a disaster creating a more resilient state after each event in coordination with and with feedback from federal, state, local, and tribal governmental partners. As the framework for recovery, the CDRF serves as a foundational guidance document for the entire Recovery program. However, there are additional planning documents for the different operational areas within Recovery that provide guidance and direction for pre- and post- disaster responsibilities and tasks. This includes, but is not limited to, the California Recovery Support Function Annex to the CDRF, the Debris Management Plan, and the Post-Disaster Housing Plan. The Recovery Planning Unit maintains these plans as well as coordinates with all Units within Recovery, especially the Readiness Unit, to identify further operational needs for plans. The Recovery Planning Unit leads the effort to develop these in coordination with the operational users of the plan within Recovery as well as in coordination with federal, state, local, and tribal governmental and non-governmental partners. Planning is an ongoing effort. Plans are living documents that require frequent updates and need to be modified to keep pace with new technology, experience, and lessons learned in previous disasters. The Recovery Planning Unit coordinates with all units in Recovery to manage the maintenance of the CDRF as well as the other operational and tactical plans used by Recovery. As the State continues to respond to and recover from the pandemic, while at the same time responding to wildfires of historic size in an unprecedented number of counties around California, the Recovery Planning Unit is reaching out to stakeholders to identify critical outcomes and lessons learned to incorporate into existing plans. The Recovery Planning Unit coordinates with the Readiness Unit to support pre-disaster recovery efforts with jurisdictions throughout the State. Through these efforts, the Planning Unit supports communities in creating plans to identify how they will manage their recovery efforts in alignment with the CDRF and NDRF. After disasters, the Recovery Planning Unit staff provide support to the Planning Sections in the Joint Field Office and field as necessary. In this function, the staff leverages their planning expertise to support efficient and effective state recovery operations. Loss of the Recovery Planning capability would create gaps in critical plans, result in reduced support to local jurisdictions, and result in a loss of coordination with federal, state, local, and tribal governments, decreasing the ability for the State and other jurisdictions to recover efficiently and effectively from disasters. This would ultimately result in longer recovery times, and delays in restoring California communities to a level where local mission critical functions can resume. Analysis of Problem
Quality Control and Monitoring Unit The Quality Control and Monitoring Unit monitors projects funded by a variety of federal and state disaster assistance programs. 2 CFR Part 200 requires Cal OES to monitor subrecipients of funding for compliance, specifically to monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward; and that subaward performance goals are achieved. Given the surge in the number of disasters and the subsequent increase in FEMA funded projects to address the damage and mitigate future damage, the Monitoring and Quality Assurance Unit staff requires the existing staff to continue to address the significant number of required compliance reviews. The Quality Control and Monitoring Unit ensures the State is meeting the requirements of the funding, provides technical assistance and training so that the projects, especially those in the significantly impacted communities, are properly supported for the best possible outcomes. The Quality Control and Monitoring Unit conducts compliance assessments on a wide variety of projects funded by a number of federal and state programs, including HMGP, HMGP Post Fire, PDM, Legislative Pre-Disaster Mitigation, PA, Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA), Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC), and funds made available via the California Disaster Assistance Act (CDAA). Each program requires compliance monitoring. The Quality Control and Monitoring Unit conducts monitoring activities in several ways. It reviews single audit reports for deficiencies and generates management decision letters. It provides technical assistance over the course of the compliance assessment, and it identifies weaknesses in local processes, as well as performance gaps hampering the effectiveness of local projects. As part of the process, subrecipients are educated on the rules and requirements of the award, and assisted in creating corrective action plans, as needed, to address any shortcomings. But subrecipients also receive confirmation that their project is complete, and many times are identified as utilizing a best practice for implementing a specific project type, a process which can be shared with other subrecipients, fostering collaborative efforts among California communities. The Quality Control and Monitoring Unit also provides support to communities with audit findings, procurement questions, and reporting, so that program deadlines and documentation rules are followed, and projects can move forward effectively and efficiently, in the manner intended in the award. A loss of capacity in Quality Control and Monitoring Unit will impact our Enhanced Status with FEMA, a status earned by only 14 other states in the nation. Our overall disaster funding would be reduced by five percent in future disasters, resulting in a substantial loss of funding dollars for California. Recovery Declaration, Individual Assistance & Readiness Division Recovery Declarations Unit, Recovery Individual Assistance Unit, and Recovery Readiness Unit Perm 3-Year TH to New Funded Perm
10 7 4 4 Analysis of Problem
Recovery Declarations Unit The Recovery Declarations Unit consists of five personnel responsible for providing technical assistance to local governments throughout California and managing requests for emergency assistance by local governments. In addition, the Unit is responsible for drafting critical correspondence, such as Governor’s Office Action Requests, State of Emergency Requests, California Disaster Assistance Act (CDAA) funding requests, and Presidential Disaster Declaration Requests. The Recovery Declarations Unit is responsible for receiving local emergency proclamations issued by a governing body (city, county, or city and county) within ten days, and ratified by the governing body within seven days. The Declarations Unit works with the Readiness Unit to assess Initial Damage Estimates (IDEs) submitted by the local government following their emergency proclamation. The damages captured on the IDEs and Preliminary Damage Assessments (PDAs) can lead to a state or federal disaster declaration. Table 1 below shows the number of requests that the Declarations Unit has supported for the last eight years. Figure 4: Local Proclamations and Requests for Assistance Received
Analysis of Problem
Figure 2 Table: Local Proclamations and Requests for Assistance Received Calendar Proclamations and Requests Year Received
2013 75
2014 362
2015 230
2016 150
2017 627
2018 198
2019 284
2020 1,170
Once a PDA is conducted for a local jurisdiction, the Declarations Unit prepares a detailed analysis of the PDA, the budget of the county or city, and an analysis that identifies if the damages exceed the fiscal capacity of the county or jurisdiction. This information is provided up through the Governor’s Office and Department of Finance to determine if funding under CDAA should be granted. The Recovery Declarations Unit responds to the requesting jurisdiction with official correspondence regarding the Governor’s CDAA funding determination. The Declarations Unit develops a recommendation to the Governor in response to a local government’s request for the Governor to proclaim a State of Emergency in an area affected by a natural or manmade disaster. This recommendation requires Declarations Unit consideration of several factors, including the determination that emergency conditions are beyond the capability of the county, operational area, or the state. Since 2015, the Declarations Unit has prepared 134 Governor’s Office Action Requests for State of Emergency Requests, and requests for CDAA funding. The Declarations Unit is responsible for drafting the Presidential Disaster Declaration request on behalf of the Governor. This request is critical in ensuring that California and the local jurisdictions receive federal resources necessary for the response and recovery from a disaster. In order for the President to approve a major disaster declaration, the Declarations Unit has to demonstrate that the state meets critical PA and IA factors outlined in Title 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations. Since 2015, the Declarations Unit has prepared 19 requests for a Presidential Disaster Declaration. Recovery Individual Assistance Unit The IA Unit is composed of a team of seven staff who coordinate with federal, state, local, and voluntary/nonprofit entities to provide recovery assistance when individuals, households, businesses, and/or agricultural communities are affected by an emergency or disaster. In the event of a presidentially declared disaster, the IA Unit works with FEMA to manage and implement the Individuals and Households Program (IHP) which has disbursed $144,339,000 in program benefits to over 17,000 households in 38 counties since 2015, as shown in Table 4 below. Analysis of Problem
Table 2: FEMA IHP Applications and Funding Amount Approved
Year Disaster Counties Total FEMA IHP Total FEMA Impacted Amount Approved IHP Applications Approved 2015 Valley & Butte Fires 2 $12,756,144.84 1,544 2017 October 2017 California 8 $17,998,120.57 4,417 Wildfires 2018 November 2018 California 3 $90,988,917.68 8,075 Wildfires 2020* August 2020 Wildfires 15 $18,935,999.79 2,768 2020* September 2020 Wildfires 10 $3,659,471.60 251
Note regarding Table 1, FEMA IHP Applications and Funding Amount Approved. Figures shown for 2020 are as of 12/8/2020. When a city or county proclaims a local emergency due to a disaster, the IA Unit works with the county to establish a Local Assistance Center (LAC) to provide essential services to households that have been impacted by a disaster. The IA Unit coordinates with other state agencies to have a physical presence at the LAC to provide services to disaster survivors. Since 2019, the IA Unit coordinated the opening of 30 LACs, serving more than 13,200 households impacted by disasters. For the 2020 Wildfires, 43 mission tasks were resourced through WebEOC and fulfilled through the State Operations Center to support LAC operations. Table 4 below provides more information about the operational considerations of managing these LACs. Table 3: California LACs Supported by the IA Unit
Year Number of Number of LACs Number of Number of Households Counties LAC Liaisons Supported 2019 9 8 8 4,180 2020 23 22 36 9,072
The IA Unit is also the Cal OES lead for facilitating assistance through other federal programs, including the Small Business Administration (SBA), U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), and the FEMA Disaster Case Management and Crisis Counseling programs. The IA Unit leads the process for requesting and notifying counties of SBA declarations for eligible businesses, renters, and homeowners. When a disaster occurs that impacts homes and/or businesses, the IA Unit will inform the impacted county of the potential assistance and guide them through the process of gathering the required documentation for an SBA Physical Disaster declaration or an SBA Economic Injury Disaster Loan declaration. Table 5 below identifies information from the six most recent SBA declarations. Analysis of Problem
Table 4: SBA Loans Disbursed for California Disasters
Year Disaster Total SBA Loans Disbursed 2015 Valley & Butte Fires $28,135,700 2017 October 2017 California Wildfires $164,285,400 2017 December 2017 California Wildfires $56,122,200 & Debris Flows 2018 November 2018 California Wildfires $437,368,300 2020* August 2020 Wildfires $52,947,100 2020* September 2020 Wildfires $10,086,700
Note regarding Table 3, SBA Loans Disbursed for CA Disasters. Disasters and SBA Loans Disbursed dollar amounts for 2020 are as of 12/9/2020. The IA Unit works with County Agricultural Commissioners to facilitate a request for a USDA disaster designation to implement the USDA-Farm Service Agency Emergency Loan Program. The IA Unit guides the Agricultural Commissioner on the disaster designation eligibility requirements and required forms to be submitted, as well as drafts the request letter for Cal OES Director’s signature. When a FEMA Major Disaster Declaration for the IA Unit authorizes the State to apply for a Disaster Case Management Program (DCMP) grant, the IA Unit works with the DCMP lead state agency, California Department of Social Services (CDSS), to apply for and implement this program. Upon approval, the IA Unit continues to closely collaborate with FEMA and CDSS to monitor program progress, address challenges, and facilitate linkages with other programs and services for disaster-impacted individuals. When a FEMA Major Disaster Declaration for the IA Unit authorizes the State to apply for a Crisis Counseling Program (CCP) grant, the IA Unit works the CCP lead state agency, California Department of Health Care Services (CDHCS), to apply for and implement this program. Upon approval, the IA Unit continues to closely collaborate with FEMA and CDHCS to monitor program progress, address challenges, and facilitate linkages with other programs and services for disaster-impacted individuals. Recovery Readiness Unit The Recovery Readiness Unit is a team of eight, responsible for building operational preparedness within Recovery, and implementing JFO operations in the event of a disaster. In addition, the Recovery Readiness Unit maintains training, credentialing, and certification systems for all recovery positions, and conducts IDEs and PDAs for both PA and IA. When a local jurisdiction proclaims an emergency and requests state or federal assistance, their IDE needs to be reviewed and validated before a PDA can be conducted. The Recovery Readiness Unit is responsible for coordinating with the Declarations Unit and local jurisdictions to identify the qualified personnel, and mobilize them into the field to conduct assessments to validate the number of destroyed homes, and to determine the impact on public infrastructure to determine which costs would be eligible for reimbursement under federal and/or state programs. These assessments are critical for determining the level of impact a disaster has had on the homes and critical infrastructure of local government, and the PDAs are ultimately used to request assistance from the Governor of California or the President of the United States. Table 6 below shows the number of IA PDAs conducted between 2015 and 2020, and Table 7 below shows the number of PA PDAs conducted between 2010 and 2020. Analysis of Problem
Table 5: IA PDAs Conducted from 2015 – 2020
Year Disaster Destroyed Homes PDAs Conducted Assessed 2020 Mountain View Fire 29 1 2020 August 2020 Wildfires 217 3 2020 September 2020 Wildfires 327 4 2020 April Storms 28 1 2020 Niland Fire 41 1 2019 Winter Storms and Flooding 522 1 2019 Kincaid Fire 171 1 2019 Sandalwood Fire 90 1 2019 Santo Tomas Fire 32 1 2019 California Earthquakes 359 2 2018 Camp/ Woolsey/Hill Fire * * 2018 Klamathon Fire 38 1 2018 West Fire 42 1 2018 Steel Fire 11 1 2018 Corsica Apartment Fire 58 1 2017 Severe Storms and Flooding 644 6 2017 Detwiler Fire 74 1 2017 Helena Fire 82 1 2017 Wall Fire 46 1 2017 Ponderosa Fire 43 1 2017 Mud Creek Slide 5 1 2017 San Pablo Avenue Fire 48 1 2016 Mission 29th Fire 47 1 2016 Blue Cut Fire 68 1 2016 Soberanoes Fire 56 1 2016 Clayton Fire 157 1 2016 Erskine Fire 280 1 2016 Warehouse Fire 25 1 2015 Severe Rain, Flooding, and Debris Flow 80 1 2015 Rocky Fire 36 1 2015 San Diego County Flooding 87 1 Total 30 (Incidents) 3,743 41 Analysis of Problem
Note regarding Table 4, IA PDAs Conducted from 2015 – 2020. For 2018 Camp/ Woolsey/Hill Fire note, 10,000-12,000 homes destroyed but due to the severity and size of the wildfires, Presidential Disaster Declaration was declared prior to PDAs Table 6: PA PDAs Conducted from 2010 – 2020
Year Disaster PDAs Conducted 2020 COVID-19 DR-4482 8 2020 August 2020 Wildfires DR-4558 25 2020 September 2020 Wildfires DR-4569 12 2019 Mid-February 2019 Storms DR-4431 16 2019 Late February 2019 Storms DR-4434 19 2018 March Storms 4 2018 Summer 2018 Wildfires and High Winds DR-4382 2 2018 November 2018 Wildfires DR-4407 3 2017- December 2017 Wildfires DR-4353 4 2018 2017 January 2017 Storms DR-4301 35 2017 Late January 2017 Storms DR-4305 24 2017 February 2017 Storms DR-4308 45 2017 October 2017 Wildfires DR-4344 9 2016 Erskine Fire 1 2016 Drought 10 2016 Tree Mortality 10 2015 Valley & Butte Fires DR-4240 3 2014 South Napa Earthquake DR-4193 3 2013 Rim Fire DR-4158 3 2011 March 2011 California Tsunami DR-1968 6 2011 March Storms 17 2010 2010 Severe Winter Storms DR-1884 8 2010 Baja Earthquake DR-1911 1 2010 San Bruno Explosion 1 2010 December 2010 Statewide Storms DR-1952 11 Total 25 (Incidents) 280
The Recovery Readiness Unit tracks staff qualifications, experience, and credentialing to ensure all staff mobilized to support a disaster have the appropriate credentials to support the incident. This includes filling critical Incident Command System positions within the Joint Field Office (JFO) and sending personnel throughout the State to support LACs, Debris Removal Operations Centers, Area Field Offices, Tree Removal Operations Centers, Emergency Operations Centers, and Regional Emergency Operations Centers. This systemic approach to qualifications Analysis of Problem management mirrors FEMA’s methodology for managing their field workforce, reduces risk, and increases mission effectiveness. The Recovery Readiness Unit team plans, resources, and implements specialized JFO Operations to ensure a comprehensive approach to disaster management and recovery. The JFO enables the coordination of federal, state, local, and tribal organizations. The Recovery Readiness Unit has established a process and Standard Operating Procedure for building processes and partnerships to collaborate effectively with local governments and state and federal partners during and after a disaster, as well as establishing, operating, and demobilizing the JFO for all- hazards. The Recovery Readiness Unit increases Recovery’s ability to conduct agile deployment dispatch, mitigates the recovery time, and increases the resiliency of local governments. The Recovery Readiness Unit will act throughout the disaster lifecycle to increase Recovery’s capabilities and capacity to carry out recovery operations immediately after a disaster to ensure more efficient and effective disaster recovery operations within Cal OES. Recovery Operations Section Assistant Director and Support Unit
Perm 3-Year TH to New Funded Perm
2 0 1 0
The length of time it will take to fully close a disaster is directly tied to the severity of the disaster and the capabilities of the local government. When a natural or manmade disaster occurs, a local government issues a Local Emergency Declaration if it determines conditions are or are expected to be beyond its capacity to respond and recover. Recovery from these types of disasters is shorter and less costly. At the request of a local government, the Director of Cal OES may, at his or her discretion, concur with a local agency’s declaration of a local emergency. This Director’s Concurrence makes state financial assistance, through the CDAA, available to the local agency to offset emergency response costs and repair or replace damaged public facilities. The Governor can proclaim a State of Emergency when the resources of a local jurisdiction have been exceeded. At the request of the Governor, the President can make a Major Disaster Declaration or an Emergency Declaration when there is a natural or manmade event or other circumstance beyond the capacity of State and local governments to respond. Finally, at the request of the Governor, FEMA can provide an FMAG Declaration when the state is experiencing an uncontrolled wildfire that may become a major disaster if additional firefighting resources are not provided. In larger disasters, the first few years of recovery involve assessment of the damages and planning for restoration. In this phase, plans and drawings are created, environmental impact is conducted, and permits are secured. In the next few years, the restoration phase of building permanent physical structures begins and can take a few years to a couple of decades depending on the magnitude of the disaster. In the closeout phase of a disaster, local jurisdictions submit final documents, inspection reports, and proof of completion of projects to receive their final payments. In each phase of recovery, local jurisdictions submit reimbursement requests to Cal OES for state and federal funding. With potentially millions of dollars in each reimbursement request, the requisite documentation, potential denial of funding and subsequent appeals, and post-payment audits, the timeline of each project and the closeout of a disaster can be extended. Analysis of Problem
Depending on the severity of a disaster, it may take as long as 20 years to complete recovery projects from a disaster as was the case in the 1994 Northridge earthquake. While the recovery workload in any disaster does not receive the media visibility that the response phase does, it is actually estimated to be the majority of the workload and cost of the disaster. There are several concerns related to the three-year or limited term position funding. The frequency and scale of disaster events have been drastically increasing since 2017, as are the numbers of projects being obligated and approved, as well as the projects being carried over from prior years. Figure 4 below illustrates the number of open projects on July 1st of the fiscal year. FEMA project worksheets include projects for FEMA PA and FMAG programs. Cal OES State-Only DSRs are the projects approved by Cal OES that are funded exclusively by CDAA without federal assistance. The number of projects being obligated/approved, and the number being carried over from prior years has been growing since 2017; 1,346 projects were obligated in the last year and nearly 5,000 projects were obligated over one year ago. Figure 5: Open FEMA Project Worksheets and Open Cal OES State-Only DSRs at the Start of the Fiscal Year
Analysis of Problem
Figure 3 Table: Open FEMA Project Worksheets and Open Cal OES State-Only DSRs at the Start of the Fiscal Year
FEMA FEMA Cal OES HMA Cal OES HMA Project Project State- Branch State-Only Branch Worksheet Worksheet Total Fiscal Only DSRs projects DSRs projects Versions Versions Open Year approved approved approved approved obligated obligated Projects over 1 over 1 in the last in the last over 1 year in the last year ago year ago year year ago year FY 10/11 4043 466 107 430 40 23 5109 FY 11/12 4022 474 94 1688 122 30 6430 FY 12/13 4274 517 96 642 179 41 5749 FY 13/14 3314 559 120 468 46 23 4530 FY 14/15 2037 539 127 398 31 24 3156 FY 15/16 1607 486 116 380 109 35 2733 FY 16/17 1362 487 113 392 175 36 2565 FY 17/18 1269 444 131 115 217 39 2215 FY 18/19 1214 633 142 3068 145 49 5251 FY 19/20 3837 678 137 871 183 50 5756 FY 20/21 4339 852 143 1185 266 149 6934
Based on the number of projects that have been obligated and number of projects that are in the review queue now, this trend is expected to continue into 2021-22. At this time, it is clear that the State is at the beginning of recovery, and federal funding approved for Cal OES to administer the recovery grants for up to eight years after the disaster has not been fully spent. Additionally, FEMA’s enforcement of the statutory timelines associated with project submission and closeouts have been stricter than before. Missing these deadlines due to staff shortfalls prior to project completion and event closure could mean loss of funding opportunities. Since Recovery does not control all aspects of the timeline and FEMA obligations/versions are often trailing the programmatic approval from Region IX by months, the Recovery workload does not always move in a straight, linear fashion. Project completion and event closure occurs years after an event happening. Recovery Closeout and Infrastructure Branch Branch Manager and Support Unit; Public Assistance Division and Support Unit; Public Assistance Division, include Support, South, Inland, Coastal, and State; Closeout Units I, II, and III; and Debris Operations Unit Perm 3-Year TH to New Funded Perm
31 24 34 14
PA and Disaster Closeout programs coordinate recovery efforts, validate initial damage estimates, complete joint PDAs, write initial project worksheets and damage survey reports, conduct applicant briefings, submit quarterly progress reports to FEMA to provide progress on open projects, draft correspondence and appeals, and close all project grants that received federal and State funding in disasters. After all grant projects are completed and all appeals and debts resolved, the program coordinates with grant sub recipients, pursuant to State and federal requirements, to close out applications. Analysis of Problem
For all State-only disaster events, the State is responsible for all costs associated with disaster recovery. For all federal declaration events, the State is responsible for cost share of all eligible disaster response and recovery costs, and all pre-declaration recovery activities. Debris Operations Unit On average, debris management costs 45 percent of the total costs of a disaster event. Disaster debris such as metal, concrete, contaminated soil, and hazardous materials must be removed and properly managed to reduce threats to public health and safety, protect the environment, and help communities to recover and rebuild. California’s Consolidated Debris Removal Program (CDRP) is implemented under the leadership of Cal OES Recovery and local governments. In Phase I, local government, State, and federal agencies have organized teams of experts from the California State Department of Toxic Substances Control and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to inspect damaged/destroyed properties and remove any household hazardous waste that may pose a threat to human health, animals, and the environment. Phase I is automatic and includes both residential and commercial properties destroyed by the fire. In Phase II, Cal OES, FEMA, and local officials coordinate with the State’s Debris Task Force and its Debris Management Teams to conduct fire-related debris removal if property owners have elected to participate in the program by completing and signing a Right-of-Entry Form. After the October 2017 wildfires in Northern California, the CDRP removed over 300,000 tons of debris from more than 1,200 properties. This number increased drastically in 2019 as part of the recovery efforts after the Camp Fire in Butte County: crews removed more than 3.66 million tons of debris from nearly 11,000 properties. The debris removal operation was the largest of its type in State history and cost roughly $1.35 billion dollars.
Analysis of Problem
Recovery Financial Administration Branch Branch Manager, Division Manager and Support Unit, and Financial Processing Units I, II, and III
Perm 3-Year TH to New Funded Perm
8 9 8 0
The Financial Administration Branch provides oversight of processing grant obligations and reimbursement requests; manages the processing of federal and State financial documents with federal, State, local, and private non-profit agencies; and provides financial technical assistance to all sub-recipients for their requests for reimbursement. The staff and Units within the Financial Administration Branch are essential in performing a broad range of analytical tasks relating to financial, programmatic, and administrative requirements of PA, CDAA, and HMGP. Representing the largest value of grants and largest number of subrecipients, projects and transactions administered by Cal OES, the Financial Administration Branch will play an integral role in analyzing financial and administrative grant documents and ensuring its compliance with applicable laws, regulations, policies, procedures, and program guidelines. Hazard Mitigation Section Assistant Director, Support Unit, and Special Projects Unit Perm 3-Year TH to New Funded Perm
1 0 1 4
Mitigation is the effort to reduce loss of life and property by lessening the impact of disasters. Mitigation is taking action now—before the next disaster—to reduce human and financial consequences later. Effective mitigation requires that the State understand local risks, address the hard choices, and invest in long-term community well-being and resilience. Without mitigation actions, the State jeopardizes our safety, financial security, and self-reliance. The Federal government provides mitigation funding to states at the time of a disaster declaration based on the standard rate of 15 percent of the total estimated eligible disaster assistance for each federally declared disaster. California maintains enhanced status at the federal level, which is achieved by demonstrating that the State has developed a comprehensive mitigation program and is capable of managing increased funding to achieve its mitigation goals. The enhanced status acknowledges the coordinated effort a state is taking to reduce losses, protect life and property, and create safer communities. By maintaining enhanced status, California is eligible for hazard mitigation funding at a rate of 20 percent of the total estimated eligible disaster assistance, not to exceed $35.3 billion. Each federal disaster declaration provides access to mitigation funding. Based on federal declarations since 2017, California anticipates mitigation funding of over $1.8 billion as reflected in Table 8 below. Analysis of Problem
Table 7: Anticipated Available Hazard Mitigation Funds and Expected Subrecipients for Funding from 2021/22 Federally Declared Disasters
Actual / Estimated Disaster Title Actual / Estimated Funds Subrecipients February 2017 Storms $22,642,093 16
November 2018 California Wildfires $150,000,000 106
Mid-February 2019 Storms, $7,730,527 7 Flooding, Landslide, and Mudslides Late February 2019 Storms, $7,895,795 13 Flooding, Landslide, and Mudslides COVID-19 $1,000,000,000 702 2019 Post Fire Program $1,817,728 6 2020 Post Fire Program $16,371,706 30 2019 Pre-Disaster Mitigation $5,675,711 14 Program 2019 Flood Mitigation Assistance $1,532,613 3 Program 2020 BRIC Program $447,000,000 63 2020 Flood Mitigation Assistance $160,000,000 5 Program August 2020 Wildfires $71,000,000 47 September 2020 Wildfires $50,000,000 33 Total $1,842,100,829 1,287
The Hazard Mitigation Section leadership, including the Support Unit, ensures that the staff within the Section have the resources and guidance necessary to manage the increasing workload in this critical area, and to maintain enhanced status. Special projects, like the Statewide Wildfire Home Hardening Program, need to be addressed to expand capabilities for successful implementation of all hazard mitigation programs. The home hardening project will be the first step in demonstrating State-mandated progress in line with Assembly Bill 38 (Chapter 391, Statutes of 2019), which directed Cal OES and Cal FIRE to create a Joint Powers Authority to facilitate a Statewide Ignition Resistant Construction program. Other critical special projects to continue to build mitigation capabilities include creating partnerships with other agencies and across jurisdictions, enhancing mitigation planning and implementation, and performing detailed analyses of past disaster funding and future risk to guide hazard mitigation investment decisions. Currently, staff from Hazard Mitigation Assistance and Hazard Mitigation Planning are assigned these special projects, in addition to their already elevated grants or planning responsibilities and deployments for disaster response and recovery. Consequently, special project assignments impede the completion of critical functions such as grant management or hazard mitigation planning that impact the State’s enhanced status. Furthermore, these projects become secondary responsibilities, and it is impossible for staff to provide the in-depth work necessary to implement them to their full potential. Analysis of Problem
The new Special Projects Unit will provide critical support for the development and implementation of the Home Hardening Program. The will also manage other special projects supporting other State efforts like the Forest Management Task Force, Sea-Level Rise Working Groups, and Office of Planning and Research Mitigation Pipeline. The Special Projects Unit will consist of one Staff Services Manager I and three Associate Governmental Program Analysts (AGPAs). Hazard Mitigation Assistance Branch Branch Manager; Hazard Mitigation Grants Division, including Support, Southern, Inland, and Coastal; and Quality Assurance, including Support Mitigation Assessment, and Mitigation Administration Perm 3-Year TH to New Funded Perm
11 14 9 2
The Hazard Mitigation Assistance Branch provides subject matter expertise to administer the HMGP, HMGP Post Fire, PDM, FMA, and BRIC grant programs. The Branch establishes mitigation priorities and assists local governments and other eligible subrecipients in obtaining funding to develop Local Hazard Mitigation Plans (LHMPs) and implement mitigation activities to reduce risk from natural hazards and to increase community resiliency. The ability of the State to perform these functions in a timely and compressive manner is a metric critical to maintaining enhanced status and thus bringing an extra five percent of the cost of each disaster to California to support resilience efforts. The FMA, PDM, and BRIC programs are annual programs appropriated by Congress, but HMGP and HMGP Post Fire grant opportunities become available following a disaster declaration. Because of the recent increase in disaster events, the Branch is responsible for administering considerably more funds as reflected in Figure 4 below, resulting in a substantial increase in the volume of community outreach, technical assistance, grant review, and monitoring obligations. Analysis of Problem
Figure 6: HMGP Funding Available for California Disasters
Figure 4 Table: HMGP Funding Available for California Disasters Fiscal Year Funding Available (in Millions)
FY 11 $23.8 M
FY 12 $0
FY 13 $0
FY 14 $6.5 M
FY 15 $7.8 M
FY 16 $64.2 M
FY 17 $144.6 M
FY 18 $343.3 M
FY 19 $426.2 M
FY 20 $18.6 M
FY 21 $81.0 M
The grant solicitation, review, and monitoring processes for all pre- and post-disaster HMA grants, including BRIC, FMA, and HMGP, are labor intensive and require a high degree of programmatic scrutiny, technical expertise, financial monitoring, and engagement with the sub- applicant. Administration of these programs includes outreach, Notice of Interest (NOI) review and adjudication, application development and review, and application data submission. Upon approval, effective and compliant HMA grant administration requires site visits, monitoring Analysis of Problem and reporting, process changes and correspondence, and closeout. HMA grants are active for up to 36 months but can extend beyond that timeframe with approved time extensions. Due to COVID-19, HMA has approved 59 project time extensions, which will extend the period under which HMA staff will actively monitor these grants and engage with the grant subrecipients. HMA Branch currently administers 305 active grants. There are currently 127 in FEMA review that will become active grants upon FEMA approval. Cal OES HMA staff provide a high degree of accuracy with 97.5 percent of grants recommended to FEMA becoming approved, active grants. The Branch solicits proposals and provides technical assistance to develop complete sub- applications for cost-effective projects. The solicitation and review of grant proposals and sub- applications, along with the delivery of technical assistance, accounts for a significant amount of the Branch’s workload. For Hazard Mitigation Assistance, the dramatic growth in available funding and thus grants to review, award, and monitor is the key driver for our need for more staff. The grants process includes extensive technical assistance to sub-subrecipients, review of Notices of Interest and then review of the grants themselves. Following the award of a grant to a sub-applicant, HMA monitors the grants throughout the duration of the projects, which may take many years and is labor intensive. HMA then aims to perform rigorous analysis of the projects that are impacted by future disasters to determine whether the mitigation actions were successful in limiting loss of life and property. Since 2017, HMA staff have reviewed and adjudicated more than 2,850 NOIs. Depending on the complexity of the proposal, an NOI review requires 15-45 minutes of staff time, sometimes more; an investment of approximate average of 1,425 hours. Upon approval of the NOI, subrecipients are invited to submit a full application including all relative programmatic and technical details for consideration of recommendation to FEMA for funding. HMA staff provide substantial technical assistance during application development to ensure the projects are eligible and will achieve their intended mitigation result. Since 2017, HMA staff have reviewed more than 1,000 applications. Applications are often submitted lacking enough detail to determine technical feasibility for the program and require a great deal of coordination with the applicant to acquire additional information for Cal OES to make a complete eligibility and compliance determination. A single application review requires approximately 40 hours of staff time; a total of at least 40,000 hours in the same time frame. The number of applications reviewed by the Branch doubled between 2016-17 and 2019-20. Table 8: Grant Applications Reviewed and Awarded by HMA Since 2016/17
State FY 16/17 17/18 18/19 19/20 20/21 Applications Reviewed 0 174 431 351 88* New Projects Awarded 29 48 50 168 63**
Note regarding Table 7, Grant Applications Reviewed and Awarded by HMA Since 2016/17. *Regarding Applications Reviewed for 20/21, 2 additional application periods close this Spring. **Regarding New Projects Awarded for 20/21, 157 projects currently in FEMA review. Once projects are selected for recommendation to FEMA, they must be entered into FEMA’s database, National Emergency Management Information System (NEMIS). This requires staff to manually enter every detail of each application into the database for electronic submission. More complex projects require a greater level of detail be entered. An elevation project that includes multiple properties requires staff to enter details about each individual property and requires significantly more time. On average, NEMIS entry requires eight hours per project. HMA Analysis of Problem staff have entered more than 400 applications in to NEMIS since 2017, an investment of 3,200 hours. After a grant is awarded, the Branch monitors the subrecipient throughout the life of the grant, from award to closeout. This includes at least three site visits to each project grant, quarterly reporting, serving as a conduit for process change requests, time extension requests, and scope of work and budget modifications. Effective management of an HMA grant requires approximately 34 hours per grant. Based on current active grants, this amounts to 14,688 hours of staff time. Because of the length of some of the projects, these responsibilities can last for many years for every grant, so the burden of grant monitoring is cumulative. The Branch is responsible for evaluating the success of the mitigation projects after the projects are completed to determine whether they were effective at reducing loss of life and property when tested by a disaster. This process involves extensive data collection and analysis. In the past four years, California has received 11 major disaster declarations, each resulting in additional HMGP funding and a unique cycle of grant solicitation, review, and development, to be administered by the Branch. The annual programs of HMGP Post Fire, PDM, FMA, and BRIC contribute another three annual funding cycles per year which results in multiple overlapping workloads competing for staff time. Table 10 below identifies the anticipated funds to be managed by HMA staff in the 2021-22, illustrating the magnitude of additional work the staff will manage.
Analysis of Problem
Table 9: HMGP Funding Available for California Disasters
Disaster State FY Funding September 2020 Wildfires 20/21 TBD August 2020 Wildfires 20/21 $71,000,000 Saddle Ridge Fire 19/20 $16,371,706 Late February 2019 Storms, Flooding, Landslide, and 18/19 $7,895,795 Mudslides Mid-February 2019 Storms, Flooding, Landslide, and 18/19 $7,730,527 Mudslides Camp Fire 18/19 $1,817,728 November 2018 California Wildfires 18/19 $318,145,901 Summer 2018 California Wildfires and High Winds 18/19 $40,492,823 December 2017 California Wildfires & Debris Flows 17/18 $56,578,663 Wall Fire 17/18 $18,133,664 October 2017 California Wildfires 17/18 $246,289,689 February 2017 Storms 16/17 $87,468,432 Late January 2017 Storms 16/17 $10,136,842 January 2017 Storms 16/17 $22,097,355 Valley & Butte Fires 15/16 $59,045,860
The Branch has further been tasked with special projects such as the development of the legally mandated Home Hardening Program and has supported Recovery efforts in the JFO and LACs. The State’s ability to effectively administer increased hazard mitigation funding is a key metric in maintaining the State’s enhanced status. California previously lost over $79 million in federal mitigation funding for failing to meet the metrics under the Enhanced State Plan requirements, including the timely monitoring of grant applications. As the frequency of disasters and thus hazard mitigation funding continues to increase, the Hazard Mitigation Assistance Branch requests two additional staff members to support these critical functions. Specifically, the Branch requests one AGPA and one Staff Service Analyst.
Analysis of Problem
Hazard Mitigation Planning Division Division Manager and Support Unit, Local Hazard Mitigation Planning Unit, and State Hazard Mitigation Planning Unit Perm 3-Year TH to New Funded Perm
10 0 0 3
The Units within the Hazard Mitigation Planning Division are responsible for coordinating California’s comprehensive mitigation program, including development, implementation, and maintenance of the State Hazard Mitigation Plan (SHMP), which is what allows California to receive mitigation funding. Additional staffing is needed to support the increased number LHMPs being submitted to ensure timely review and comment within the 45-day review timeframe. Additionally, these positions are needed to meet the requirements for training and technical assistance, program administration and plan integration in accordance with the requirements for Local Mitigation Planning in the Enhanced SHMP elements. In order to be eligible for mitigation funds, California must have a FEMA-approved SHMP. Additionally, local jurisdictions must have LHMPs to access the funds obligated to the state. As California currently has an Enhanced Status for the SHMP, California is eligible for hazard mitigation funding at a rate of 20 percent for the estimated total cost of disaster assistance not to exceed $35.3 billion. There are an estimated 1,287 potential subrecipients for mitigation funding in California. . These subrecipients are only eligible if they maintain an approved LHMP. Without appropriate staffing in the Local Mitigation Planning Unit to support the development, technical assistance, and review of LHMPs, jurisdictions would lose the opportunity to be awarded these funds. Local Hazard Mitigation Planning is a critical component to sustaining and improving mitigation planning capabilities and ensuring California retains the Enhanced Status for the SHMP. Currently, the Local Mitigation Planning Unit lacks the analytical support necessary for program administration, plan reviews, local government training and technical assistance, program outreach and integration, progress tracking, and project management support. In addition, due to the dramatic increase in disaster declarations and the increased importance being placed on Hazard Mitigation Planning through State legislative requirements, it is imperative that the Local Mitigation Planning Unit increase staffing to meet the demands of the workload. Specifically, two additional Emergency Services Coordinator positions and one AGPA position are needed to continue compliance with the Local Mitigation Planning requirements and the analytics associated with the maintenance of California’s Enhanced SHMP. Since 2016, California has seen a dramatic increase in the number of LHMPs being submitted by local governments and special districts throughout the State. There are currently 136 active local mitigation planning grants in the State of California. Over half of these planning grants are multi-jurisdictional planning grants, meaning that multiple jurisdictions are participating in the larger plan and each annex requires a separate technical review and communication with separate planning contacts. For example, the 2020 Kern County LHMP included 63 participating jurisdictions in addition to Kern County. This required 64 separate reviews by plan reviewers, each one requiring a separate review tool, vulnerability analysis, risk assessment, and mitigation capability and implementation assessment. In the cases where revisions were needed, separate technical assistance and outreach efforts were also required to each participating annex and revisions were reviewed in accordance with the County base LHMP. In essence, reviewing this one multijurisdictional plan is similar to reviewing 64 plans. In order to meet the 45-day review Analysis of Problem timeframe, as well as support these jurisdictions, additional staffing is needed. If additional staffing is not approved, it would directly impact the ability of local California communities to be able to apply for mitigation grant-funded projects that could ultimately reduce their future losses during a disaster. In addition, as a SHMP element and tied directly to the State’s Enhanced Status, the Local Mitigation Planning Unit is required to provide training and technical assistance before, during, and after the completion of the LHMP, as well as provide guidance for the LHMPs to be integrated with other local, State, and federal planning mechanisms and legislative requirements. Failure to provide the administration of these tasks could result in the loss of grant funding, as was seen when California lost over $79 million in federal mitigation funding for failing to meet the metrics under the Enhanced State Plan requirements. Given that the Local Hazard Mitigation Planning cycle is in a continual five-year renewal cycle, these additional positions would allow the continued support of the planning process during every phase of development and implementation and would allow coverage to ensure deadlines are met and communication, feedback, and analysis are continually provided to support local jurisdictions in becoming more disaster resilient. Support Administration, Human Resources, Information Technology, and other support areas 3-Year TH to New Funded Perm 30 1 4
The increase in Recovery projects and complexity of reporting systems results in an increase in invoices for payment, purchases to support programmatic staff, audit requests and internal audit reviews, legal inquiries, technology support, recruitment requests, and employment inquiries. Adequate resources are needed to address these activities to ensure the program can run smoothly from cradle to grave. These resources are supported within distributed administration that is applied to all programmatic positions within the agency. Without these resources, Cal OES would be unable to ensure compliance with the prompt payment act, which could result in penalties and fines. Additionally, the Recovery program would not have the necessary support to ensure adequate tracking of expenditures, dedicated focus for position and recruitment support, and legal expertise to provide necessary guidance regarding the complexities of Recovery projects.