Bad News for Port Security Grant Holders

The DHS has kicked in the SAM system and every potential grant applicant and current grant beneficiary must start from scratch to register and qualify.

This is different from the ND Grants registration.

Meanwhile, the DHS has informed Congress all $1.54 available for ND Grants will be distributed among the 16 former non-disaster categories based on a risk assessment AND a definition of the National Preparedness Goals that was published in 2011 and has not been updated since.

No money will be granted to any entity that does not apply based on the NPG. And FEMA hopes to write the new compliance guidelines soon, except for the sequester.

Go to News and Events for full details.

Get ready for the new ND Grants regime

Dear FEMA Grantees,

All GMS and ProTrac data has been successfully migrated to the ND Grants system and the system is now available for all users to access. The user access rights and the ND Grants data prior to the migration have not been impacted.

To access your newly migrated data, the following actions need to be completed by the user who will be the Organization Administrator in ND Grants system:

1.       Log in to the ND Grants System or request access if you are not a current user

2.       Request access to newly created organizations

§  Please note that we have created NEW organizations based on the Vendor Name in GMS or ProTrac system. You will need to request access to this Organization in ND Grants system. Please DO NOT create a new Organization in the system to access your migrated GMS/ProTrac records.

§  If you are current ND Grants users, you will still need to request access to the NEW Organizations created to access your GMS or ProTrac data. The current ND Grants Organization you belong to will only allow you to access your FY 2011/2012 ND Grants data.

3.       Your FEMA Program Manager will review and approve access request

4.       Once approved for Organization access, update your role as the Authorizing Official

5.       Submit Authorizing Official amendment

If you do not have the pdf from DHS that lists step by step guidance on how to complete the actions above contact us at NDGrants.com.

DHS promises it will be providing online trainings and will release the training schedules later this week through ASKCSID. or maybe during Christmas week.

Please continue to monitor messages from ASKCSID regarding data migration to ND Grants.  If you have any questions in the meantime, please contact your Program Manager or the ND Grants Help Desk at ndgrants@fema.gov or 1-800-865-4076.

Sincerely,

The ND Grants Team

No IT is NOT YOU! Non-Disaster Grants Management System (ND Grants) is unavailable November 29, 2012 to December 10, 2012

Dear Grantees,

This email serves as reminder that ND Grants continues to be unavailable until Monday, December 10, 2012. There is currently a data migration project underway that will transfer FEMA grant awards from the Grants Management System (GMS) into ND Grants.

DHS claims you will regain access to ND Grants on December 10th at 8 A.M EST.

Any updates and notification when ND Grants is available will continue to be sent from ASKCSID.  If you have any questions in the meantime, please contact your Program Manager or the ND Grants Help Desk at ndgrants@fema.dhs.gov or 1-800-865-4076.

Sincerely,

The ND Grants Team

FEMA Announces 2012 Individual and Community Preparedness Award Winners

WASHINGTON – The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) today announced the recipients of the 2012 Individual and Community Preparedness Awards. These Awards recognize the innovative practices and achievements of individuals, Citizen Corps Councils, and non-profit, faith-based, and private sector organizations working throughout the nation to make our communities safer, stronger, and better prepared to manage any disaster or emergency event.

“It has been shown time and time again that after a disaster, the very first responders are our neighbors,” said FEMA Administrator Craig Fugate. “The award recipients promote preparedness across America’s communities – the bedrock of our national resiliency. I commend each and every one of the awardees for their service and innovation. They serve as a model for communities everywhere.”

Each applicant demonstrated their ability to engage the Whole Community through partnerships, achievements, and activities that took place from January 2011 to June 2012. For example, the American Red Cross Gateway to the Golden State Region chapter trained more than 16,000 individuals in lifesaving skills, such as disaster preparedness, CPR, and basic first aid, and developed a cadre of more than 200 bilingual volunteers.  The Texas State Citizen Corps Program trained Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) volunteers who were integrated into the response to the Bastrop Complex Fire last fall and North Texas tornadoes earlier this year.

Other awardees participated in emergency planning activities and established creative methods to address the needs of their communities. For example, North Dakota State University developed two Smartphone applications, one to address the needs of individuals and families affected by local flooding and one with information for residents stranded during a winter storm.

The Second Annual John D. Solomon Preparedness Award is being  presented to Florida’s Be Ready Alliance Coordinating for Emergencies (BRACE)  for collaborative work as a team of nearly 500 disaster preparedness and response organizations, engaging in efforts that reach the business community, children and youth, under-served populations, faith-based organizations, first responders, and individuals with access and functional needs, and more. The John D. Solomon Preparedness Award is named for the late creator of the groundbreaking blog, In Case of Emergency, Read Blog: A Citizen’s Eye View Of Public Preparedness. John’s body of work was striking in its reporting, analysis, engagement and impact, in preparing the public, informing professionals, and effecting change in the public and private sectors. Administrator Fugate once stated that he “set the standard for what it meant to be part of our nation's emergency management team.”

All winners will be invited, as FEMA’s honored guests, to a community roundtable event in Washington, D.C. During the roundtable the honorees will share their innovative and successful approaches to community preparedness with emergency management leadership. 

FEMA congratulates the following awardees:

Outstanding State Citizen Corps Council Initiatives

 ·         Texas Citizen Corps (TX) 

Outstanding Local Citizen Corps Council Initiatives

 ·         New York City Citizen Corps Council (NY)

Outstanding Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) Initiatives

·         CERT Program and Volunteers, City of Newport Beach (CA)

Outstanding Achievement in Youth Preparedness

·         Chinatown Community Development Center (CA)

Preparing the Whole Community

·         American Red Cross Gateway to the Golden State (CA)

Promising Partnerships

·         Partners in Preparedness (NY)

Awareness to Action

·         American Red Cross of the Poconos (PA)

Innovative Use of Technology

·         North Dakota State University Agriculture Communication (ND)

Volunteer Integration

·         West Pierce County Fire and Rescue CERT Program (WA)

Community Preparedness Heroes

·         Michael Parker (CA)

·         Mohamed Ali (WA)

·         Scott Ellis (NJ)

Second Annual Recipient of the John D. Solomon Preparedness Award

·         Be Ready Alliance Coordinating for Emergencies (BRACE) (FL)

The award winners were selected by a panel of leaders representing the Whole Community, including the National Emergency Management Association, the International Association of Emergency Managers, Target, the American Red Cross and FEMA. 

For a description of the award categories, please see the Application Guide.

FEMA's mission is to support our citizens and first responders to ensure that as a nation we work together to build, sustain, and improve our capability to prepare for, protect against, respond to, recover from, and mitigate all hazards.

Coast Guard's WatchKeeper domain awareness rejected at 11 of 12 USCG districts

 By David Perera  Comment | (Fiercehomelandsecurity)

The Coast Guard is having difficulty in convincing other port security agencies to utilize WatchKeeper, the service's web-based information management and sharing system, acknowledged Rear Adm. Joseph Servidio before a Sept. 11 House panel.

"Right now, I think there's other tools and communications structures that people are using," Servidio told the House Transportation and Infrastructure subcommittee on Coast Guard and maritime transportation.

WatchKeeper is meant to fuse multiple information sources in order to give an integrated view of vessels in port areas, but port partners "have expressed mixed views" on its usefulness, notes a February 2012 Government Accountability Office report (.pdf).

During the hearing, Stephen Caldwell, GAO director of homeland security and justice issues, noted that the report found that 82 percent of those given access to WatchKeeper "had never even logged on."

"Even other federal agencies aren't participating," Caldwell added.

WatchKeeper was developed as part of an effort to build interagency operations centers. The centers are a requirement of the SAFE Port Act of 2006, but Caldwell said it's unlikely the Coast Guard will build many physical centers.

"They're not going to be a physical place where people actually gather," he said. "The next best thing is to move to a more virtual model, where you can use WatchKeeper to do that."

What GAO Found

DHS and the Coast Guard did not meet the SAFE Port Act’s requirement that IOCs be established at high-priority ports by October 2009, in part because the Coast Guard was not appropriated funds to establish the IOCs until 14 months after enactment of the law, and the definition of an IOC was evolving during this period. However, the Coast Guard plans to establish IOCs at all 35 of its sectors. According to the Coast Guard’s analysis of sector status reports, none of its sectors have achieved IOCs with full operating capability. According to the Coast Guard’s Chief of IOC Implementation, as well as its Information Sharing Executive Agent, continued support is needed from DHS to increase port-partner participation and the success of the IOC initiative. DHS has recently begun to support efforts to increase port-partner participation and further IOC implementation, such as facilitating the review of an IOC management directive. It is too early to determine, though, if and when IOCs will achieve their intended goal of sharing information and coordinating operations with port partners.

The Coast Guard has granted WatchKeeper access to port partners at 11 of the 12 sectors where it has been installed, but more than 80 percent of those port partners did not log on from July through September 2011. As of October 2011, the Coast Guard no longer collects data on port partners’ access and use of WatchKeeper. Without such data, it will be difficult for the Coast Guard to determine whether WatchKeeper is facilitating the IOC program in meeting its goals of improving information sharing and coordination of joint operations. GAO interviewed 22 port partners who were not using WatchKeeper. Of those 22, the most frequently cited reason (by 7 port partners) is that it does not help them perform their missions. The Coast Guard primarily consulted with Customs and Border Protection when developing WatchKeeper, but did not solicit input from all port partners. Without developing, documenting, and implementing a process on how it will incorporate port partners’ feedback into future WatchKeeper requirements, the Coast Guard does not have reasonable assurance that WatchKeeper will satisfy the needs of port partners and facilitate IOC goals.

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends that the Coast Guard collect data on port partners’ access and use of WatchKeeper; develop, document, and implement a process on how to incorporate port-partner input; implement requirements-development practices; and revise the cost estimate and the integrated master schedule. DHS concurred subject to the availability of funds.

SEPTEMBER 11, 2012 — Eleven years after 9/11, a GAO report finds that the U.S. has made "substantial progress" in improving maritime security.

GAO says that, 10 years after passage of the Maritime Transportation Security Act, its work has shown that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), through its component agencies, particularly the Coast Guard and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), have made substantial progress in implementing various programs that, collectively, have improved maritime security.

In general, GAO's work on maritime security programs falls under four areas:

1. security planning,
2. port facility and vessel security,
3. maritime domain awareness and information sharing, and  
4. international supply chain security.

DHS has, among other things, developed various maritime security programs and strategies and has implemented and exercised security plans.

The Coast Guard has developed Area Maritime Security Plans around the country to identify and coordinate Coast Guard procedures related to prevention, protection, and security response at domestic ports. In addition, to enhance the security of U.S. ports, the Coast Guard has implemented programs to conduct annual inspections of port facilities.

To enhance the security of vessels, both CBP and the Coast Guard receive and screen advance information on commercial vessels and their crews before they arrive at U.S. ports and prepare risk assessments based on this information.

Further, says GAO, DHS and its agencies have increased maritime domain awareness and have taken steps to better share information by improving risk management and implementing a vessel tracking system, among other things. For example, in July 2011, CBP developed the Small Vessel Reporting System to better track small boats arriving from foreign locations and deployed this system to eight field locations.

DHS and its component agencies have also taken actions to improve international supply chain security, including developing new technologies to detect contraband, implementing programs to inspect U.S.-bound cargo at foreign ports, and establishing partnerships with the trade industry community and foreign governments.

Although DHS and its components have made substantial progress, they have encountered challenges in implementing initiatives and programs to enhance maritime security since the enactment of the Maritime Security Transportation Act (MTSA) in 2002 in the areas of:

1. program management and implementation;
2. partnerships and collaboration;
3. resources, funding, and sustainability; and
4. performance measures.

Thus, although CBP designed and implemented an initiative that placed CBP staff at foreign seaports to work with host nation customs officials to identify high-risk, U.S.-bound container cargo, CBP initially did not have a strategic or workforce plan to guide its efforts.
 
The Coast Guard faced what GAO terms "collaboration challenges" when developing and implementing its information management system for enhancing information sharing with key federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies because it did not systematically solicit input from these stakeholders.

Budget and funding decisions have also affected the implementation of maritime security programs. For example, Coast Guard data indicate that some of its units are not able to meet self-imposed standards related to certain security activities--including boarding and escorting vessels.

In addition, DHS has experienced challenges in developing effective performance measures for assessing the progress of its maritime security programs. For example, the Coast Guard developed a performance measure to assess its performance in reducing maritime risk, but has faced challenges using this measure to inform decisions.

Careful with your file name attachments when reporting to SAM or ND Grants

Valid file names may only include the following UTF-8 characters: A-Z, a-z, 0-9, underscore ( _ ), hyphen (-), space( ) and period (.).

If applicants use any other characters when naming their attachment files, their applications will be rejected.

As we officially kick of National Preparedness Month, President Obama has proclaimed September to be National Preparedness Month.

NATIONAL PREPAREDNESS MONTH, 2012

BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

A PROCLAMATION

As thousands of our fellow Americans respond to and recover from the damage done by Hurricane Isaac, we are called to remember that throughout our history, emergencies and natural disasters have tested the fabric of our country. During National Preparedness Month, we renew our commitment to promoting emergency preparedness in homes, businesses, and communities nationwide, and to building an America more ready and resilient than ever before.

Each of us has an important role to play in bolstering our preparedness for disasters of all types -- from cyber incidents and acts of terrorism to tornadoes and flooding. That is why my Administration is pursuing an approach to emergency management that engages the whole community -- from Federal, State, local, and tribal governments to the private sector, nonprofits, faith-based organizations, and the general public. I encourage all Americans to visit www.Ready.gov or www.Listo.gov to learn more about the risks facing their communities, find out what they can do to prepare, and join thousands of individuals from coast to coast by becoming a member of the National Preparedness Coalition. Individuals and families can also take action by building a disaster supply kit with food, water, and essential supplies in case of emergency, and by developing and sharing an emergency plan with their loved ones.

As cities and towns across our country recover from natural disasters that have spanned historic drought to devastating wildfires and storms, we are reminded of the spirit of resilience that binds us together as one people and as one American family. This month, let us honor that spirit by standing with all those affected by recent severe weather, as well as past disasters, and by taking the steps we can to protect our loved ones and our communities before disaster strikes.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim September 2012 as National Preparedness Month. I encourage all Americans to recognize the importance of preparedness and observe this month by working together to enhance our national security, resilience, and readiness.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this thirty-first day of August, in the year of our Lord two thousand twelve, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-seventh.

BARACK OBAMA

Be heard…Email comments or suggestions to us at citizencorps@dhs.gov

---

September is National Preparedness Month. Pledge to Prepare by joining the National Preparedness Coalition now! Empower yourself and help coordinate preparedness activities for your family, neighbors and co-workers and those with whom you may study or worship.

---

 

---

This email was sent to rick@eyerdam.com using GovDelivery, on behalf of FEMA · U.S. Department of Homeland Security · Washington, DC 20472

OK you decide. Do you think DHS/FEMA might have lost the way?

Is there a grant for Zombie Apocalypse remediation? Zombie awareness?

Effective Practices in Promoting Disaster Preparedness
Thursday, September 6th
3:00 p.m. EDT

Are you ready for a “Zombie Apocalypse?” Join FEMA’s Individual and Community Preparedness Division and Ready.gov on September 6 as they present a FREE Webinar about zombie preparedness. While the walking dead may not be first on your list of local hazards, zombie preparedness messages and activities have proven to be an effective way of engaging new audiences who may not be familiar with what to do before, during, or after a disaster, and to inject a little levity into preparedness while still informing and educating people.  As director of the Center for Disease Control, Dr. Ali Khan, notes, "If you are generally well equipped to deal with a zombie apocalypse you will be prepared for a hurricane, pandemic, earthquake, or terrorist attack."

Listen as speakers introduce fun and innovative emergency preparedness activities for communities to spark some attention and get people involved before it’s too late. These activities can be planned in September, during National Preparedness Month and executed just in time for Halloween.

Featured Speakers Include:

• Center for Disease Control (CDC), which launched its Zombie Apocalypse Social Media Campaign
• Kansas Department of Emergency Management will discuss their Zombie Awareness Month, which is held each October and ideas for activities and events that you can host in your communities this fall!

Register/Log in 

Register if this is your first time joining the Community Preparedness Webinar Series.

Log in if you have already registered for this webinar, have registered for a previous webinar or if you're a HSIN.gov user.

If you have questions regarding this event, please contact citizencorps@dhs.gov

A mouthful of FedSpeak about who is really running the ND Grants program

Written testimony of Federal Emergency Management Agency Grant Programs Directorate Assistant Administrator Elizabeth Harman for a Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, Subcommittee on Federal Financial Management, Government Information, Federal Services, and International Security hearing titled “Assessing Grants Management Practices at Federal Agencies”

Release Date: July 25, 2012

Good morning Chairman Carper, Ranking Member Brown, and Members of the Subcommittee. I am Elizabeth Harman, Assistant Administrator for the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) Grant Programs Directorate (GPD). On behalf of Secretary Napolitano and Administrator Fugate, it is my pleasure to appear before you today to discuss the grants management practices of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).

FEMA fulfills its role as the principal component within DHS responsible for assisting state and local governments to prepare for, protect against, respond to, recover from, and mitigate incidents of terrorism and other all hazards events. To achieve this mission, FEMA relies on Congressional appropriations for state and local programs in emergency management and homeland security. These appropriations provide for grants, training, exercises, and other support activities to assist States, Territories, Tribal governments, local jurisdictions, as well as for-profit and non-profit organizations in furthering their preparedness missions. By providing funds, encouraging State, local and private sector collaboration, and encouraging risk-based investment planning involving the Whole Community, FEMA’s grant programs, managed and administered by GPD, have had a positive impact on the Nation’s overall preparedness and security.

Since its inception in 2007, and in accordance with the Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act (PKEMRA), GPD has consolidated business operations, systems, training, policy, oversight, and program management of all FEMA grants. GPD is comprised of three legacy organizations inclusive of the FEMA Grants Management Branch, the DHS Office of Grants and Training, Office of Grant Operations, and the Preparedness Programs Division. This consolidation created a single entity responsible for the business and program management of all FEMA grant programs. As a result of changes in GPD’s approach to grants management, GPD now successfully provides financial management and administration of 96 federal grant programs, including the programmatic and administrative management of over 19,000 open grants, totaling over $10 billion dollars in federal funding. Additionally, GPD closely collaborates with other FEMA components including the National Preparedness Directorate, the ten FEMA Regional Offices, the Office of Response and Recovery, other DHS components, and other Federal agencies to create a fully integrated, interdisciplinary system of support services for other stakeholders and partners.

GPD’s focus over the past several years has been on improving grants management and related efforts to ensure meaningful and measurable results. By stressing the importance of providing customer service for all grantees as well as for internal and external partners; by engaging State, local, and Tribal stakeholders through consistent outreach and discussion; and by ensuring transparency in the grant process, GPD enhances the Nation’s level of preparedness, resiliency, the public’s safety, and our overall ability to prepare for, protect against, respond to, recover from, and mitigate all hazards.

Over the past few years, GPD has matured as an organization, making significant improvements to its operations and focusing heavily on the development, management, and oversight of FEMA’s grant programs. These improvements include: reducing the personnel vacancy rate; realigning organizational resources and functions; enhancing the grant award and budget review process; standardizing internal operating procedures; implementing drawdown and closeout improvement initiatives; enhancing financial and programmatic monitoring activities; strengthening regional partnerships; improving the grants management infrastructure; formalizing GPD’s relationships with its internal and external partners; and enhancing stakeholder involvement with program development and administration.

Staffing

At the beginning of the third quarter of fiscal year 2010, 20 percent (37 Full Time Employees or FTEs) of GPD Headquarters’ 180 authorized positions were vacant in the Preparedness Grant Division and the Grants Operations Division. With the full support of FEMA’s senior leadership, GPD has made major strides in addressing its staffing shortfalls. Currently, GPD’s vacancy rate is 10 percent and GPD has filled 168 of its 1891 authorized positions. GPD’s staffing improvements include filling several key leadership positions such as the Deputy Assistant Administrator to GPD, the Director for Grant Operations, and the Director for the Preparedness Grants Division. The decrease in the vacancy rate has led to definitive improvements in GPD’s overall operations allowing the Directorate to improve its oversight of grantees.Between FY2010 and FY2012, the number of authorized positions increased from 180 to 189.

Organizational Realignment

In conjunction with the overall hiring initiative within GPD, the Directorate has sought to improve its overall mission effectiveness and financial and program management through a realignment of functions within the organization. To complement and support the hiring of a highly motivated and competent staff, GPD established two distinct but complementary divisions, the Grant Operations Office and Preparedness Grants Division. These GPD components serve as the financial and programmatic resources for GPD, respectively. The realignment has laid a path forward for increased coordination and communication efforts between management and staff, as well as improved collaboration between program and financial functions and responsibilities. As a result, GPD has increased overall mission performance through various grant process improvements that further support the grants management lifecycle.

Grant Award and Budget Reviews

During fiscal year 2010 and prior, GPD often experienced delays in processing grant awards and releasing funds to grantees. These delays impacted grantee performance by reducing the time available to spend grant funds and in some cases, delayed grantees from proceeding with critical projects. GPD identified delays in two principal areas. The first was the delays associated with GPD review and approval of grantees’ budgets, which were historically conducted post-award. The second delay involved the project reviews and approvals required under Federal environmental and historic preservations laws, such as the National Environmental Preservation Act (NEPA). The Directorate’s leadership identified both of these areas as opportunities for improvement.

To alleviate the burden on grantees, GPD undertook several internal reforms which resulted in major improvements and shortened both environmental and historic preservation reviews. The most significant of these included:

•Adding Environmental and Historic Preservation (EHP) staff to review EHP applications;

•Improving an EHP screening form to facilitate the application process;

•Developing a Programmatic Environmental Assessment to streamline the review of certain projects; and

•Implementing a formalized process to follow-up with grantees that need to submit additional information in order to process their application.

GPD also took major steps to shorten the budget review process, including setting goals to conduct all budget reviews prior to award. In addition, GPD created a budget review checklist designed to assist grantees by providing guidance on what information is needed for a complete and thorough budget, which served to improve consistency as well as decrease overall review time.

By providing these instructions, grantees were better informed on what materials were needed, were able to ensure that their budget information was complete, and as a result, their budgets were approved more quickly. Overall, steps instituted within GPD streamlined internal processes to make the entire budget review period less than 30 days.

Standardizing Internal Operating Procedures

The development and adoption of standard operating procedures (SOPs) is critical to the successful, long-term operation of any organization. In 2011, FEMA embarked on an effort to develop SOPs for all of its preparedness grant programs, including the Emergency Management Performance Grant Program (EMPG), the Emergency Operations Center Grant Program (EOC) and the Driver’s License Security Grant Program (DLSGP). Those SOPs are now in force and are utilized on a daily basis by both headquarters and regional grants staff. GPD recently completed similar efforts with the Homeland Security Grant Programs including the State Homeland Security Grant Program (SHSGP), the Urban Areas Security Initiative (UASI) Grant Program, Operation Stone Garden (OPSG), the Metropolitan Medical Reserve System (MMRS) Grant Program and the Citizen Corps Grant Program (CCP).

Expediting Grant Drawdowns

Another issue GPD has focused on is “drawdowns,” or the rate at which GPD’s grantees, the recipients of preparedness grant funds, spend the monies they receive.

It is important to understand that grant funds currently in the pipeline are not idle. In the vast majority of cases, work is being performed, projects are underway and capabilities are being built in accordance with the rules and guidelines under which these grants were accepted.

In those cases where funds do appear to be idle, GPD engages proactively with grantees to put funds to use. Further, based on input from grantees, DHS and FEMA undertook an effort in the fall of 2011 to evaluate ways to further streamline the grants process and put available funding to work now. In conjunction with the FY 2013 budget roll-out, GPD implemented a number of measures that provide grantees with additional flexibility to accelerate the spending of remaining FY 2007 - FY2012 DHS/ FEMA grant funds by addressing immediate needs and building core capabilities that will support preparedness in the long run, consistent with existing laws, regulations and programmatic objectives. At the same time, similar to the recent Administration effort to expedite Recovery Act funding, grantees are required to take steps to expend, draw down and close out previously awarded grant funding. Specific measures outlined in the Secretary’s February 13, 2012 Memorandum titled “Guidance to State Administrative Agencies to Expedite the Expenditure of Certain DHS/FEMA Grant Funding” included:

Support Reprioritization

•Allow grantees to apply grant balances towards more urgent priorities.

•Expand allowable expenses under the Port and Transit Security Grant Program, in accordance the SAFE Port Act and 9/11 Act, respectively.

•Allow combating violent extremism activities (CVE) outlined in the Administration’s CVE Strategy to be eligible in all grant years.

Focus on Core Capabilities

•Expand maintenance and sustainment to equipment, training, and critical resources that have previously been purchased in order to build and sustain core capabilities tied to the five mission areas of the National Preparedness Goal.

Provide Waivers

•Waive the 50 percent cap on personnel costs.

•Waive the match requirements under FY 2008 and 2009 Port Security Grant for public sector grantees and match requirements for Nonprofit Security Grant Program, the Interoperable Emergency Communications Grant Program and Regional Catastrophic Planning Grant Program.

In addition to the measures described above, State Administrative Agencies are encouraged to reduce administrative hurdles that can delay expenditure of funds, as well as decrease delays between receipt of invoices and expenditure of corresponding funds.

Specific guidance was provided as to the timeline grantees were encouraged to follow in spending awarded preparedness grant funds. Pursuant to GPD’s Information Bulletin Number 379 issued February 17, 2012, the following timeframes were encouraged.

“Subject to certain exceptions, grantees are required to take steps to expend, draw down and close out DHS/FEMA grant funding by the dates outlined below. If those funds have not been spent by the dates outlined below, DHS/ FEMA will reclaim them to the extent permitted by law.

•All FY 2007 grant funding must be spent by June 30, 2012

•All FY 2008 and 2009 grant funding must be spent by September 30, 2012

•All FY 2010 funding must be spent by September 30, 2013

•All FY 2011 and FY 2012 funding must be spent by the end date cited on the award agreement.

The periods of performance outlined above support the effort to expedite the outlay of grant funding and provide economic stimulus. Agencies should request waivers sparingly, and they will be granted only due to compelling legal, policy, or operational challenges.”

As mentioned above, there are a variety of factors contributing to unspent grant funds, several of which FEMA has addressed directly by reducing administrative requirements, streamlining the grant budget review process and simplifying the EHP Reviews. More broadly, preparedness grant programs have historically been authorized and appropriated by Congress to have up to a five year performance period. This has allowed grantees to apply for and be awarded funding, then follow their own internal processes and state/ local laws as they carry out grant-funded projects. In addition, the body of federal regulations imposed on grantees, including rules on the timing and frequency with which grant dollars can be drawn from the Treasury and pre-disbursement requirements such as environmental and historic reviews have impacted drawdown rates. State laws and regulations governing the allocation of federal grant dollars to state agencies, including those that impact procurement and hiring activities, also impact drawdowns. Often, agencies cannot enter into contracts until award or sub-awards are in hand. Once funds are in hand, contracting processes may take over a year and are subject to state/local procurement laws and local officials who approve budgets/projects and meet infrequently. Other factors that impact drawdown rates include cost share requirements, understaffed state administrative agencies due to layoffs or furloughs, and grantees unfamiliar with the federal grants process.

Managing Grant Closeouts

GPD has also evaluated ways to improve the grants management closeout process to expedite the financial and programmatic closeout of open, expired grants. As such, in January of 2011, GPD developed the Grant Closeout Task Force specifically designed to provide closeout support for FEMA’s grant programs.

To that end, GPD evaluated FEMA’s universe of open and closed grants, conducted a current state assessment of the grant closeout process, coordinated and communicated with related stakeholders on process improvements, identified improvement recommendations, and developed and implemented a closeout manual detailing each step of the process and to enhance standardization.

GPD initially focused its efforts on grants awarded in fiscal year 2005 and prior, and within the first three months, GPD effectively closed out 588 out of 611 grants resulting in $3.2 million in deobligated funding. To date, GPD has successfully closed out approximately 8,000 grants out of 14,000 dating back as far as 1997 due to the creation of the Grant Closeout Task Force. Moving forward, GPD is currently concentrating its closeout efforts on financially and programmatically closing out fiscal year 2007 grants, in conjunction with eligible fiscal year 2008 – 2010 grants.

GPD has taken a pro-active approach to ensuring all current and future grants are programmatically and financially closed in a timely manner. To sustain and maintain continued progress on this effort, GPD has implemented the following action items:

•Implemented a tracking system designed to identify grants nearing closeout within a 30 day period

•Developed a closeout guide defining roles, responsibilities, and processes for stakeholders

•Identified alternate closeout methods to address system closeout limitations

•Established weekly benchmarks based on closeout needs and priority

Financial and Programmatic Monitoring

FEMA launched a long-term solution to enhance financial and programmatic monitoring. This approach implements risk management principles to direct scarce monitoring resources to grantees and programs with the most need. As part of a multi-year process, FEMA has standardized financial and programmatic monitoring activities and expanded ongoing oversight activities to ensure early identification of issues. This methodology builds upon the established monitoring approach and will drive FEMA toward continuously advancing its grants management capability.

The fiscal year 2012 approach lays the foundation for future financial risk-based monitoring that will support FEMA’s and DHS’s risk management philosophy. We assess the monitoring needs of each grant selected for monitoring using eight key indicators:

1.Spending patterns

2.Grant dollar value

3.Grantee responsiveness

4.New FEMA grantee/grantee with new personnel

5.Number of grants managed by grantee

6.Prior financial monitoring findings

7.Program type

8.Priority areas as determined by me and my leadership team

As a result of these efforts over the past two and a half years, GPD is making significant improvements to its grant monitoring activities with the annual development and implementation of its fiscal year monitoring plans.

In fiscal year 2012, we will continue to refine this risk-based monitoring approach. GPD also will begin focusing its efforts on the development of a unified financial and programmatic monitoring plan for fiscal year 2013. This plan will leverage existing relationships and monitoring activities between GPD’s financial and programmatic divisions. The purpose of this integrated monitoring plan will be to encourage and promote the coordination of activities and communications between financial and programmatic monitoring staff, and build the foundation for robust integration in fiscal year 2014.

The development of a more closely integrated financial and programmatic monitoring approach is currently underway and identifies the following key initiatives and outcomes:

•Providing a unified source of guidance to conduct financial and programmatic monitoring activities

•Encouraging communication and coordination among financial and programmatic monitoring counterparts

•Supporting informed decision making through the use of a risk-based approach

Regional Coordination Efforts

Over the past two and a half years, GPD has made significant strides in strengthening capacity in FEMA’s regional offices to play a more constructive role in managing grants. Sparked by the new strategic direction set forth by FEMAGPD recognized the importance of increased regional grants collaboration and management as an integral step towards building a robust grants management structure across FEMA. To manage and facilitate this new way forward, GPD established the Regional Coordination and Oversight Branch to provide oversight over the business grants management and program implementation efforts for all FEMA grant programs, such as financial monitoring and compliance oversight and cash analysis. Leveraging this resource, GPD has effectively managed processes and procedures to promote accountability, improved management controls over grants management business functions, and streamlined and standardized monitoring and cash analysis activities.

GPD has developed and implemented a series of initiatives to improve our coordination and communication efforts across FEMA. The most significant of which include the following:

•Transferring full grants management responsibility to the regional offices for six FEMA preparedness grant programs with associated guidance, tools, and operating procedures

•Conducting onsite regional grant business management assessment visits with all ten FEMA regional offices to collect feedback and observations on FEMA operations

•Developing annual financial monitoring plans through various working groups and discussions

•Hosting and facilitating monthly conference calls to discuss financial and programmatic grant related issues and topics

•Implementing a formalized communications and outreach plan to improve customer service to regional partners

Due to the diversity of FEMA’s grant programs and the importance of establishing consistencies and financial controls, it remains a critical priority for GPD to monitor the process of regional grants management efforts. Through ongoing outreach activities, including discussions with FEMA Regional Administrators, GPD continues to explore new opportunities for future improvements and collaboration efforts.

Enhancing Infrastructure

To further enhance the grants management infrastructure of FEMA’s preparedness grant programs, GPD developed and implemented the Non-Disaster Grants Management System (ND Grants). This system, which is used to manage approximately 20 preparedness grant programs, began accepting grant applications in fiscal year 2011. GPD has identified system improvements and capabilities that support the consolidation for all of FEMA’s non-disaster grant programs into one system that covers the entire grants management lifecycle. Expansion of ND Grants and its improved functionality will provide FEMA with a flexible system that can quickly adapt to changing business needs, reporting requirements, and performance metrics. Once fully deployed, ND Grants will accomplish the following:

•Support the entire grants management life cycle from application to closeout

•Provide real time acknowledgement of information as well as notify FEMA employees and grantees of pending actions

•Offer integrated reporting that effectively measures award outlays and demonstrates how awards impact the overall preparedness of the nation

•Provide a user friendly interface that clearly highlights pending actions to be completed

•Automate and standardize processes to manage the entire grants management lifecycle

•Collect grant data in a structured, searchable format allowing data manipulation and customization for preparation, analysis, and reporting

•Complete the automation of FEMA’s Mitigation Directorate’s grants

Formalizing Relationships with Federal Agency Partners

GPD has the programmatic, financial and fiduciary responsibility for the management and oversight of FEMA’s grant programs. Working in partnership with a number of Federal agencies, GPD draws on those agencies’ expertise and resources in the development and administration of individual Homeland Security Grant Programs. For example, GPD has partnered with the U.S. Coast Guard in the development and administration of PSGP. Similarly, it has partnered with the Transportation Security Administration in the development and administration of TSGP and with Customs and Border Protection in the development and administration of OPSG. Furthermore, GPD participates in the Emergency Communications Preparedness Center (ECPC) Grants Focus Group (GFG), which is an interagency coordinating body of Federal grants administrators whose programs support emergency communications. Through the GFG, GPD has worked with its Federal partners to develop common guidance for these programs, encouraging alignment of programs to national goals, objectives, and priorities, as well as technical standards that promote interoperability.

In order to formalize GPD’s relationships with its partner agencies and ensure ongoing stability, GPD has eight (8) MOUs in place with the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Policy, Screening Coordination Office, the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Infrastructure Protection, the Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of Transportation, the Transportation Security Administration, the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Health Affairs, FEMA’s Office of Environmental Planning and Historic Preservation, and the Department of Commerce’s National Telecommunication and Information Administration.

Engaging Stakeholders

GPD’s partners in the development and administration of the preparedness grant programs are the grantees, and more broadly the stakeholder community. These are the Nation’s governors, mayors, tribal leaders, emergency managers, port and transit stakeholders, the law enforcement and fire service communities, and others connected to the Nation’s overall preparedness and ability to respond to threats and hazards and who receive homeland security grant funds.

Recognizing that its success is linked to the success of its grantees, GPD has prioritized efforts to reach out to the stakeholder community, listen to their concerns and be responsive to their needs. GPD has actively sought opportunities to address and engage stakeholders at conferences and other formal meetings including, but not limited to, the National Emergency Management Association (NEMA), the International Association of Emergency Managers (IAEM), the National Conference of Mayors, the National Association of Counties, the Urban Areas Security Initiative (UASI) Conference, and the Emergency Communications Planning Consortium (ECPC). GPD leadership meet regularly with State and local leaders including governors, mayors, State and local legislators, representatives of transit and port systems as well as others from the emergency response community. In addition, GPD is making use of emerging technologies to solicit comments and feedback from the public and stakeholders regarding the development of the proposed fiscal year 2013 National Preparedness Grant Program.

The FY 2013 National Preparedness Grant Program

As we look ahead, and in order to address evolving threats and make the most of limited resources, the Administration proposed a new vision for homeland security grants in the FY 2013 President’s budget. The Administration’s proposal focuses on building and sustaining core capabilities associated with the five mission areas within the National Preparedness Goal (NPG), helping to elevate nationwide preparedness.

This proposal reflects the many lessons we have learned in grants management and execution over the past ten years. Using a competitive, risk-based model, the proposal envisions a comprehensive process to assess gaps, identify and prioritize deployable capabilities, limit periods of performance to put funding to work quickly, and require grantees to regularly report progress in the acquisition and development of these capabilities. The Administration looks forward to working with Congress and stakeholders on this proposal to enable all levels of government to build and sustain, in a collaborative way, the core capabilities necessary to prepare for incidents that pose the greatest risk to the security of the Nation.

Conclusion

Over the last several years, FEMA has strived to improve how preparedness grants are managed and administered fiscally and programmatically. I believe we have made significant improvements in this area and will continue to do so moving forward.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for providing me this opportunity to appear before you today to discuss these important issues. I look forward to answering any questions you or other members of the Committee may have.

This page was last reviewed/modified on July 25, 2012.

FY 2012 PSGP Allocations

http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=6178/

CA

Los Angeles-Long Beach

City of Long Beach, Fire Department $527,534

City of Los Angeles Harbor Department $6,900,000

International Transportation Service $320,000

Long Beach Container, Inc. $3,335,988

Long Beach Police Department $73,500

Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department $450,000

Los Angeles Police Department $784,119

Port of Long Beach $2,880,135

Seaside Transportation Services, LLC $150,000

TraPac, Inc. $1,005,155

San Francisco Bay

Alameda County Sheriff's Office $975,000

City of Alameda Fire Department $375,000

City of Richmond Police Department $596,226

City of South San Francisco Fire Department $24,500

Port of Oakland $3,543,750

Port of Stockton $1,736,612

Ports America Outer Harbor Terminal $1,282,000

Redwood City Fire Department $30,690

Richmond Fire Department $466,578

Solano County Sheriff's office $316,370

LA New Orleans

City of New Orleans $848,291

Lower Mississippi River Port Wide Strategic

Security Council $4,975,631

St. Charles Parish Sheriff's Office $135,000

NJ/PA/DE Delaware Bay

City of Chester $780,000

City of Philadelphia- Police $510,000

Delaware City Refining Company LLC $630,000

Delaware State Police $509,966

New Jersey Department of Environmental

Protection $222,435

Paulsboro Refining Company LLC $630,000

NY/NJ New York/New Jersey

Bayonne Fire Department $25,000

City of Elizabeth Police Department $97,760

City of Linden Fire Department $23,850

Global Terminal - Jersey City $1,140,820

Hoboken Fire Department $24,824

Jersey City Dept. of Fire and Emergency Services $350,000

Jersey City Police Department $41,250

Kearny Fire Department (Town of Kearny, NJ) $21,800

New York City Department of Transportation $1,350,000

New York City Fire Department $1,001,891

B-12

Group State Port Area Entity Allocation

I

NY/NJ New York/New Jersey

New York City Police Department $5,457,085

New York Cruise Lines $37,582

NYC Department of Environmental Protection $1,425,072

NYS Division of Military and Naval Affairs $39,143

Port Imperial Ferry Corp. $120,000

Sprague Mt. Vernon $21,000

Sunoco Logistics Partners - Newark NJ $70,000

The Borough of Edgewater $382,453

Union County Hazmat $93,750

Union County Police $24,000

TX Houston-Galveston

Board of Trustees of the Galveston Wharves $93,750

City of Baytown $48,750

City of Houston, Mayor's Office of Public Safety &

Homeland Security $1,689,415

City of Pasadena, Texas $3,292,500

Houston Ship Channel Security District $750,000

Industrial Terminals, L.P. $92,000

NuStar Energy, L.P. $198,042

Port of Houston Authority $1,106,512

Port of Texas City Security Council, Inc. $363,327

WA Puget Sound

City of Port Angeles $50,000

Marine Exchange of Puget Sound $538,125

Port of Everett $55,725

Port of Olympia $299,028

San Juan County Sheriff's Office $785,000

Seattle Fire Department $1,522,100

Tulalip Tribes $637,500

Washington State Department of Transportation -

Ferries Division $473,770

Washington State Patrol $166,525

Group I Total $58,923,829

II

CA San Diego San Diego Unified Port District $153,750

San Diego Unified Port District Harbor Police $249,900

CT Long Island Sound

City of Bridgeport $269,607

City of New Haven $520,000

City of Stamford $221,891

Connecticut State Police $529,000

Cross Sound Ferry Services, Inc. $24,974

Greenwich Police Department $45,000

Groton Town Police Department $25,000

JDZ Marine LLC dba TowBoatUS Mystic $24,970

Milford Police Department $375,000

B-13

Group State Port Area Entity Allocation

II

CT Long Island Sound Norwich CT Police Department $61,152

Town of Waterford $124,208

FL

Jacksonville Jacksonville Port Authority $219,375

Miami

5th Street Marina LLC $22,690

Miami-Dade County $842,000

Miami-Dade County, Fire Rescue Department $180,000

Seaboard Marine $763,500

Tampa Bay

City of Tampa Police Department $126,735

Manatee County Port Authority $25,000

Tampa Fire Rescue $127,902

Tampa Port Authority $814,988

GA Savannah Georgia Ports Authority $480,788

HI Honolulu Hawaii Department of Defense $3,891,500

IN/IL Southern Tip of Lake

Michigan

Illinois State Police Special Operations Command -

North (Chicago) $163,500

Indiana Department of Natural Resources $115,438

Village of Romeoville $56,250

Will County Sheriff's Office $787,500

KY Louisville Indiana State Police $222,995

Jeffersonville Fire Department $272,607

LA Lake Charles PPG Industries Inc. $2,350,000

MA Boston

Beverly Fire Department $262,500

Massachusetts Environmental Police $1,322,341

Massachusetts Port Authority $1,113,941

Sprague Quincy $18,525

Sprague TRT $23,644

Sunoco Logistics Partners - Boston $170,000

The City of Quincy - Police Department $24,900

Town of Marshfield $290,006

MD Baltimore

AMPORTS, INC. $25,000

Maryland Department of State Police $611,475

Maryland Dept. of Transportation - MPA $299,376

MN Minneapolis-St. Paul St. Paul, MN Emergency Management $314,910

MO Kansas City Board of Police Commissioners $212,400

Missouri State Highway Patrol $24,000

MO/IL St. Louis City of Madison $232,000

Illinois State Police Special Operations Command $32,750

B-14

Group State Port Area Entity Allocation

II

NY Buffalo

City of Tonawanda $139,500

County of Erie $135,935

NOCO Energy Corp. $250,000

SC Charleston

Charleston County Government $120,000

City of Charleston Fire Department $561,750

City of Charleston Police Department $47,458

Mount Pleasant Fire Department $202,500

South Carolina State Ports Authority $225,000

TN Memphis City of Memphis - Division of Police Services $24,000

TX

Corpus Christi City of Corpus Christi $22,268

Refinery Terminal Fire Company $134,936

Sabine-Neches River

City of Beaumont $1,452,525

Jefferson County, Texas $121,500

Nederland Fire Rescue $2,100,169

Port Neches Police Department $1,900,280

Port of Beaumont Navigation District $58,176

Port of Port Arthur Navigation District $322,998

South East Texas Regional Planning Commission $349,287

VA Hampton Roads

Accurate Marine Environmental, Inc. $100,000

Chesapeake Police Department $54,000

City of Newport News $33,750

City of Newport News Police Department $65,625

City of Suffolk, Virginia $55,500

James City County Police Department $30,964

Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries $225,000

Virginia Port Authority $1,020,600

WA/OR/ID Columbia-Snake River System Oregon State Police $320,000

United Grain Corporation $111,291

Group II Total $29,250,000

III

AL Guntersville City Of Guntersville DBA Police Department $533,267

CA Sacramento County of Sacramento $24,125

FL Pensacola City of Niceville $240,937

GA Brunswick Logistec USA, Inc. $19,465

IL Peoria Illinois State Police Special Operations Command $81,263

IN Mount Vernon Indiana Department of Natural Resources $73,401

Indiana State Police $24,540

LA Port Fourchon/The LOOP Greater Lafourche Port Commission $707,771

MI

Monroe Virtual Emergency Services $24,795

Muskegon County of Muskegon $305,000

Port Huron City of Port Huron Fire Department $206,250

County of St. Clair $333,750

MS Gulfport Gulfport Fire Department $373,575

B-15

Group State Port Area Entity Allocation

III

NY Albany Sprague Albany $13,500

OH

Cleveland

City of Cleveland - Public Safety $155,102

Ohio Department of Natural Resources, Dam

Safety $8,400

Lorain Lorain County Sheriff's Office $103,500

OK Tulsa, Port of Catoosa Tulsa Port Authority $380,000

PR Ponce Autonomous Municipality of Ponce $32,508

TX Brownsville Brownsville Navigation District $372,964

VA Richmond City of Richmond, Virginia $135,185

WI Milwaukee City of Milwaukee $301,873

Group III Total $4,451,171

All Other

Port

Areas

AK

Juneau Allen Marine Inc. $38,265

Seward Alaska Railroad Corporation $60,300

AL Decatur Ascend Performance Materials $150,000

AR Blytheville and Osceola Mississippi County Sheriff Department $300,562

CT

Norwalk City of Norwalk $128,220

City of Norwalk Police Department $15,479

Stonington Stonington Police Department $375,000

Trumbull Town of Trumbull $69,841

DC/MD/VA National Capital Region City of Alexandria $379,193

Maryland Department of Natural Resources $127,046

FL Key West City of Key West Port $90,000

GU Saipan Commonwealth Ports Authority $361,064

IL/IA Quad Cities Davenport Fire Department $12,000

Illinois State Police Special Operations Command $24,000

IN/KY Evansville City of Evansville $131,775

Indiana State Police $24,765

KY/IL Paducah McCracken County $67,500

Metropolis Fire Department $145,910

MA

Barnstable Town of Barnstable Harbormaster $90,000

Duxbury Duxbury Harbormaster Department $139,346

Falmouth Town of Falmouth, MA $25,000

New Bedford Port of New Bedford $285,000

Oak Bluffs Town of Oak Bluffs Emergency Management

Department $45,600

Woods Hole Woods Hole, Martha's Vineyard and Nantucket

Steamship Authority $219,688

ME Maine Coast Maine Department of Marine Resources $25,000

B-16

Group State Port Area Entity Allocation

All Other

Port

Areas

MI

Holland, Port Sheldon, and

Grand Haven Ottawa County Central Dispatch Authority $21,400

Ludington City of Ludington $24,999

St. Clair Shores St Clair Shores Fire Department $10,000

Traverse City Peninsula Township $317,150

NJ Ocean City Ocean City, New Jersey Police Department $92,722

NY

Oswego

City of Oswego Fire Department $149,538

Port of Oswego Authority $24,500

Sprague Oswego $23,500

Suffolk County Suffolk County Police Department $400,219

Suffolk County Sheriff's Office $25,000

OH Sandusky Miller Boat Line $76,254

VT Lake Champlain Vermont Department of Public Safety $25,000

WA Grays Harbor Port of Grays Harbor $265,650

WI

Marinette Marinette County Emergency Management $39,485

Sturgeon Bay Sturgeon Bay Police Department $24,999

UMR Pool 5 Fountain City Police Department $24,030

All Other Port Areas Total $4,875,000

B-17

Table 8. FY 2012 TSGP Allocations

State Agency Allocation

California

Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority $2,484,254

Orange County Transportation Authority $200,000

Sacramento Regional Transit District $93,287

San Diego Metropolitan Transit System $100,000

San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission (ACE Rail) $75,000

Southern California Regional Rail Authority $150,000

District of Columbia Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority $7,789,284

Georgia Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority $2,115,315

Hawaii City and County of Honolulu Department of Transportation Services $175,000

Illinois

Chicago Transit Authority $10,149,230

Commuter Rail Division of the RTA d/b/a Metra $1,371,231

Maryland Maryland Transit Administration $3,773,540

Massachusetts Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority $6,600,000

Missouri Bi-State Development Agency $28,400

New Jersey

Delaware River Port Authority $500,000

New Jersey Transit $9,862,155

New York

Metropolitan Transportation Authority $27,838,954

New York City Department of Transportation $5,200,000

Port Authority of New York and New Jersey $5,550,000

North Carolina City of Charlotte (Charlotte Area Transit System) CATS $116,072

Ohio Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority $30,438

Oregon Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District of Oregon (TriMet) $286,856

Pennsylvania

Port Authority of Allegheny County $233,584

Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (SEPTA) $2,402,400

Texas Metropolitan Transit Authority of Harris County Texas $25,000

Washington Pierce Transit $350,000

Total $87,500,000

DHS Announces More Than $1.3 Billion in Fiscal Year (FY) 2012 Preparedness Grant Awards

Release Date: June 29, 2012

For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
Contact: 202-282-8010

WASHINGTON—Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano today announced the final allocations for seven FY 2012 Preparedness Grant programs, totaling more than $1.3 billion to assist states, urban areas, tribal and territorial governments, non-profit agencies, and the private sector in strengthening our nation’s ability to prevent, protect, respond to, and recover from terrorist attacks, major disasters and other emergencies in support of the National Preparedness Goal (NPG). In FY 2012, DHS preparedness grants were reduced by nearly $1 billion from the FY 2011 enacted level and $1.5 billion below the President’s FY 2012 request.

The FY 2012 grants focus on the nation’s highest risk areas, including urban areas that continue to face the most significant threats. Dedicated funding is provided for law enforcement and terrorism prevention activities throughout the country to prepare for and prevent and respond to pre-operational activity and other crimes that are precursors or indicators of terrorist activity.

Given limited resources, grantees are encouraged to utilize grant funding to maintain and sustain current capabilities through investments in training and exercises, updates to current planning and procedures, and lifecycle replacement of equipment. New capabilities that are built using homeland security grant funding must be deployable if needed to support regional and national efforts. All capabilities being built or sustained must have a clear linkage to the core capabilities in the NPG.

The FY 2012 grants incorporate input from DHS’ state, local, tribal, territorial, and private sector partners and detail specific steps undertaken by DHS to improve the ability of state and local partners to apply for and utilize grant funding. On February 13, 2012, the Department released the Guidance to State Administrative Agencies to Expedite the Expenditure of Certain DHS/FEMA Grant Funding, which provided a series of initiatives to help accelerate the drawdown of grant funding, enabling grantees to put previously awarded grant funding to work now in order to build and sustain core capabilities and address evolving threats.

FEMA proposed a new vision for homeland security grants in the FY 2013 President’s budget that focuses on building and sustaining core capabilities associated with the five mission areas within the NPG that are readily deployable and cross-jurisdictional, helping to elevate nationwide preparedness. The Administration looks forward to working with Congress and stakeholders to enable all levels of government to build and sustain, in a collaborative way, the core capabilities necessary to prepare for incidents that pose the greatest risk to the security of the nation.

Preparedness Grant Program Allocations for Fiscal Year 2012:

Homeland Security Grant Program (HSGP)—provides more than $830 million for states and urban areas to prevent, protect against, mitigate, respond to, and recover from acts of terrorism and other threats. 

• State Homeland Security Program (SHSP)—provides $294 millionto support the implementation of state homeland security strategies to build and strengthen preparedness capabilities at all levels.
• Urban Areas Security Initiative (UASI)—provides more than $490 millionto enhance regional preparedness and capabilities in 31 high-threat, high-density areas.
• Operation Stonegarden (OPSG)—provides more than $46 million to enhance cooperation and coordination among federal, state, territorial, tribal and local law enforcement agencies to jointly enhance security along the United States land and water borders.

Per the Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007 (Public Law 110-53) (hereafter “9/11 Act”), states are required to ensure that at least 25 percent of the combined HSGP funds allocated under SHSP and UASI are dedicated towards law enforcement terrorism prevention activities (LETPA) linked to one or more core capabilities within the NPG. The LETPA allocation can be from SHSP, UASI or both.

Emergency Management Performance Grants (EMPG) Program—provides more than $339 million to assist state and local governments in enhancing and sustaining all-hazards emergency management capabilities.

Tribal Homeland Security Grant Program (THSGP)—provides $6 million to eligible tribal applicants to implement preparedness initiatives to help strengthen the nation against risk associated with potential terrorist attacks and other hazards.

Nonprofit Security Grant Program (NSGP)—provides $10 million to support target hardening and other physical security enhancements for nonprofit organizations determined to be at high risk of a terrorist attack and located within one of the FY 2012 UASI-eligible urban areas.

Intercity Passenger Rail (Amtrak) Program—provides $10 million to protect critical surface transportation infrastructure and the traveling public from terrorism and increase the resilience of the Amtrak rail system.

Port Security Grant Program (PSGP)—provides more than $97 million to help protect critical port infrastructure from terrorism, enhance maritime domain awareness, and strengthen risk management capabilities in order to protect against improvised explosive devices and other non-conventional weapons.

Transit Security Grant Program (TSGP)—provides more than $87 million to owners and operators of transit systems to protect critical surface transportation and the traveling public from acts of terrorism and to increase the resilience of transit infrastructure.

Further information on DHS preparedness grant programs is available at www.dhs.gov and www.fema.gov/grants.

Where is SAM and when will he arrive?

Maybe in August 2012, maybe not.

Many grants administrators arrived at Grants.gov on May 16, 2012 and saw this surprising message:

“May 16, 2012 CCR is going away May 29, 2012. Welcome to SAM.”

The Central Contracting Registry (CCR) will be replaced by the System for Award Management (SAM). SAM will be live and active May 29, 2012. (If you go to CCR.gov on May 29 you will be re-directed to SAM.gov.)

SAM is where you will go to register as an institution, organization, or business in order to apply for Federal Assistance (grants) or for contracts as of May 29, 2012.

Active CCR registration is a pre-requisite to the successful submission of grant applications. Some key notes to our grants community:

•If you have a current updated active registration, the process will be seamless to you.

•You will be unable to do a NEW registration with CCR from May 23 - 28, 2012. Any new registrations done during this period will not be processed by SAM until starting May 29, 2012.

•If your registration is set to expire anywhere between the period of May 15 - July 15, 2012, you are automatically granted an additional 90-day extension to renew your registration.

•All existing CCR data will be exported to SAM.

To learn more about the switch from CCR to SAM, you can get more information here. To learn more about SAM, you can go to SAM.gov.

The Grants.gov PMO strongly suggests that you go to CCR prior to May 23, 2012, and check your account.

And if you got everything ready in a panic and headed over to SAM, here is what you got:

Welcome to the System for Award Management

Thank you for visiting SAM.gov.

Announcement

If you are looking for the SAM.gov application, please continue to use CCR/FedReg, ORCA, and EPLS. You can expect the capabilities to be here in late July. See announcement.

What is SAM?

The System for Award Management (SAM) is combining eight federal procurement systems and the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance into one new system.

When will SAM launch?

SAM is being deployed in phases, beginning with the "Entity Management" capability and the Exclusions portion of the "Performance Information" capability. Currently, this first phase is scheduled to be available at the end of July 2012.

AS you can see the question really is when will SAM actually be lauched?

At 4:30 pm on May 21, 2012, GSA issued the following announcement delaying the implementation of the new SAM system:

The General Services Administration (GSA) is moving the implementation date of the System for Award Management (SAM) from May 29, 2012 to end of July 2012. The additional sixty days will allow federal agencies to continue preparing their staff, give agencies and commercial system providers even more time to test their data transfer connections, and will ensure SAM contains the critical, documented capabilities users need from the system.

This first phase of SAM will include the capabilities of Central Contractor Registration (CCR)/Federal Agency Registration (FedReg), Online Representations and Certifications Application (ORCA), and the Excluded Parties List System (EPLS).

In preparation for the launch, GSA conducted extensive testing internally and in coordination with federal agencies using the data from these systems in their own contracting, grants, finance, and other departments. The testing was very valuable and will focus the efforts of the next sixty days.

SAM will reduce the burden on those seeking to do business with the government.  Vendors will be able to log into one system to manage their entity information in one record, with one expiration date, through one streamlined business process. Federal agencies will be able to look in one place for entity pre-award information. Everyone will have fewer passwords to remember and see the benefits of data reuse as information is entered into SAM once and reused throughout the system.

Please see http://sam.gov/ or contact a GTPAC Counselor at www.gtpac.org/team-directory.

Private Sector Advisory from Auntie FEMA

 

In March, we asked for your feedback on the National Planning Frameworks as part of the Presidential Policy Directive 8 (PPD 8), and we received more than 3,000 ideas, including comments submitted via the feedback submission forms as well as collected during webinars and in-person workshops.

 

Since then, we’ve incorporated your submissions into the working draft documents. Since you last saw the Frameworks, you’ll notice a few new additions.  For example, a new ‘Supporting Resources’ section that provides information on documents and tools is available. You can download the latest versions here: 

 

• Draft National Prevention Framework 
• Draft National Protection Framework 
• Draft National Mitigation Framework 
• Draft National Response Framework 

 

While the comment period closed on April 2, 2012, we are posting these near-final versions to continue transparency, acknowledge your substantive contributions, and to keep you informed.

 

Right now, we are working with representatives from federal departments and agencies to address their inputs. We will then package the documents in preparation for submission to the White House by June 30, 2012. In the meantime, we wanted to thank you for your help in getting us this far. Stay tuned for more information on upcoming engagement opportunities for PPD-8 implementation. We look forward to continued collaboration with all of our whole community partners on future opportunities.

 

The National Planning Frameworks are part of Presidential Policy Directive 8 (PPD-8), which sets the vision for national preparedness. Together, the five Frameworks—Prevention, Protection, Mitigation, Response, and Recovery—will outline the whole community’s roles, responsibilities and key actions to keep our nation safe and resilient. The current focus is on finalizing the Prevention, Protection, Mitigation, and Response Frameworks. The National Disaster Recovery Framework was released in September 2011. For questions, please contact us at PPD8-Engagement@fema.dhs.gov.

 

---

Update Your E-mail Address | Change Delivery Preference | Update State and Zip Code | Unsubscribe

Subscribe to receive alerts during disasters in your state.

If you have questions or problems with the subscription service, please contact support@govdelivery.com.

 

Senate Panel gives ports 35% grant increase

No hint yet about Fiduciary Agents or other distribution strategies

Committee Approval Of Increased Funding For Homeland Security Grants Announced

By Press Release

The Way it was 

Congress dumps Obama National Preparedness Grant Program for lack of specifity.

What now tomorrow. 

. House and Senate appropriators reject National Preparedness Grant Program proposal

By David Perera

Comment | Forward | Twitter | Facebook | LinkedIn

We all must guard the Homeland!

Analysis of the Presidential Order: PPD-8: "You shall sing Kumbaya"

In March of 2011 President Barack Obama issued an order to all of the agencies of the US Government plus all the tribes, companies, cities, counties, non-profits, police, fire, emergency agencies, Coast Guard, states, and every other local and regional group that has competed for years for limited federal funds to respond to similar underfunded mandates. Their task had been to independently provide security in their own back yards that appeared to match illusive FEMA and DHS guidelines.

On that March day, Obama ordered everyone to obey a former governor of Arizona with no security or law enforcement background and no experience in civil defense or emergency management as she attempted to enforce Obama’s FedSpeak decree.

We are dissolving the boundaries of government and civil society to, as Obama wrote, “prevent, protect against, mitigate the effects of, respond to and recover from not just terrorists attacks but also cyber attacks, pandemics, and catastrophic natural disasters.”

He wrote, “The Secretary of Homeland Security shall coordinate a comprehensive campaign to build and sustain national preparedness, including public outreach and community-based and private-sector programs to enhance national resilience, the provision of Federal financial assistance, preparedness efforts by the Federal Government, and national research and development efforts.”

She was ordered to be the Homeland’s head coach, lead blocking back, defensive end, quarterback, cheerleader and play-by-play analyst all in one. There are a few who might suggest she was a little short on experience, but not compared to the president.

She was in her second term as Governor of Arizona when appointed Secretary of Homeland Security. However she was the first woman to chair the National Governors Association and was named one of the top five governors in the country by Time Magazine. Napolitano was also the first female Attorney General of Arizona and served as U.S. Attorney for the District of Arizona.

Napolitano was born in New York City and grew up in Pittsburgh, Penn., and Albuquerque, N.M. She graduated from Santa Clara University, where she won a Truman Scholarship and was the university's first female valedictorian, and received her Juris Doctor from the University of Virginia School of Law. Before entering public office, Napolitano served as a clerk for Judge Mary M. Schroeder on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and practiced law in Phoenix at the firm of Lewis and Roca.

The president has issued her these orders to be accomplished by 2013:

• The national preparedness system shall include a series of integrated national planning frameworks, covering prevention, protection, mitigation, response, and recovery _ The frameworks shall be built upon scalable, flexible, and adaptable coordinating structures to align key roles and responsibilities to deliver the necessary capabilities.
•  
• The frameworks shall be coordinated under a unified system with a common terminology and approach.
•  
• It must be built around basic plans that support the “all-hazards”approach to preparedness and functional or incident annexes to describe any unique requirements for particular threats or scenarios, as needed .
•  
• Each framework shall describe how actions taken in the framework are coordinated with relevant actions described in the other frameworks across the preparedness spectrum .
•  
• The national preparedness system shall include an interagency operational plan to support each national planning framework .
• Each interagency operational plan shall include a more detailed concept of operations, description of critical tasks and responsibilities ; detailed resource, personnel, and sourcing requirements ; and specific provisions for the rapid integration of resources and personnel .
•  
• All executive departments and agencies with roles in the national planning frameworks shall develop department-level operational plans to support the interagency operational plans, as needed .
•  
• Each national planning framework shall include guidance to support corresponding planning for State, local, tribal, and territorial governments.

So far, here is one national planning framework. This one for prevention.

Mission Area: Prevention

Prevention includes those capabilities necessary to avoid, prevent, or stop a threatened or actual act of terrorism.7 It is focused on ensuring we are optimally prepared to prevent an imminent terrorist attack within the United States.

Preventing an imminent terrorist threat to the homeland will require Prevention core capabilities. In addition, it will trigger a robust and collaborative investigative process.8 Prevention also includes the intelligence, law enforcement, and homeland defense activities conducted in the event of an act of terrorism in the homeland to determine if follow-on attacks are planned and to thwart and/or apprehend the adversary.

The terrorist threat is dynamic and complex and combating it is not the sole responsibility of a single entity or community. Ensuring the security of the homeland requires the execution of terrorism prevention through extensive collaboration with government and nongovernmental entities, international partners, and the private sector. We will foster a rapid, coordinated, all-of-Nation, effective terrorism prevention effort that reflects the full range of capabilities critical to avoid, prevent, or stop a threatened or actual act of terrorism in the homeland.

Unlike other mission areas which are all-hazards by design, PPD-8 specifically focuses Prevention-related activities on an imminent terrorist threat.

8 An investigative process is the systematic collection and analysis of information pertaining to factors suspected of being, contributing to, or having caused a terrorism threat or a terrorism incident. A well-conducted process will routinely leverage multiple core capabilities to accomplish its purpose in a holistic, all-of-Nation approach.

National Preparedness Goal

Table 2: Prevention Mission Area Capabilities and Preliminary Targets9