全球智库信息集成服务系统

The indirect benefits line found that input-output (I-O) and computable general equilibrium (CGE) are the two most widely accepted modeling strategies for estimating the economic benefits of hazard mitigation.

• Although each type of model contains certain advantages and disadvantages, I-O models are the most practical near-term option for estimating the economic benefits of hazard mitigation.
• The indirect benefits line provides detailed instructions for how to model economic benefits using an I-O approach.

The AIC line developed a checklist for assessing the ability of applicants to propose or execute mitigation projects.

• The most important internal factors for high-performing applicants were an appropriately trained and skilled workforce, prior experience, and access to management and technical capabilities.
• The specific evaluation criteria include general and key staff turnover, staff skill/expertise and prior experience with predisaster mitigation projects and grants, management/administration capabilities, and access to technical expertise to propose predisaster mitigation projects.
• External factors outside an applicant's control—such as disaster activity and weather delays—also influence project performance.

The community resilience line developed an assessment framework for evaluating community resilience measures based on BRIC's legal requirements, discussions with leadership, and standard best practices.

• Measures based on actions that communities can take may be more useful to BRIC than measures based on difficult-to-change census population characteristics.
• Vulnerability measures based on difficult-to-change census population characteristics may be better suited to the measurement of equity gaps in program outcomes.
• Building codes are heavily emphasized in the legal framework guiding disaster recovery and measure an important aspect of resilience. However, they are often missing from resilience measures.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) launched the Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) program to award predisaster mitigation grants. FEMA asked the Homeland Security Operational Analysis Center (HSOAC) to develop metrics—quantitative measurements of important concepts—that can inform decisionmaking for the BRIC program. Building from discussions with program leadership, a review of stakeholder comments, and a close reading of BRIC's legal requirements, the authors established three lines of effort (LoEs) for analysis.

The indirect benefits line reviewed published measurement techniques and blended them into instructions for an input-output simulation model that better measures the full benefit to a community of mitigating an asset. The applicant institutional capability (AIC) line reviewed analogous research and interviewed subject-matter experts to develop a checklist for assessing the ability of applicants to propose or execute mitigation projects, focusing on staff retention, skills, and experience, as well as management capacity and technical capacity. The community resilience line developed an assessment framework based on BRIC's legal requirements, discussions with BRIC leadership, and standard best practices in measurement. Then, the LoE conducted a preliminary review of published resilience metrics, highlighting the potential value of action-based community resilience metrics for performance evaluation, population-based metrics for equity evaluation, and building code–based metrics as needed to improve statutory compliance. Each LoE produced a metric or framework for assessing metrics that could support BRIC grant decisionmaking and program performance evaluation. The report concludes with 11 recommendations for FEMA to consider.

• Chapter One

  Introduction

• Chapter Two

  Supporting Compliance: Relationship Between Lines of Effort and the Building Resilient Infrastructure and Community Program's Statutory Requirements

• Chapter Three

  Indirect Benefits Line of Effort

• Chapter Four

  Applicant Institutional Capacity Line of Effort

• Chapter Five

  Community Resilience Line of Effort

• Chapter Six

  Conclusions and Recommendations

• Appendix A

  Analysis of Disaster Relief Fund Public and Individual Assistance Costs

• Appendix B

  Indirect Benefits Technical Details

• Appendix C

  Applicant Institutional Capacity Insights from the International Development Literature

• Appendix D

  Applicant Institutional Capacity Interview Protocol

• Appendix E

  Applicant Institutional Capacity Analysis Codebook