Mass Care in Disasters : FEMA, The Red Cross & Volunteers Hardback

The five voluntary organisations the authors reviewed are highly diverse in their focus and response structures.

They also constitute a major source of the nation's mass care and related disaster services and are integrated into the 2008 National Response Framework.

The Red Cross in particular -- the only one whose core mission is disaster response -- has a federally designated support role to government under the mass care provision of this Framework.

While the Red Cross no longer serves as the primary agency for co-ordinating government mass care services -- as under the earlier 2004 National Plan -- it is expected to support FEMA by providing staff and expertise, among other things.

FEMA and the Red Cross agree on the Red Cross's role in a catastrophic disaster, but it is not clearly documented.

While FEMA recognised the need to update the 2006 Catastrophic Incident Supplement to conform with the Framework, it does not yet have a time frame for doing so.

Since Katrina, the organisations the authors studied have taken steps to strengthen their service delivery by expanding coverage and upgrading their logistical and communications systems.

The Red Cross, in particular, is realigning its regional chapters to better support its local chapters and improve efficiency and establishing new partnerships with local community-based organisations.

Most recently, however, a budget shortfall has prompted the organisation to reduce staff and alter its approach to supporting FEMA and state emergency management agencies.

While Red Cross officials maintain that these changes will not affect improvements to its mass care service infrastructure, it has also recently requested federal funding for its governmental responsibilities.

Capabilities assessments are preliminary, but current evidence suggests that in a worst-case large-scale disaster, the projected need for mass care services would far exceed the capabilities of these voluntary organisations without government and other assistance--despite voluntary organisations' substantial resources locally and nationally.

Voluntary organisations also faced shortages in trained volunteers, as well as other limitations that affected their mass care capabilities.

Meanwhile, FEMA's initial assessment does not necessarily include the sheltering capabilities of many voluntary organisations and does not yet address feeding capabilities outside of shelters.

In addition, the ability to assess mass care capabilities and co-ordinate in disasters is currently hindered by a lack of standard terminology and measures for mass care resources, and efforts are under way to develop such standards.

Finding and training more personnel, dedicating more resources to preparedness, and working more closely with local governments are ongoing challenges for voluntary organisations.

A shortage of staff and volunteers was most commonly cited, but the authors also found they had difficulty seeking and dedicating funds for preparedness, in part because of competing priorities.

However, the guidance for FEMA preparedness grants to states and localities was also not sufficiently explicit with regard to using such funds to support the efforts of voluntary organisations.