Bill Overview
Title: Disaster Contract Improvement Act
Description: This bill directs the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to establish an advisory working group to encourage and foster collaborative efforts among individuals and entities engaged in disaster recovery relating to debris removal. The bill requires (1) FEMA to conduct outreach to states, tribal governments, and local governments with respect to any guidance or support materials developed; and (2) the Government Accountability Office to conduct a study that includes examining the use and adoption rate of advance contracts for debris removal by states, tribal governments, and local governments.
Sponsors: Sen. Scott, Rick [R-FL]
Target Audience
Population: People in disaster-prone areas who would be affected by enhanced recovery efforts
Estimated Size: 50000000
- The bill primarily focuses on disaster recovery efforts, particularly related to debris removal after disasters.
- The main entities involved are FEMA, state, tribal, and local governments, as well as private and non-profit sectors involved in disaster recovery.
- The population that will benefit directly includes people who live in areas prone to natural disasters where debris removal is essential post-event.
- Improved contracts and collaborative efforts for debris removal can lead to quicker recovery, directly impacting those who experience natural disasters.
- The development of guidance and supportive materials for states, tribal, and local governments can improve overall disaster recovery efforts, indirectly benefiting the broader population by improving government efficiency.
Reasoning
- A significant portion of the U.S. population lives in disaster-prone areas. Policies like this can directly impact these individuals by improving disaster recovery efforts, particularly in debris removal.
- The policy is budget-limited, indicating a need to prioritize which areas or projects receive funding, potentially affecting the variability in impact among different communities.
- Residents from states like Florida, Texas, and California could experience a noticeable improvement in their well-being after a disaster due to quicker and more efficient debris removal.
- Some people, especially those indirectly involved in disaster management or residing in less at-risk areas, might be less impacted by this policy, reflecting a diverse range of experiences and opinions.
- Individuals with past experiences of inadequate disaster recovery responses might provide insight into how enhanced debris management could affect overall recovery efforts.
Simulated Interviews
Small Business Owner (Miami, Florida)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy could improve recovery times after hurricanes, which is critical for reopening my business swiftly.
- Having more support and structured plans for debris removal would greatly benefit local businesses like mine.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Emergency Services Coordinator (Houston, Texas)
Age: 32 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Creating better coordinated plans is crucial for effective disaster management.
- The policy may enhance the operational efficiency of our efforts, leading to better resource distribution and quicker response times.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Retired (Sacramento, California)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I've seen the struggle to clear debris after wildfires quickly. It affects how soon we can return home.
- This policy seems like it would help us get back to normal life faster after such events.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Urban Planner (New Orleans, Louisiana)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Improved contracts for debris removal could integrate well with our urban planning strategies.
- A collaborative approach is vital for complex recovery phases post-flooding.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Local Government Official (Bismarck, North Dakota)
Age: 50 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While our region doesn't face severe disasters often, having better plans for debris management is beneficial for future incidents.
- Coordination with FEMA is always a positive, ensuring we're prepared for any eventuality.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Community Organizer (San Juan, Puerto Rico)
Age: 37 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- A structured approach to debris-removal will empower local communities, offering faster recovery.
- Such policies help prevent long-term disruptions in daily life post-hurricane.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
IT Specialist (Phoenix, Arizona)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy seems relevant mostly to areas more directly affected by natural disasters.
- Any improvement in disaster response is positive for national readiness, even if it doesn't impact me directly.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Environmental Scientist (New York City, New York)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy could serve as a model for effective urban disaster management nationwide.
- Increased adoption of advance contracts could enhance environmental and economic resilience.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Teacher (Charleston, South Carolina)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Policies like this give me hope for a faster and more organized response after future storms.
- Our schools and neighborhoods would greatly benefit from quicker debris clearance.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Construction Worker (Oklahoma City, Oklahoma)
Age: 36 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Boosting local contracts for debris removal supports jobs in our industry.
- Enhanced readiness plans are crucial for communities repeatedly hit by tornadoes.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $25000000 (Low: $20000000, High: $30000000)
Year 2: $20000000 (Low: $15000000, High: $25000000)
Year 3: $20000000 (Low: $15000000, High: $25000000)
Year 5: $20000000 (Low: $15000000, High: $25000000)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- The main aim of the bill is to improve disaster recovery efficiency rather than induce immediate financial returns.
- The effectiveness of the advisory working group in facilitating collaboration is crucial for achieving intended results and justifying costs.
- The adoption rate of advance contracts by states and local governments may vary, affecting the anticipated savings and efficiency gains.
- Long-term benefits may be significant but are challenging to quantify in the short term.