State Mandate Influences on FEMA-Approved Hazard-Mitigation Plans Under the Disaster Management Act of 2000.
This study is an of hazard- plans approved by the Federal Management Agency (FEMA) using the requirements of the Management Act of 2000 (DMA2K). The study investigates whether or not there are significant differences in the action plans (MAPs) developed by jurisdictions from states with existing planning mandates in their comprehensive plans prior to DMA2K and those without existing planning mandates. The requirements of such plans include collaboration with several entities, public information and awareness, evacuation, sheltering, provision for special needs populations, terrorism, and technological hazards. The findings from the t-test analysis show there is no significant difference in plans with or without mandates. Results also suggest the for FEMA to further scrutinize and review the approval process criteria to reflect the inclusion of these identified elements before plans are approved. Such scrutiny could lead to improved plans and subsequently lead to a reduction of impacts of hazards. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]/nCopyright of World Medical & Health Policy is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Comparing Hazard- Plans with t-test analysis
Comparison
Comparison of Action Plan (MAP) and FEMAs State Planning Mandates on Hazard DMA2K
From Guideline review
“Do cities within states that have existing mandates for the incorporation of hazard- elements in their comprehensive plans include more hazardmitigation elements in their DMA2K plans than cities in states without such a mandate?”
Not all parts of the comparison can be generalized
The findings from the t-test analysis show there is no significant difference in plans with or without mandates. Results also suggest the for FEMA to further scrutinize and review the approval process criteria to reflect the inclusion of these identified elements before plans are approved. Such scrutiny could lead to improved plans and subsequently lead to a reduction of impacts of hazards.
This study is an of hazard- plans approved by the Federal Management Agency (FEMA) using the requirements of the Management Act of 2000 (DMA2K).The study investigates whether or not there are significant differences in the action plans (MAPs) developed by jurisdictions from states with existing planning mandates in their comprehensive plans prior to DMA2K and those without existing planning mandates
 |
Portfolio of Solutions web site has been initially developed in the scope of DRIVER+ project. Today, the service is managed by AIT Austrian Institute of Technology GmbH., for the benefit of the European Management. PoS is endorsed and supported by the Disaster Competence Network Austria (DCNA) as well as by the STAMINA and TeamAware H2020 projects. |