Navigating the Road to Recovery: Assessment of the Coordination, Communication, and Financing of the Disaster Case Management Pilot in Louisiana
Jun 11, 2010
|PDF file||0.1 MB||
Use Adobe Acrobat Reader version 10 or higher for the best experience.
Disaster case management must be planned specifically for the target population, whose characteristics and needs will determine services, staff, budget, and timeline after a disaster. In Louisiana, the Louisiana Recovery Authority implemented the Federal Emergency Management Authority's pilot program for families and individuals living in temporary housing five years after the 2005 hurricanes. Challenges in identifying clients, communicating among provider agencies, approving invoices, and serving client needs led to delays; half the expected number of cases were opened. RAND made recommendations for future program planning, coordination, communication, staffing, training, and financing.
Fire, flood, earthquake, tornado, hurricane . . . When disaster strikes, disaster case management provides short- and long-term relief to victims by connecting them with comprehensive services that facilitate recovery. The Federal Emergency Management Authority (FEMA) funded the most recent example to serve the thousands of Louisiana residents still in need after Hurricanes Katrina, Rita, Ike, and Gustav and to test the national program. The Louisiana Recovery Authority (LRA) implemented FEMA's Disaster Case Management Pilot (DCMP) in fall 2009.
LRA asked researchers from the RAND Corporation to analyze the DCMP implementation process. RAND's recommendations for improvement are relevant for FEMA, for the state of Louisiana, and for all governments and organizations that must provide services to their citizens in the wake of disaster.
Despite concerted effort by participating agencies, the implementation of the DCMP was fraught with difficulties and did not fully meet the needs of all its clients. The target population for the program was families and individuals still living in FEMA temporary housing, but LRA did not receive up-to-date lists of eligible clients with complete contact information from FEMA, which made it challenging to reach them. As of June 18, 2010, Louisiana had approved invoices for about three-fourths of the money budgeted for the pilot and had opened about half the number of cases initially estimated by FEMA.
The overall design of the DCMP underestimated the task of finding and identifying clients and did not account adequately for their particular characteristics and needs. Many were older or disabled and needed overlapping health and social services. Their self-reported social and geographic isolation made them difficult to serve. Because of delays at the start of the DCMP in Louisiana, the program was compressed into just seven months — not enough time to meet the needs of this vulnerable and at-risk population.
Other RAND findings pertain to DCMP coordination, communication, staffing, training, and financing. Lack of clarity about roles and responsibilities among the participating agencies led to some tension between LRA and contractors. Case management organizations lacked operational capacity (e.g., management structure, phones, computers) to start immediately and had limited time and funds to build the organizational capacity that they needed. State and local officials reported difficulties in completing unique FEMA forms for the DCMP. Guidelines for what could be included in indirect costs were confusing and resulted in financial losses for contracting agencies.
The DCMP experience offers some lessons for all who must plan for disaster response. Most important: Match the design of a disaster case management program to the target population.
A recovery program must be planned around the population it will serve, with complete and accurate information about numbers of people and their needs. The current system for identifying and locating residents before a disaster — particularly the populations most at risk due to preexisting factors — is limited at best. Without a concerted review of these systems, government and service providers will not be able to strategize appropriately for staffing, resource allocation, and development of a robust resource network.
Continuity and longevity of programs should match human needs. The stop and start of recovery initiatives at both the federal and state levels can lead to serious discontinuities in client recovery. Disaster case management merits a single, longer-term recovery initiative that seamlessly acknowledges the stages of human recovery.
To improve the design of the national disaster case management program and coordination of disaster case management services:
To encourage communication among agencies, FEMA should develop a web-based knowledge center. States should use the knowledge center to document decisions.
To improve financing procedures and policies:
The DCMP also highlighted overarching questions about the processes and underlying principles of disaster case management. Research is needed to answer these questions; the answers could help improve how disaster case management is designed and implemented in the future.
This report is part of the RAND Corporation Research brief series. RAND research briefs present policy-oriented summaries of individual published, peer-reviewed documents or of a body of published work.
This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.
The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.