fema’s benefit cost analysis roxanne gray, wisconsin state hazard mitigation officer and kristen...

65
FEMA’S BENEFIT COST FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer Hazard Mitigation Officer and and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009 MnAFPM and WAFSCM Combined Annual 2009 MnAFPM and WAFSCM Combined Annual Conference Conference October 8, 2009 October 8, 2009

Upload: leo-osborne

Post on 23-Dec-2015

215 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009

FEMA’S BENEFIT COST FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSISANALYSIS

Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation OfficerMitigation Officer

andandKristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard

Mitigation OfficerMitigation Officer

2009 MnAFPM and WAFSCM Combined Annual 2009 MnAFPM and WAFSCM Combined Annual ConferenceConference

October 8, 2009October 8, 2009

Page 2: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009

UNIFIED HAZARD MITIGATION UNIFIED HAZARD MITIGATION ASSISTANCE PROGRAMASSISTANCE PROGRAM

• Hazard Mitigation Grant ProgramHazard Mitigation Grant Program• Pre-Disaster Mitigation ProgramPre-Disaster Mitigation Program• Flood Mitigation Assistance Program Flood Mitigation Assistance Program

(flood hazard only)(flood hazard only)• Repetitive Flood Claims Program Repetitive Flood Claims Program

(flood hazard only)(flood hazard only)• Severe Repetitive Loss Program Severe Repetitive Loss Program

(flood hazard only)(flood hazard only)

Page 3: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009

MITIGATION PROGAMSMITIGATION PROGAMS

• Project and Planning GrantsProject and Planning Grants• 75/25% cost share75/25% cost share

– HMGP – WI & MN both provide 12.5% of the local HMGP – WI & MN both provide 12.5% of the local matchmatch

– PDM – 90/10% for small, impoverishedPDM – 90/10% for small, impoverished– RFC – 100% fundingRFC – 100% funding– SRL – 90/10% with strategy in State PlanSRL – 90/10% with strategy in State Plan

• State, local, and tribal organizations eligible State, local, and tribal organizations eligible applicantsapplicants– HMGP – certain eligible private, non-profitsHMGP – certain eligible private, non-profits

• Approved Hazard Mitigation Plan required Approved Hazard Mitigation Plan required – Exception is RFC ProgramException is RFC Program

Page 4: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009

FUNDING AVAILABILITYFUNDING AVAILABILITY

• HMGPHMGP– Post-DisasterPost-Disaster– 15% (20% with Enhanced Plan) of the 15% (20% with Enhanced Plan) of the

total federal funds allocated for Public total federal funds allocated for Public and Individual Assistance Programs for and Individual Assistance Programs for each disastereach disaster

Page 5: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009

FUNDING AVAILABILITY (cont.)FUNDING AVAILABILITY (cont.)

• FMAFMA– Annual allocation; and national Annual allocation; and national

competition competition – # of flood insurance policies and # of flood insurance policies and

repetitive loss properties in the staterepetitive loss properties in the state– Flood Mitigation onlyFlood Mitigation only– Mitigation to NFIP insured structuresMitigation to NFIP insured structures

Page 6: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009

Funding Availability (cont.)Funding Availability (cont.)

• PDMPDM– State base amount of $500,000State base amount of $500,000– Annual, national competition or is it?Annual, national competition or is it?– Subgrants projects capped at $3 million Subgrants projects capped at $3 million

federal share; Planning $800,000 for new federal share; Planning $800,000 for new plan, $400,000 plan updateplan, $400,000 plan update

– $150 million – FFY10 (Earmarks once $150 million – FFY10 (Earmarks once again)again)

– Will sunset 9/2010 unless reauthorizedWill sunset 9/2010 unless reauthorized

Page 7: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009

Funding Availability (cont.)Funding Availability (cont.)

• RFCRFC– Mitigation to NFIP insured structuresMitigation to NFIP insured structures– At least one paid flood insurance claimAt least one paid flood insurance claim– Flood Mitigation OnlyFlood Mitigation Only– No plan requirementNo plan requirement– Inability to manage subgrant or lack of Inability to manage subgrant or lack of

25% match25% match– National CompetitionNational Competition

Page 8: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009

Funding Availability (cont.)Funding Availability (cont.)

• SRLSRL– Mitigation to NFIP insured structuresMitigation to NFIP insured structures– Flood mitigation onlyFlood mitigation only– At least 4 NFIP claim payments over At least 4 NFIP claim payments over

$5,000 each, and cumulative exceeds $5,000 each, and cumulative exceeds $20,000; or 2 payments exceeds the $20,000; or 2 payments exceeds the value of the structurevalue of the structure

– Allocations for target states; otherwise Allocations for target states; otherwise competition competition

Page 9: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009

ELIGIBLE PROJECTSELIGIBLE PROJECTS

• Either on public or private Either on public or private propertyproperty

• Acquisition/Demolition of Acquisition/Demolition of structuresstructures

• Relocate structuresRelocate structures• Elevation of structuresElevation of structures• Retrofit StructuresRetrofit Structures• Community SheltersCommunity Shelters• Residential Safe Rooms Residential Safe Rooms • Development of standardsDevelopment of standards• Structural hazard control, Structural hazard control,

i.e., debris basins, i.e., debris basins, floodwallsfloodwalls

• Development/updates of All Development/updates of All Hazards Mitigation PlansHazards Mitigation Plans

Page 10: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009

Eligible Projects (cont.)Eligible Projects (cont.)

• FMA, RFC, SRLFMA, RFC, SRL– Mitigation to NFIP insured structuresMitigation to NFIP insured structures– Flood mitigation onlyFlood mitigation only

Page 11: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009

REQUIREMENTSREQUIREMENTS

• Participating in the NFIP and in good Participating in the NFIP and in good standingstanding

• Cost-BeneficialCost-Beneficial

• Environmentally SoundEnvironmentally Sound

• Considered other alternatives Considered other alternatives

• Best alternativeBest alternative

• Solve the problemSolve the problem

• Plan requirement (except RFC)Plan requirement (except RFC)

Page 12: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009

Mitigation eGrantsMitigation eGrants

• HMA applications (PDM, FMA, RFC, HMA applications (PDM, FMA, RFC, and SRL) have to be submitted via and SRL) have to be submitted via FEMA’s eGrants systemFEMA’s eGrants system

Page 13: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009

HMA 2010 HMA 2010 Guidance/ResourcesGuidance/Resources

http://www.fema.gov/http://www.fema.gov/government/grant/hma/government/grant/hma/

index.shtmindex.shtm

Page 14: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009

BCABCA

• All projects must be cost-effectiveAll projects must be cost-effective

• Benefits of the project must outweigh Benefits of the project must outweigh the cost of at least 1:1.the cost of at least 1:1.

Page 15: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009

Required for BCARequired for BCA

• Detailed scope of workDetailed scope of work

• Cost EstimateCost Estimate

• Maintenance CostMaintenance Cost

• Past Damages and Frequency of Past Damages and Frequency of EventEvent

Page 16: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009

Benefits of MitigationBenefits of Mitigation

• Avoided damages to buildings and Avoided damages to buildings and contentscontents

• Avoided loss of functionAvoided loss of function

• Avoided emergency management Avoided emergency management costscosts

• Avoided casualtiesAvoided casualties

Page 17: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009

Calculating BenefitsCalculating Benefits

• Before mitigationBefore mitigation

• After mitigation After mitigation

• Probabilities of the hazardProbabilities of the hazard

• Useful life of the projectUseful life of the project

• Time value of moneyTime value of money

Page 18: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009

Damages before MitigationDamages before Mitigation

• The greater the frequency and depth The greater the frequency and depth of flooding for a given structure, the of flooding for a given structure, the higher the annualized damages and higher the annualized damages and losses.losses.

• To the extent that a mitigation To the extent that a mitigation project reduces or eliminates these project reduces or eliminates these damages, the greater the potential damages, the greater the potential benefitsbenefits

Page 19: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009

Damages after MitigationDamages after Mitigation

• Benefits are calculated as the Benefits are calculated as the difference between annualized difference between annualized damages with and without damages with and without undertaking the mitigation project.undertaking the mitigation project.

• Annualized benefits are calculated as Annualized benefits are calculated as the difference in the annualized the difference in the annualized damages before and after mitigation.damages before and after mitigation.

Page 20: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009

Software HighlightsSoftware Highlights• Streamlined software to allow users to develop an inventory Streamlined software to allow users to develop an inventory

of structures and projectsof structures and projects

• The ability to allow structures in multiple projects or to use The ability to allow structures in multiple projects or to use multiple hazardsmultiple hazards

• Various defaults with the ability to override when providing Various defaults with the ability to override when providing justification and backup documentationjustification and backup documentation

– Provided wizards, drop-down menus, integrated Provided wizards, drop-down menus, integrated calculationscalculations

– Data sharing capability through import / exportData sharing capability through import / export

– Dynamic Help, including Job Aids, Checklists and Tool Dynamic Help, including Job Aids, Checklists and Tool TipsTips

– Integrated online help Integrated online help

– An online toolkitAn online toolkit

Page 21: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009
Page 22: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009

Multiple Structures, Multiple Multiple Structures, Multiple HazardsHazards

Page 23: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009

BCA ImportBCA Import

Page 24: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009

Structure ImportStructure Import

Page 25: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009

BCA ExportBCA Export

Page 26: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009

Structure ExportStructure Export

Page 27: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009

Backup/RestoreBackup/Restore

Page 28: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009
Page 29: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009

Using Integrated Using Integrated CalculatorsCalculators•Each data element that affects the BCA must Each data element that affects the BCA must be documented be documented

•Any deviation from the FEMA Standard Values Any deviation from the FEMA Standard Values MUST be justified and documented MUST be justified and documented

•Once documentation is uploaded into the BCA Once documentation is uploaded into the BCA software, and the software is then loaded into software, and the software is then loaded into eGrants, all documentation will follow to eGrants, all documentation will follow to eGrants.eGrants.

Page 30: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009

Using the Cost EstimatorUsing the Cost Estimator

Page 31: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009
Page 32: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009
Page 33: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009
Page 34: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009
Page 35: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009
Page 36: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009

Flood BCA Module – Key Flood BCA Module – Key InputsInputs• Mitigation Project TypeMitigation Project Type• Mitigation Project CostMitigation Project Cost• Hazard-Specific Data Hazard-Specific Data • Structure Information Structure Information

– GeneralGeneral– ResidentialResidential– Non-ResidentialNon-Residential

• Damages and Losses AvoidedDamages and Losses Avoided• Depth-Damage FunctionsDepth-Damage Functions

Page 37: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009

Flood BCA Documentation: Flood BCA Documentation: General GuidanceGeneral Guidance

Data used in place Data used in place of of FEMA standards FEMA standards or or default values default values MUST MUST be documentedbe documented

Documentation should include Documentation should include justification for the use of data in justification for the use of data in place of FEMA values.place of FEMA values.

• Hydrologic and hydraulic Hydrologic and hydraulic

analysesanalyses

• Building Replacement and Building Replacement and

Contents ValuesContents Values

• Elevation Certificate(s)Elevation Certificate(s)

All data must be All data must be obtained obtained from a credible from a credible sourcesource

• Federal, State, county, regional, Federal, State, county, regional,

and local government agenciesand local government agencies

• Qualified professionals such as Qualified professionals such as

licensed architects, engineers, licensed architects, engineers,

and surveyorsand surveyors

Page 38: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009

• Mitigation Project CostMitigation Project Cost– Estimating Costs and BenefitsEstimating Costs and Benefits

•Pre-constructionPre-construction•ConstructionConstruction•AncillaryAncillary•Annual Maintenance CostsAnnual Maintenance Costs

– Sources: Sources: •Local historical cost dataLocal historical cost data•Current contractor bidsCurrent contractor bids•Cost estimating softwareCost estimating software

Flood BCA Documentation: Flood BCA Documentation: Mitigation Project CostMitigation Project Cost

Page 39: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009

– FIS and/or Hydrology and Hydraulics (H&H) FIS and/or Hydrology and Hydraulics (H&H) StudyStudy•Riverine: Flood Profile, Streambed Elevation, Riverine: Flood Profile, Streambed Elevation,

DischargesDischarges

•Coastal: Stillwater Elevation (SWEL), BFE or Coastal: Stillwater Elevation (SWEL), BFE or 100-year elevation including wave action100-year elevation including wave action

– FIRMFIRM•Panel Number, Effective Date, Community ID Panel Number, Effective Date, Community ID

NumberNumber

Flood BCA Documentation: Flood BCA Documentation: Hazard-Specific DataHazard-Specific Data

Page 40: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009

• Structure Structure Information - GeneralInformation - General

Flood BCA Documentation: Flood BCA Documentation: Structure InformationStructure Information

Page 41: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009

Size of Building Size of Building – Measured in square feetMeasured in square feet– Sources: appraisal, tax records, survey or homeowner Sources: appraisal, tax records, survey or homeowner

estimates, measured drawings with photographsestimates, measured drawings with photographs

Building Replacement ValueBuilding Replacement Value– Cost per square foot to build a comparable structureCost per square foot to build a comparable structure– Sources: letter from local building inspector, Sources: letter from local building inspector,

contractor, architect or engineer; or information from contractor, architect or engineer; or information from standard cost estimating software. If tax records are standard cost estimating software. If tax records are used, source must be assessorused, source must be assessor

Flood BCA Documentation: Flood BCA Documentation: Structure Information Structure Information (continued)(continued)

Page 42: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009

–Foundation/Building Type, Number of Foundation/Building Type, Number of StoriesStories

•Acceptable forms of documentation: Acceptable forms of documentation: photocopies of tax records, hard copy or photocopies of tax records, hard copy or electronic photos, appraisals and letters electronic photos, appraisals and letters from homeownersfrom homeowners

•Sources: homeowner, local building Sources: homeowner, local building inspector, local tax assessor's office, or inspector, local tax assessor's office, or title documents. title documents.

Flood BCA Flood BCA Documentation: Documentation: Residential Structure Residential Structure

Page 43: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009

–Primary Use of Building, Number of Stories Primary Use of Building, Number of Stories •Sources: owner, local building inspector, local tax Sources: owner, local building inspector, local tax

assessor’s office, or title documents on letterhead from assessor’s office, or title documents on letterhead from a credible sourcea credible source

–Service Types by Facility (Value of Public Service), Service Types by Facility (Value of Public Service), Annual BudgetAnnual Budget

•Examples of Service Name: government, library, Examples of Service Name: government, library, education, hospital, emergency medical service (EMS), education, hospital, emergency medical service (EMS), safe room, fire, police, or Emergency Operations Centersafe room, fire, police, or Emergency Operations Center

•Documentation is available from agency providing Documentation is available from agency providing service or published annual reportservice or published annual report

Flood BCA Documentation: Flood BCA Documentation: Non-residential StructureNon-residential Structure

Page 44: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009

Flood BCA Documentation: Flood BCA Documentation: Displacement/Loss of RentDisplacement/Loss of RentDisplacement/Loss of RentDisplacement/Loss of Rent

•Costs when occupants are displaced to temporary Costs when occupants are displaced to temporary quarters while damage is repaired. Includes rent quarters while damage is repaired. Includes rent and other monthly costs, such as furniture rental and other monthly costs, such as furniture rental and utilities, and one-time costs, such as moving and utilities, and one-time costs, such as moving and utility hook-up fees.and utility hook-up fees.

•FEMA Standard ValuesFEMA Standard Values– $1.44 square foot per month for residential$1.44 square foot per month for residential

•Loss of Rent are costs for rental properties Loss of Rent are costs for rental properties onlyonly and and do not include one-time costs.do not include one-time costs.

Page 45: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009

Flood BCA Documentation: Flood BCA Documentation: Contents ValueContents Value

FEMA Standard Value: FEMA Standard Value: ContentsContents•Residential and Default DDF (USACE) Residential and Default DDF (USACE)

table: 100 percent of Building table: 100 percent of Building Replacement Value (BRV) Replacement Value (BRV)

•All Others: 50 percent of BRVAll Others: 50 percent of BRV

If default is not used, sources include:If default is not used, sources include:• Insurance records Insurance records •Appraisals Appraisals •Receipts Receipts •Estimates based on current market Estimates based on current market

prices for similar contentsprices for similar contents

Page 46: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009

Flood BCA Documentation: Flood BCA Documentation: Depth Damage FunctionsDepth Damage Functions

–Depth Damage FunctionsDepth Damage Functions•Choose from three optionsChoose from three options

– DefaultDefault – All information provided; no justification or – All information provided; no justification or documentation neededdocumentation needed

– LibraryLibrary – Similar to default, but is a secondary – Similar to default, but is a secondary preference; justification AND documentation required preference; justification AND documentation required ONLY if user overrides valuesONLY if user overrides values

– CustomCustom – User-entered information; justification AND – User-entered information; justification AND documentation MUST be provideddocumentation MUST be provided

•If FEMA Standard Value is not used, sources If FEMA Standard Value is not used, sources include: historical loss records and engineering include: historical loss records and engineering judgmentsjudgments

Page 47: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009

Flood BCA Documentation:Flood BCA Documentation:Other Avoided DamagesOther Avoided Damages

• BCA Tool automatically estimates avoided BCA Tool automatically estimates avoided losses/damages:losses/damages:– Building and Contents DamagesBuilding and Contents Damages– Displacement CostsDisplacement Costs

• Other Avoided Damages Table allows user-Other Avoided Damages Table allows user-entered benefit categories that may include:entered benefit categories that may include:– Debris removalDebris removal– Emergency Management CostsEmergency Management Costs– Disruption of LifeDisruption of Life

Page 48: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009

Damage-Frequency Assessment Damage-Frequency Assessment (DFA)(DFA)

• Typically requires the most assumptions Typically requires the most assumptions and engineering judgmentand engineering judgment

• Provides the most accurate analysis if no Provides the most accurate analysis if no hazard data or specific building data are hazard data or specific building data are availableavailable

• Historical damage information is required Historical damage information is required (updated for inflation to present value)(updated for inflation to present value)

• Performs an analysis based on historical Performs an analysis based on historical hazard frequency data, damage hazard frequency data, damage observations, and engineering judgmentobservations, and engineering judgment

Page 49: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009

Damage-Frequency Assessment Damage-Frequency Assessment (continued)(continued)

• DFA calculates project benefits based DFA calculates project benefits based on two or more historical damage on two or more historical damage events and the frequencies of the events and the frequencies of the eventsevents

• Advantage of DFA module is its Advantage of DFA module is its flexibility: it can be used for a wide flexibility: it can be used for a wide range of hazards and project typesrange of hazards and project types

Page 50: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009

When to Use the DFAWhen to Use the DFA

The DFA approach should be used when one or The DFA approach should be used when one or more of the following situations apply:more of the following situations apply:

•Non-building projects (utilities, roads, Non-building projects (utilities, roads,

infrastructure)infrastructure)

•Key structure information, such as the first floor Key structure information, such as the first floor

elevation data for flood, is not availableelevation data for flood, is not available

•Hazard data used to determine the expected Hazard data used to determine the expected

annual number of flood events is missing or out of annual number of flood events is missing or out of

datedate

Page 51: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009

DFA RequirementsDFA Requirements1.1. Must have documented historical damages/losses from two Must have documented historical damages/losses from two

or more hazard events of known frequencies based on:or more hazard events of known frequencies based on:

– FEMA Project Worksheets/Damage Survey Reports,FEMA Project Worksheets/Damage Survey Reports,

– Insurance or repair records, orInsurance or repair records, or

– Newspaper articles citing other credible sourcesNewspaper articles citing other credible sources

2.2. Must have documented frequencies associated with each Must have documented frequencies associated with each hazard event based on:hazard event based on:

– Comparison of observed flood elevations or discharges to Comparison of observed flood elevations or discharges to FIS, stream gauge or tide gauge dataFIS, stream gauge or tide gauge data

– Documented data from a credible source to estimate Documented data from a credible source to estimate frequenciesfrequencies

– The unknown frequency calculator with supporting The unknown frequency calculator with supporting documentation when the requirements are metdocumentation when the requirements are met

Page 52: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009

DFA DocumentationDFA Documentation

The DFA Module requires documentation of The DFA Module requires documentation of the following key data:the following key data:

•Value of Services (Roads/Utilities)Value of Services (Roads/Utilities)

•Loss of Service DurationsLoss of Service Durations

•Historical Damages Historical Damages

•Loss Event Frequencies Loss Event Frequencies

•Residual Damages/Losses (Project Residual Damages/Losses (Project Effectiveness)Effectiveness)

Page 53: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009

Value of Services Value of Services (Roads/Utilities)(Roads/Utilities)Recommended documentation:Recommended documentation:

• RoadsRoads: traffic counts and detour time : traffic counts and detour time estimates with mapsestimates with maps

• Utilities: local utility company data Utilities: local utility company data indicating number of impacted indicating number of impacted customers customers

• Buildings: annual budget Buildings: annual budget

Page 54: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009

Historical Event Damages/LossesHistorical Event Damages/Losses

Recommended documentation:Recommended documentation:

• FEMA Project Worksheets/Damage Survey FEMA Project Worksheets/Damage Survey ReportsReports

• Insurance claims, BureauNet/Simple and Insurance claims, BureauNet/Simple and Quick Assessment (SQA) Net information, Quick Assessment (SQA) Net information, damage repair records, or data from the damage repair records, or data from the State/local agency, local governmentState/local agency, local government

• Newspaper accounts citing credible Newspaper accounts citing credible sources (other than homeowner accounts)sources (other than homeowner accounts)

Page 55: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009

Historical Event FrequenciesHistorical Event Frequencies

Recommended documentation:Recommended documentation:

• Frequencies linked to documented FIS dataFrequencies linked to documented FIS data

• U.S. Geological Society (USGS) stream gauge U.S. Geological Society (USGS) stream gauge data or National Oceanic and Atmospheric data or National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) tide gauge dataAdministration (NOAA) tide gauge data

• Copies of engineering/technical expert reportsCopies of engineering/technical expert reports

• Use the unknown frequency calculator with Use the unknown frequency calculator with supporting documentation when requirements supporting documentation when requirements are met are met

Page 56: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009

Unknown Frequency Unknown Frequency Calculator: RequirementsCalculator: Requirements

The unknown frequency calculator can only be used when the The unknown frequency calculator can only be used when the following requirements are met:following requirements are met:

1.1. Minimum of three hazard events occurring in different years Minimum of three hazard events occurring in different years where either:where either:

– The frequencies/RIs of The frequencies/RIs of allall events are events are unknownunknown, , oror

– The frequencies/RIs of The frequencies/RIs of up to twoup to two events are events are knownknown and and have total inflated have total inflated values that exceedvalues that exceed the total inflated the total inflated values of values of allall the the other unknownother unknown frequency/RI events frequency/RI events

2.2. Period of record based on the age of the structure or a Period of record based on the age of the structure or a minimum of 10 years; whichever is greaterminimum of 10 years; whichever is greater

3.3. No other way to tie historical events to known No other way to tie historical events to known frequencies/RIsfrequencies/RIs

Page 57: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009

Unknown Frequency Calculator: Unknown Frequency Calculator: DocumentationDocumentationRecommended documentation:Recommended documentation:

• Three historical events of unknown Three historical events of unknown frequencyfrequency

• Date of construction (needed for the period Date of construction (needed for the period of record)of record)

Sources of documentation may include:Sources of documentation may include:

• Insurance claims, damage repair records, Insurance claims, damage repair records, technical reports, data from the State/local technical reports, data from the State/local agency, local government, etc.agency, local government, etc.

Page 58: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009

Project EffectivenessProject Effectiveness

Elements to documenting project effectiveness:Elements to documenting project effectiveness:

• Keep in mind that nearly all mitigation projects Keep in mind that nearly all mitigation projects have some residual damages have some residual damages

• Some projects will not completely eliminate Some projects will not completely eliminate damages after mitigation, but will reduce damages after mitigation, but will reduce damages by a certain percentagedamages by a certain percentage

• Consult with the mitigation project designer to Consult with the mitigation project designer to determine the level of effectivenessdetermine the level of effectiveness

• Assume damages after mitigation occur once the Assume damages after mitigation occur once the level of effectiveness frequency is reached level of effectiveness frequency is reached

Page 59: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009

I

Summary: Documenting DFA Summary: Documenting DFA DataDataMethods to derive data from documented events:Methods to derive data from documented events:• Interpolation between known data points (but Interpolation between known data points (but notnot by by

extrapolating above or below known data points)extrapolating above or below known data points)• Calculate estimates based on “typical values” such as:Calculate estimates based on “typical values” such as:

• Examples of good and bad documentation for each of Examples of good and bad documentation for each of the key DFA inputs are provided on the slides that the key DFA inputs are provided on the slides that follow.follow.

FEMA Depth-Damage functions for buildings, contents, and displacement costs

Damage functions or relationships from other credible sources

Page 60: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009

DFA Documentation: Value of DFA Documentation: Value of Services (Roads/Utilities)Services (Roads/Utilities)

Acceptable Documentation

DOT traffic counts and detour time estimates with maps (roads)

Local utility company data indicating number of impacted accounts (utilities)

Unacceptable Documentation

“Ballpark” estimates of traffic counts/detour times without maps (roads)

Population/census data not correlated to utility service area (utilities)

For FEMA standard values for services, refer to FEMA’s BCA Toolkit

Page 61: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009

DFA Documentation: DFA Documentation: Historical Damage Event Historical Damage Event Costs/LossesCosts/LossesAcceptable Documentation

FEMA Project Worksheets/DSRs

Insurance or damage repair records from DOT, DPW, utility company

Damages estimated based on FEMA standard values

Unacceptable Documentation

Extrapolated damages or service losses

Road and utility maintenance costs not tied to damage events

Newspaper articles that do not cite credible sources (i.e., other than homeowner accounts)

Page 62: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009

DFA Documentation: DFA Documentation: Historical Damage Event Historical Damage Event FrequenciesFrequenciesAcceptable Documentation

Frequencies linked to documented FIS data

USGS stream gauge data or NOAA data

Copies of engineering/ technical expert reports

Using the unknown frequency calculator with supporting documentation

Unacceptable Documentation

Assuming all recurring damages occur at the 1-year frequency

Extrapolated event frequencies

Using the unknown frequency calculator with no explanation or supporting documentation

Page 63: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009

DFA Documentation: DFA Documentation: After-Mitigation Damages/LossesAfter-Mitigation Damages/Losses

Acceptable Documentation

Engineering or technical report

A detailed project scope that clearly indicates the level of effectiveness

Plans or specifications

Unacceptable Documentation

Assuming no damages occur after mitigation for non-acquisition projects

Poorly-defined project scopes with no clear level of effectiveness

Remember most mitigation projects do not eliminate all future damages (except acquisition)

Page 64: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009

ConclusionConclusionFEMA Damage-Frequency AssessmentFEMA Damage-Frequency Assessment

• Remember: Remember: It is always about riskIt is always about risk,, regardless of the hazardregardless of the hazard

• GoodGood mitigation projects address mitigation projects address high- riskhigh- risk situationssituations

• PoorPoor mitigation projects address mitigation projects address low- low- riskrisk situations situations

Page 65: FEMA’S BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS Roxanne Gray, Wisconsin State Hazard Mitigation Officer and Kristen Sailer, Minnesota State Hazard Mitigation Officer 2009

Contact InformationContact Information

• Roxanne Gray, Hazard Mitigation Roxanne Gray, Hazard Mitigation Officer Wisconsin Emergency Officer Wisconsin Emergency Management, 608-242-3211, Management, 608-242-3211, [email protected]@wisconsin.gov

• Kristen Sailer, Hazard Mitigation Kristen Sailer, Hazard Mitigation Officer, Minnesota Homeland Security Officer, Minnesota Homeland Security and Emergency Management, 651-and Emergency Management, 651-201-7423, 201-7423, [email protected]@state.mn.us