Introduction
The organization chosen for analysis is FEMA (Federal Emergency management Agency). Its goal is to prepare, prevent, recover and respond to natural and manmade disasters. The government created FEMA in 1979, and the organization has gone through various structural and service related changes.
How the agency has changed
In 1979, President Carter created FEMA in order to amalgamate of all the emergency response activities carried out by a series of other federal agencies. Prior to its creation, emergency response was a duty to the Civil Defense, the Federal Insurance Administration, the Federal Disaster Administration and many more; however, this would soon change. As the organization continued to develop, more Presidents began restructuring it.
Management, scope and roles within this agency have changed drastically over the past 33 years. During the 1990s, FEMA stopped carrying out Civil Defense work, and this allowed it to dwell only on natural disasters. As a result, the agency did very well in the area. It was able to provide effective support to persons that needed relief from natural disasters. In fact, the 1990s were some of the most successful years of the institution.
FEMA’s response to the Oklahoma City Bombing was satisfactory and even commendable in the 1994 LA Earthquake. One might add that the 1990s were quite successful because good political leadership backed the organization. President Clinton appointed authorities that had a long history in disaster relief, such as James Lee Witt. These institutional leaders then listened to experienced personnel in FEMA and this added to their effectiveness (Sylves, 2012).
However, after the September eleventh terrorist attacks, the agency underwent another restructure. This time, it would no longer operate as an independent body but as a part of larger organization known as the Department of Homeland Security. 2003 was the year when FEMA reintroduced national security as part of its portfolio. Those changes crippled the organization because they added to the bureaucracy of the organization.
For FEMA to do anything during a disaster, it needed to work with other stakeholders in the DHS. The agency also became bloated and had to share resources with other organizations in the Department of Homeland Security. Furthermore, some critics claimed that President Bush made political appointments in the organization, which led to ineffective leadership. In the new body –DHS – natural disasters were quite low in their priority list.
This explains why FEMA performed so poorly in 2005 during Hurricane Katrina. In fact, one of the worst criticisms labeled against the institution revolve around this incident. At the time, the institution failed to help the sick, the elderly and other helpless victims of the disaster. It knew that New Orleans was vulnerable to storms, but cut federal funding to prevent it.
Additionally, FEMA turned away various external organizations such as police departments and volunteers in order to abide by its many bureaucratic rules. Hurricane Katrina epitomized what can go wrong when an agency becomes too bloated and confused about its mandate.
Some changes have continued to occur in FEMA after 2005, with most of them being positive. After the event, the government passed the Post Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act in 2006. This increased funding to the entity and also granted the institution greater authority in management of natural disasters.
It eliminated certain positions and created new ones (Bea et al., 2006). Although these policy changes have minimized any embarrassing situations over the past seven years, they still have not addressed the root of the problem, which is having a bloated portfolio.
Conclusion
In the future, it is likely that the firm will not become as efficient as it was in the 1990s because it is still part of the DHS. Unless it is separated from the latter entity and left to handle natural disasters exclusively, then the agency will never be as effective as it was.
References
Bea, K., Halchin, E., Hogue, H., Kaiser, F., Love, N. & Schwemle, B. (2006). Federal Emergency Policy Changes after Hurricane Katrina. CRS Report for Congress, RL33729, 1-61
Sylves, R. (2012). Federal Emergency Management Comes of Age: 1979-200. In C. Rubin (Eds.), Emergency Management: The American experience 1900-2010 (pp. 115-166). Washington DC: CRC Press.