Lesson 9: Case Study: Hurricane Katrina
Lesson 9: Case Study: Hurricane Katrina mxw1429.1 Overview
9.1 Overview mjg8This lesson will conclude our three-week examination of emergency preparedness and disaster management. This third lesson is a historical case study of Hurricane Katrina. Your deliverable this week is a forum with two questions and an assignment. As part of your deliverable, you will research a contemporary disaster and provide a short PowerPoint presentation (see 9.6) part of which will show how the government disaster response efforts have improved (or not) since Katrina.
Lesson Objectives
At the end of this lesson, you will be able to:
- discuss and critique the use of intelligence and especially geospatial intelligence in the planning for, and response to, Hurricane Katrina;
- synthesize the ideas of previous lessons to critique the role of intelligence and especially geospatial intelligence in relation to Hurricane Katrina;
- discuss the social justice implications for geospatial intelligence applications in Hurricane Katrina;
- compare the government response to Katrina with the government response to a more recent disaster;
- speculate on future applications of geospatial intelligence for disaster management.
Questions?
If you have any questions now or at any point during this week, please feel free to post them to the GEOG 882.
9.2 Checklist
9.2 Checklist mxw142Lesson 9 will take us one week to complete. Please refer to the Calendar in Canvas for specific time frames and due dates. Specific directions for the assignments below can be found within this lesson.
Complete the following steps to complete Lesson 9:
- Work through Lesson 9 in this website.
- Read:
- the Foreword, Chapter 5, and Appendix A, and scan the rest of the material in "The Federal Response to Hurricane Katrina: Lessons Learned."
- the Executive Summary (6 pages) of "A Failure of Initiative."If you are interested, you can access the individual sections of the full report.
- the Executive Summary and scan the rest of "From Challenge to Action."
- "The Worst is yet to Come: Lessons from September 11 and Hurricane Katrina." from the research paper from Donald F. Kettl of the Fels Institute of Government of the University of Pennsylvania.
- "The Geography of Social Vulnerability: Race, Class, and Catastrophe" from the essay by Dr. Cutter and then examine the Understanding Katrina website and peruse any other essays that interest you.
- the Executive Summary and scan the rest of "In the Wake of the Storm: Environment, Disaster, and Race after Katrina."
- "Partnerships: FEMA Looks to NGA for Disaster Help" from Shawna Wolin's article (page 29-30) in the July-August 2006 issue in the NGA Pathfinder magazine.
- "Results and Recommendations on the Role of Airborne and Commercial Satellite Imagery in Emergency Response" from the ASPRS report.
- "The Red Pill" by Kathleen Tierney.
- "NGA Makes the Difference: Hurricanes and Technology Challenges" from the September-October 2005 issue of the NGA Pathfinder magazine.
- Watch Frontline's "The Storm" and watch the entire video.
- Participate in the three-part "Lesson 9 - GRADED Discussion Forum (#3)."
- Create a PowerPoint comparing the government response to Katrina with the government response to a more recent disaster and upload it to one of the three discussion forums.
9.3 Hurricane Katrina
9.3 Hurricane Katrina mxw142Background on Katrina and its Aftermath
Hurricane Katrina formed on 23 August 2005 and dissipated on 31 August 2005. In her nine day life, Katrina would wreak devastation across several states and destroy the city of New Orleans. Overall, Katrina would take at least 1836 lives and cause over $80 billion in damage, making it the most expensive disaster in US history. The after effects of Katrina continue to this day. The general perception is that the US disaster preparedness and response system, including all levels of government and disaster non-governmental organizations, failed in its initial response to Katrina. Thus, governments and NGOs at all levels continue to study Katrina to prevent future debacles. The political fallout from Katrina also continues as New Orleans attempts to rebuild with a population that as of 2023, is less that 80% of the pre-Katrina number.

Optional Reading

Wikipedia article on Hurricane Katrina
Hurricane Katrina. (2023, Nov. 16, 2023) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Katrina
Frontline: "The Storm"
We begin our case study of Hurricane Katrina with a Frontline documentary available from the PBS website via streaming video. As an educator, I personally love Frontline as I believe it is fair, balanced, well researched, and hard hitting beyond anything on commercial television. I also love Frontline because they have over sixty of their best episodes available as streaming video for free.
Video: The Storm (54:34 minutes)
FEMA is not going to hesitate at all in this storm. We are going to move fast, we are going to move quick, we are going to do whatever it takes to help disaster victims.
We will do everything in our power to help the people in the communities affected by this storm.
NARRATOR: They said everything was under control, but then came the test.
Walter Maestri: We're asking, is anybody out there listening? Does anybody out there care?
Who was in charge of that disaster? Was it Mike Brown, was it Michael Chertoff, or was it the president?
Ray Nagin: It's too doggoned late. Now get off your asses and let's do something, and let's fix the biggest crisis in the history of this country.
NARRATOR:Tonight on Frontline, correspondent Martin Smith asks what went wrong.
Martin Smith: "Did you fail?"
Michael Brown: "No, I did not fail. I'll make a great confession here.You know what? FEMA makes mistakes in every disaster. FEMA makes mistakes in every disaster."
NARRATOR: Whether America will be prepared next time disaster strikes.
Wow. Here comes a blast. Jeez!
It's getting really bad now. We've got ferocious winds here. We've got a big wall of water coming right now. Storm surge.
Here it comes. It's in the house. It's up to the top.
I never thought I'd die this way.
NARRATOR:: Almost three months after Katrina, there are still questions. Why didn't New Orleans evacuate sooner? Why were so many people left behind?
Okay, I'd better get off the air, put this thing in a watertight bag.
Man, look at that stuff. When's it supposed to stop?
NARRATOR: Where was the National Guard? Where was the Army?
Get out of here, guys.
NARRATOR: Where was FEMA?
I can't believe it.
NARRATOR: There are just as many explanations for what went wrong. Local and state officials failed to plan. The U.S. military waited too long. FEMA was poorly led. The government was indifferent to victims who were mostly poor and black.
What's up?
How are you doing, man?
I had to leave out of my house, man. I don't know whether that water is coming over that levee or what.
The last I heard, it's not.
Huh?
The last I heard, it's not.
The storm missed us.
Think I can get in there to get somewhere?
I got no room.
NARRATOR: In the first few hours after Katrina hit, many believed that New Orleans had dodged a bullet. At the headquarters of the Louisiana National Guard, located in the Lower Ninth Ward, the soldiers were not yet aware that the canal levees were were giving way. The Guard's commander was monitoring the situation from Baton Rouge.
MAJ. General Bennett Landerneau, Louiana National Guard: I spoke to an airman at Jackson barracks, and I asked him...I asked him about the water. And he told me that it rained very little, and it was just... except for just a few puddles of water in the parking lot, there just was no water. And then he hesitated a minute.. And he said, "Would you hold the line a minute? I need to look at something." And he came right back, and he said, "I don't know why, but there's probably a foot of water on Claiborne Street." And then immediately he said, "Sir, there's two feet of water on Claiborne Street." Very shortly he said, "Cars are beginning to float out of the parking lot. There's a river of water moving into this area."
NARRATOR: Trapped inside the headquarters were around 300 soldiers. They lost power. Their backup generators flooded.Their communications center was useless.They lost 15 high-water trucks with mobile communications packages. The Guard spent most of the next 24 hours saving itself. Across town the police headquarters was also under water. Only three-quarters of the force showed up for duty.
Police operator 16: Okay, ma'am, what is your location? ... Okay, is he in the attic?
NARRATOR: With most of the city's switchboards flooded, residents were lucky if they if they could make a 911 call.
I got a handicapped girl. The water is coming up.
Police operator 16: You said you are on the roof?
Captain Jeff Winn, New Orleans SWAT Team: Lower Ninth Ward was in real bad shape.The Fifth district was in real bad shape. At 3:00 or 4:00 in the morning, they were still calling for help, I mean, and sobbing on the on the air, saying, "Please come and get me out."
Smith: Did you have enough boats?
Jeff Winn: No. If anything haunts me about this whole situation, it's pulling them back and saying, "Look, we've got to go back out at first light."
NARRATOR: For many, it was too late.
Smith: And the failure of communications systems cost lives in those first days. Fair statement?
Lt. General Steven Blum, Chief US National Guard: If any lives were lost because people were late to getting there, it's because the people were late to getting there, it's because the people that couldn't call 911and tell them where they were. That's communications.They couldn't pick up their cell phone.They couldn't pick up their house phone and call anybody and "I'm trapped in an attic. Come get me."
Smith: Nor could a Swat team that was in a forward position call for backup.
Steven Blum: That's correct. Nor could a soldier that's out in a boat in some cases call back and say, "I've got five in a boat in some cases call back and say, "I've got five people on a roof and my boat can only handle four." That kind of business.
Walter Maestri, Emergency Marshall, Jefferson Parish: We've got hungry people, we've got frustrated people, we've got angry people.
There's no food, no water! I mean, the bare necessities!
We need help! New Orleans needs assistance.
Walter Maestri: And we're asking, you know, is anybody out there listening? And we're asking, you know, is anybody out there watching? Does anybody out there care?
New Orleans is hot. We can't take this. We've been out here for three days. And we've been asking for help.
Where the policemen at? Where the National Guard to control all of this?
Mayor Ray Nagin, 2002-Present: I'm swimming in it. People trying to give me their babies that are sick, and senior citizens saying that they, you know, they couldn't take it anymore.We need help. We need troops. We need resources. We need water..
We need a ship. We need a ship.
NARRATOR: But it was the mayor's responsibility to stock the shelters with enough food water and to mobilize city and school buses for evacuation. 500 were flooded when the levees broke.
Smith: Did you ever talk about having buses on higher ground prior to the storm?
Ray Nagin: No. Other than what we normally do, is to put our RTA buses, you know, at the location that has never flooded.
Smith: But why not move buses to high ground?
Ray Ngain: We did not have the drivers. We had the buses, but there were no drivers. We had to scrounge around to find enough buses.
Smith: And you had no National Guardsmen to drive the buses.
Ray Nagin: The National Guard was not on the ground.
Smith: There were National Guardsmen at Jackson Barracks.
Ray Nagin: At Jackson Barracks? Jackson Barracks flooded.
NARRATOR: On day three of the disaster, President Bush flew over the area.
President Bush: The National Guard has nearly 11,000 Guardsmen on state active duty to assist governors and local officials with security duty to disaster response efforts. FEMA's moving supplies and equipment into the hardest hit areas.
NARRATOR: What the president couldn't see was what was happening on the streets below.
What did you say to the President of the United States and what did he say to you?
Ray Nagin: I basically told him we had an incredible crisis here, and that his flying over in AirForce One does not do it justice.
How is a three-week-old infant going to be able to survive out here with no milk, no water?
I don't want to die like this.
NARRATOR: On day four, Mayor Ray Nagin went on a local radio show.
Ray Nagin: I don't want to see anybody do any more goddamn press conferences. Put a moratorium on press conferences.Don't tell me 40,000 people are coming here.They're not here.
Smith: When I hear you on the radio there on Thursday you seem a little unglued.
>> Ray Nagin: I was. I mean, you know, I was watching all this suffering at the Superdome, and I was hearing the president do a press conference. I was hearing the governor do a press conference..And I was hearing all these people doing press conference. And what they were saying was not reality.
Mr. President, thank you, thank you, thank you.
We are extremely pleased with the response of every element of the federal government.
Ray Ngain: I just...I said, "Uh-uh. I've had enough of this." And then I called up behind it and I said, "Look, here's what's really going on." And the rest is history. It's too doggoned late.'Now get off your asses and let's do something, and let's fix the biggest goddamn crisis in the history of this country.
NARRATOR: State and local officials were 80 miles away in the state capital, Baton Rouge.
Director Brown, I hope you will tell President Bush how much we appreciate it.These are the times that really count.
Director Michael Brown: What I've seen here today is a team that is very tight-knit, working closely together, being very professional, doing... and in my humble opinion, making the right calls.
NARRATOR: In his first full- length TV interview post- Katrina, former FEMA director Michael Brown tells Frontline that during the crisis he misled the public to quell panic.
Brown: Well, because I'm not going to go on television and publicly say that I think that the mayor and the governor are not doing their job and that they're not doing their job and that they're not... they don't have the sense of urgency. I'm not going to say that publicly. I don't think that's the proper thing to do.
Smith: So, though you said that, you didn't feel that way at that time?
Brown: Oh, absolutely not.You know, I'm just not going to go on public television and bash in the middle of a disaster what I think people should or should not be doing.
We need help!
NARRATOR: Brown's assurances weren't convincing.
We've haven't eaten in, like, five days.
NARRATOR: By day four, he appeared completely out of touch.
Where is the aid? It's the question people keep asking us on camera.
Brown: Brian, it's an absolutely fair question, and I've got to tell you, from the bottom of my how sad I feel for those people. The federal government just learned about those people today.
Smith: You say, "Brian, it's an absolutely a fair question. The federal government just learned about those people today."Now, you have subsequently said that you had misspoken.
Brown: Right.
Smith: But you said it again to Ted Koppel.
Ted Koppel: Don't you guys watch television? Don't you guys listen to the radio?
Brown: We've been so focused on doing rescue. And I'll take you one further. I think I actually said it to Soledad O'Brien.
Soledad O'Brien: I don't understand how FEMA cannot have this information.
Brown: Soledad, I learned about it listening to the news reports.
Smith: So you said it three times.
Brown: I said it three times.
Smith: So how do you misspeak three times? I don't understand.
Brown: I understand why people can now look at that tape and say, "Brown's saying he just learnedd about that? He really must be an idiot." And I simply misspoke. I knew about it 24 hours before, and I should have said, "We just learned about it 24 hours ago, Brian."
Smith: I just don't understand how you would misspeak three times about that situation.
Brown: Well, I'll tell you what we'll do. Next time there's a really big we'll put you in charge of it. We'll not give you any sleep, and we'll put you on this side of the chair, on this side of this side of the camera. And we'll pepper you with questions for a couple hours at a time and see how tired you are.
NARRATOR: Brown's counterpart in Baton Rouge was Governor Kathleen Babineaux Blanco, a former schoolteacher and two-term lieutenant governor. Her critics say she was unprepared and made vague, confusing requests to Washington.
Governor Kathleen Babineaux Blanco: You know, I asked for help, whatever help you can give me. If somebody asks me for help,"Okay, well, I can do this, this, this, and this. What do you need?" But nobody ever told me the kinds of things that they could give me. My first conversation with President Bush was asking for all federal firepower. And I mean, I meant everything, just send it. Give me planes, give me boats, give me people.
Smith: You've been criticized for not asking for help in the right way, that you didn't understand the system.
Blanco: When you say, "Help, help," just, you know...
Smith: Well, did you ask for troops?
Blanco: I wanted, you know, more help. I wanted whatever assets they had.
NARRATOR: Mayor Nagin was asking the same questions of the governor.
Smith: What were you asking for?
Nagin: We need help. We need troops. We need resources. We need food. We need water. You name it, we need it.
Smith: And what did she say to you?
Nagin: She said she was going to help.
Smith: And then?
Nagin: Then time went on.
Brown: With all due respect to them, I think they were just truly overwhelmed.
Smith: Well, as I understand it, when local officials are overwhelmed, that's why we have FEMA.
Brown: That's correct. But FEMA does that based upon the priorities of what the state establishes.Now, the state is still in control. We don't come in and take over. We don't have the resources to take over.
NARRATOR: And Brown claims that he couldn't really help Louisiana because officials didn't tell him what they wanted.
Brown: I talked to General Landerer...
Smith: Landreneau.
Brown: Landerneau, I'm sorry, the adjutant general, about some of the things, you know. I actually went to him and said, "Help me help you. What do you need?"And I remember being surprised because he didn't have, like, a list of priorities or things that he needed.
NARRATOR: But General Landreneau says Brown is wrong.
Smith: Are you saying that he's making this up?
General Landerneau: I'm not going to, you know... I'm not going to comment on what Mr. Brown said or didn't say.
Smith: But he's making a charge about you.
Landerneau: But I can assure you that we requested assistance from FEMA. We've got documentation to show that.
Narrator: After that interview, General Landreneau a 48-page document from FEMA. It shows hundreds of specific requests that FEMA had received from the state for manpower, equipment, and supplies. Other Louisiana emergency managers say FEMA simply didn't deliver.
Maestri: We were flabbergasted by some statements made by high FEMA officials, including statements made by high FEMA officials, including Undersecretary Brown, when he did not come or FEMA didn't come because the locals didn't ask. The locals did ask.
Smith: You told FEMA that you needed help?
Maestri: We needed this, we needed... and not only help. We needed specifics.
Smith: And then you heard Brown saying that you hadn't made those requests.
Meastri: That's correct.
Smith: What went through your mind?
Meastri: It was, you know, anger. It was betrayal. It was... calamity was going to be, you know, intensified, and we were going to look at nowdevastation squared.
President Bush: Good morning. Yesterday I saw the aftermath of one of the largest natural disasters ever to strike America.
NARRATOR: In Washington, it took six days for the administration to acknowledge the inadequacy of the federal response.
President Bush: Many of our citizens simply are not getting the help they need, especially in New Orleans. And that is unacceptable.
Richard Falkenrath: There was a period of days, and we weren't sure who was directing the federal response, and were all the actions being taken. And the impression given in those four days is basically indelible, and it is injuriousto the President. There's no question.
NARRATOR: Everyone pointed fingers at everyone else. No one came in for more criticism than FEMA director Brown.
Jane Bullock: My only understanding is that someone didn't pull the trigger to get the resources there. And who was responsible for pulling the trigger is questionable, because I could never figure out who was in charge of that disaster for the first five days of the disaster. Was it Mike Brown, was it Michael Chertoff, or was it the president?
NARRATOR: It had been a very long week. America's top National Guard officer says he hopes next time things would be done differently.
Smith: What was the impact of the flooding of your headquarters?
Steven Blum: Oh, just traumatic effect.
Smith: So did it make sense to have it in a place where you knew there was possibility offlooding?
>>Steven Blum: In hindsight, no.
Smith: You wouldn't do it that way again?
Steven Blum: No, I don't think they would. I don't think they would.
NARRATOR: But General Landreneau insists he made the right call.
Smith: So you'd do it the same way. You wouldn't change the way you deploy?
Landerneau: No. We would have personnel and equipment at Jackson barracks again.
Smith: I talked to General Landreneau, and he said he would do it again. He would do it exactly the same way.
Steven Blum: Well, I would hope that he would think that through a little more carefully.
Exceptional tides flooding inland on the Texas coast underlined the warnings of the approach of Hurricane Carla.
NARRATOR: The establishment of FEMA grew out of a series of disasters back in the '60s and '70s.
Evacuation was aided by school buses which took nearly a thousand men, women, and children to safety. Reports put the total number of refugees at half a million. They were wise to get out in time.
NARRATOR: The first, Carla, struck on September 11, 1961.
When the hurricane struck, it lashed in 170 miles an hour. Hurricane Carla, the wildest of the century.
NARRATOR: A wave of monster storms followed.
Another 25,000 refugees to swamp already-overcrowded shelters.
NARRATOR: When Hurricane Betsy struck Louisiana in 1965, half of New Orleans flooded. Four years later, Hurricane Camille devastated the Gulf Coast again.
From Biloxi to Bay St. Louis, everything's in shambles.
NARRATOR: There seemed to be no end.
It's been more than a week since Hurricane Agnes brought the floodwaters... >>
NARRATOR: There was no FEMA in those days. Relief work was the collective responsibility of more than 100 different federal agencies.
Free food is being passed out. Much of it comes from the Department of Agriculture.
NARRATOR: People often complained about lack of coordination and poor results.
Many of the people here and others in the path of Hurricane Agnes were completely wiped out. Many of them feel that federal aid is too slow in coming and too little.
NARRATOR: Eventually, it was state governors who pressed president Jimmy Carter intostreamlining federal response. The Federal Emergency Management Agency was created in 1979. Ironically, over the next decade there were fewer disasters to respond to.
Leo Bosner: I remember I used to write position papers about disaster planning. We always had to use examples out of South America or a Mexico earthquake or Africa or something because there weren't killer disasters in the U.S.
NARRATOR: FEMA quickly became a sort of backwater. Under Reagan and Bush it endured scandal and became a parking lot for political appointees.
Leo Bosner: George Bush I appointed-- it was like deja vu all over again-- he appointed a non-emergency planning person in charge of FEMA. That was Wallace Stickney. The only claim to fame I ever heard was that his wife and another fellow's wife used to go shopping together, and that's how he got the job to be the FEMA.
NARRATOR: In fact, Stickney was hired because he was a friend and past advisor to Bush's chief of staff, former New Hampshire Governor John Sununu. In 1992, his FEMA would face the first category-five hurricane to hit the U.S. in 23 years.
>> Billy Wagner: I was at the hurricane center two days before Andrew even developed real well. And I saw it unfolding, and you could see what was going to happen. I can remember that a lot of people just didn't take it seriously.
NARRATOR: Andrew was compact, just 60 miles across, with ferocious 175-mile-an-hour winds. But it missed Miami.
Billy Wagner: The news media, the first thing they did was go to Miami Beach and around Miami. And they said, "Oh, yeah, you know, it doesn't look too bad." And nobody even paid any attention to poor Florida City or even Homestead. I could tell when I got up there that nobody in the state of Florida could handle the situation.
NARRATOR: The storm had damaged or destroyed 125,000 homes. Thousands were stranded without food or water. Overwhelmed, local emergency managers waited for FEMA.
Kate Hale: And we waited and we waited. And it became apparent that the outside world really didn't get what was going on, really didn't understand how desperate the situation was. And you're looking at people in your community dying as a result of it. We had people from FEMA telling us that they couldn't give us the resources cause we hadn't asked the right way.
Jane Bullock: We simply didn't get the resources down there in time. We had no relationship with the State of Florida. So we weren't sitting with the Governor finding out what was going wrong, and we were dysfunctional, just as we... as FEMA was dysfunctional during Hurricane Katrina.
Kate Hale: At that point in time, it became apparent that we needed to do something extraordinary. We had nowhere else to go. If we do not get more food and water into the South End in a very short period of time we're going to have more casualties because we're going to have people who are dehydrated, who are without food, babies that need formula. All I know are a lot of people are saying, why aren't we doing more? We're doing everything we can. Where in the hell is the cavalry on this one?
Kate Hale: Within three hours, apparently the switchboard of the White House was just absolutely inundated with calls from all over the United States.The Pentagon was activated in three hours.
Mr. President, do you as president bear some responsibility for the delay in federal help?
President Bush: We're not talking about delay. The military was ready to move instantly, hot planning right from the very beginning.
NARRATOR: President Bush nudged his FEMA director to the sidelines and inserted his secretary of transportation, Andrew Card, as fix-it man.
Andrew Card: This is not a time to stand around and talk, it's a time to get busy, and that's what I'm down here to do.
NARRATOR: Card was immediately besieged with questions over why it had taken five days to send in the troops.
Andrew Card: As soon as Governor Chiles made the request for federal troops to come in and assist, we acted on that request.
I'm not going to participate in the blame game, and nor is Governor Chiles.
NARRATOR: Andrew was an election-year disaster for the Bush Administration.The new Clinton White House recognized the political value of reforming FEMA.
Richard Clarke: After Hurricane Andrew, which was in the last year of the Bush administration, everyone realized that FEMA had been a dumping ground for political favors and political appointees. And the Clinton administration said, "Okay, we don't want to have that happen on our watch, what happened to President Bush, 41, with Hurricane Andrew, so let's clean out all the political appointees, not put Democratic political appointees in there, but get professional emergency response units and create it as a professional agency.
NARRATOR: Clinton tapped James Lee Witt, formerly Arkansas's state emergency manager, to become the first FEMA director in the agency's history with direct experience. FEMA director in the agency's history with direct experience in disaster management. He was also a very savvy pol.
Leo Bosner: I remember the first day he was there. He stood in front of FEMA the entrance like a politician, and he shook hands with the FEMA employees coming in, 8:00 in the morning. "I'm James Witt. I'm your new director." Glad to meet you. And right away people thought, "Hey, this is interesting; this is something different."
James Lee Witt: Everybody across the country loved to hate FEMA, and the morale was just terrible. It just wasn't performing. And we made FEMA a more functional organization, a flatter organization, and to...with less bureaucracy.
NARRATOR: Republicans and Democrats alike agree that under Witt, FEMA finally became the professional disaster agency it was supposed to be.
Smith: You were never tested with a disaster of this proportion, though.
James Lee Witt: Well, I don't know if I... if you... not that magnitude, I guess you would say, but probably close. The North Ridge earthquake was one of the largest in history. The Mississippi River flood was quite large, nine states. And Hurricane Floyd, which flooded almost all of North Carolina.
NARRATOR: Witt focused on prevention, or mitigation, working with communities to prepare for disasters. He began Project Impact with $30 million in seed money.
James Lee Witt: Congress asked us to do a cost-benefit analysis on the mitigation, and we did that. And we found that every dollar spent saved anywhere from three to five dollars in future losses. But it did more than that; it saved lives.
NARRATOR: Project Impact gave money to seven pilot cities. And by 2000, nearly 250 communities had joined. But not all cities had participated in the program. New Orleans, for one, opted out.
Smith: What would New Orleans had gotten had they participated in Project Impact?
Jane Bullock: New Orleans could have sat down and brought all their community leaders together, both private sector and public sector, and looked at what their risks were. Obviously, everyone in New Orleans recognizes that they live below sea level, recognizes that the levees are a protection, but, as we've seen, not the ultimate protection. Then they could begin to address some of the issues.
President Bush: I... you know, as Governor one of the things you have to deal with is catastrophe. I can remember the fires that swept Parker County, Texas.
NARRATOR: In the 2000 presidential debates, Bush praised Witt and FEMA.
President Bush: I've got... I've got to pay the administration a compliment. James Lee Witt of FEMA has done a really good job of working with governors during times of crisis.
NARRATOR: But after Bush became president, Witt left the agency.
Joe Allbaugh: I, Joe Allbaugh, do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the constitution of the United States.
NARRATOR: Like his father, Bush stocked FEMA with political appointees with little or no professional experience in emergency management. His campaign manager, Joe Allbaugh, became FEMA'S new director.
President Bush: I couldn't have made it to Washington without him, and I can't tell you how honored I am that he has come to Washington to serve his country. Thank you for accepting this responsibility.
NARRATOR: Following the Bush budget-cutting agenda, Allbaugh set out to trim FEMA. One of the proposed cuts was Project Impact. In late February 2001, Microsoft was hosting a conference in Seattle when a major earthquake struck. That same day, as Seattle officials were crediting Project Impact with minimizing damage to life and property, the administration cut the program from its budget. And in May 2001, Allbaugh told congress that FEMA was "an oversized entitlement program." He brought in his friend of 25 years, Michael Brown, to be FEMA's new general counsel.
Michael Brown: In certain areas I think that FEMA had become bloated. There was a general desire to make it as lean and mean as possible, that if there was any fat that needed to be cut out, we should cut that out.
NARRATOR: To focus the agency, Allbaugh identified the three most likely disasters facing the country. They were: an earthquake in California, a hurricane hitting New Orleans, and a terrorist attack in New York. By all accounts, FEMA performed well after 9/11.
Jane Bullock: When 9/11 happened, the career people in FEMA did what they always do: they went up to New York and immediately set up a disaster field office, set up communications.
Find a way to get down to B2, go for it. The key thing to this thing is we do not have a lot of time.
NARRATOR: Allbaugh would not on camera, but in a telephone interview he told producer Martin Smith that "the FEMA you saw on 9/11 is not the FEMA we see today." Allbaugh says the fault lies with what happened next.
President Bush: Tonight I propose a permanent cabinet-level Department of Homeland Security to unite essential agencies that must work more closely together...
NARRATOR: It would be the largest reorganization of government in 40 years, made up of 22 federal agencies scattered across Washington, D.C., and Northern Virginia. For the new boss, the challenge was to get this archipelago of agencies to function as one unit.
Clark Kent Irvin, Inspector Gen D.H.S, 2003-2004: This would test the competence of a Jack Welch or a Lee Iacocca.The Department has this huge management challenge, a huge budget-- about $30 to $40 billion-- the third-largest agency in the government, and all cobbled together in a matter of months. And yet we had at the top someone who'd never managed anything larger than the immediate staff of a governor or the immediate staff of a congressman.
President Bush: The Department is under the command of a superb leader, who has my confidence. Congratulations, Tom, and thank you for serving.
Tom Ridge, Sec. of Homeland Security, 2003-2005: If you look at the Department of Homeland Security, it's like a holding company, where you had some mergers and acquisitions, you had a couple of new start-ups. Basically putting together 20-plus units of government, and about 180,000 people.
NARRATOR: The Department became much larger than congress had ever proposed.
Smith: Then they decided to form a larger department than you had recommended..
Warren Rudman, U.S Commission of National Security: Correct.
Smith: Bad idea? Good idea?
Warren Rudman: I thought it was a bad idea, because I think that any government reorganization has to come in relatively small bites, and... or else you get indigestion. If you look at our original report, it was a much leaner organization. The key parts of it were FEMA, the Coast Guard, Immigration and Customs Enforcement. But here, you had a lot of other things that went in, which in my opinion didn't belong there.
NARRATOR: In the bureaucratic shuffle, FEMA was downgraded from an independent agency to a sub-department of Homeland Security.
Leo Bosner: What it looked like to us was that for whatever reasons, a well-run system was either on purpose or accidentally just being pulled apart and shredded, because our system wasn't perfect, but it worked pretty well.
Jane Bullock: FEMA was a very small agency. Being moved into a huge department where it would have agencies like Immigration Services, Transportation Security Administration-- groups and organizations that had 10,000 to 20,000 employees in it. And a small agency like FEMA could not possibly compete. The creation of the Department of Homeland Security became a death knell for FEMA.
NARRATOR: The morale at FEMA plummeted. Scores of lifelong employees left the agency. Director Joe Allbaugh left for the private sector. Michael Brown took over.
Michael Brown: When you move FEMA into the Department of Homeland Security, you do create this added layer of bureaucracy that FEMA has to deal with, in terms of budgets, in terms of personnel, I.T. systems, everything. There was almost $80 million that was taken out of FEMA's budget to use in other areas of the Department of Homeland Security. And once we moved FEMA in there, these taxes started to occur, and we started to lose the resources.That was a mistake.
Smith: People inside FEMA complained that they got taxed to pay for this new overhead.
Tom Ridge: Well, it's quite interesting they used the word "tax," because these agencies and their individual heads understood that as part of the integration process that we're going to redistribute some of the dollars they had.
Smith: You don't think FEMA was hurt by the reorganization?
Tom Ridge: No, of course not.
Michael Brown: Terrorism was the issue. That was the issue. And I want to emphasize that I don't minimize that issue because I do believe it's important, but you need to be prepared to respond to a disaster regardless of what causes it.
NARRATOR: Brown was also planning to leave FEMA for the private sector around the time Katrina struck.
Michael Brown: Let's get started immediately. National Hurricane Center, you want to give us an update?
Sure. There is a very, very large hurricane, and...
NARRATOR: For all the cutbacks at FEMA, Brown faced Katrina with some planning under his belt.
Michael Brown: Okay, we'll move on now to the States. Louisiana?
NARRATOR: A year earlier, the agency had sponsored an exercise called Hurricane Pam that forecast Katrina.
Walter Maestri: Pam is the perfect model of what happened here, you know. Everything that happened in Pam, which was purely fictional and an exercise, happened in Katrina.
NARRATOR: But Pam set up false expectations.
Walter Maestri: Commitments were made at the end of the exercise: this is what we're going to do; this is what you're going to do; this is what this one's going to do. And the problem here that developed in Katrina is that the locals accepted that. We believed it.
NARRATOR: After 20 days and $850,000, the administration cut FEMA'S funding for the Pam exercise before it was completed. This 121-page draft report shows that key planning decisions were not yet made. The issue of medical care for hurricane victims was not yet finalized. Communications were not addressed at all. Key transportation decisions were left "to be determined." As Katrina approached, state and city officials knew they were unprepared.
The storm was coming. It was heading dead on in.
It had been gaining strength. It had been headed closer.
A direct hit was going to be really bad for the city.
They knew for days that a hurricane was going to hit a city
They knew for days that a hurricane was going to hit a city that was already below sea level.
I said, "Mr. President, it's going to be a big one. It's going to be bad, and I'm going to need a lot of help. We have a... you know, we have a very small state.
Ray Nagin: Ladies and gentlemen, I wish I had better news for you, but we are facing a storm that most of us have feared.
NARRATOR: In those last hours before landfall, dozens of copies of the Pam report were distributed to emergency planners.
Ray Nagin: Every person is hereby ordered to immediately evacuate the city of New Orleans.
NARRATOR: But when it came to evacuation, they were forced to improvise.
Ray Nagin: We basically communicated with all of, you know, the people in the city, especially the churches, to say, "Look, this thing is coming." We faxed out to everyone. We had talked about a buddying system. And for the most part, a lot of churches participated and got people out.
Smith: Can we evacuate cities really?
I think it would prove to be virtually impossible on very short notice to get urban America out of the way, as it were. So I think that one of the difficult lessons from a Katrina-like event is that it's very difficult to do. We weren't as well-prepared as we should have been, pure and simple.
Smith: Why weren't you pre-positioned?
Michael Brown: We were pre-positioned.
Smith: With buses that you could get people evacuated out?
Michael Brown: We did not have buses pre- positioned, because that was a state and local responsibility. And I don't want to sound like I'm, you know, passing the buck here, but we rely upon state and local governments. Evacuation laws are state and local laws. That's not a federal law.
NARRATOR: But Brown is not entirely correct. Evacuation is a shared responsibility. U.S. federal law governing homeland security states clearly: "The functions of the federal emergency management agency include conducting emergency operations to save lives, through evacuating potential victims."
Smith: Weren't people dying while waiting to be rescued?
>>Michael Brown: Yes, they absolutely were, because people who either did not or could not evacuate, as the waters began to rise, they found themselves in situations where they were going to die. And every rescuer on every helicopter and every boat was trying to get to every person that they could.
The red and white awning?
You see it? We might have to get on a..
Michael Brown: One busload would have saved some people. Two busloads would have saved twice as many people. Things like that that I just wish all of us had been a little more umpgh about.
NARRATOR: Brown's regrets aside, there was an age-old political caution operating, a belief in maintaining strict constraints on federal power.
Smith: Shouldn't it be the role of the federal government to be setting standards for evacuation?
Admiral James Loy, Doty. Secretary D.H.S 2003-2005: I think it's the mayor's responsibility.
Smith: It's not the federal government's responsibility to make sure that our cities can be evacuated in a timely fashion?
James Loy: We are really talking about a logic path that takes you to pretty Orwellian nature.
Smith: But we... yet we have educational standards. It's the responsibility of states to have good clean air policies.
James Loy: Yeah, I hear you. I know... I think I sense where you're going.
Smith: It's not Orwellian to have clean air standards nationwide.
James Loy: It's a step in the direction, and I would offer that if in fact the mayor or the governor had had that imposed on them, there would have been some "Not so fast" associated with it.
NARRATOR: The Hurricane Pam exercise had predicted that more than 100,000 people would be left behind. The vast majority of the more than 900 people who died in New Orleans were elderly, 154 of them patients in New Orleans area nursing homes and hospitals. 34 died in this facility alone.
Smith: Why did that happen?
Walter Maestri: It appears that the staff did not implement their plan which requires them to evacuate, and, I suspect, didn't believe that the storm was going to be as disastrous as it was. And when they realized it, they couldn't do anything. And so they decided to save themselves, and they ran and left these, you know, 30-some-odd older people to fend for themselves. And they died in their chairs.
NARRATOR: The rescue of thousands of city residents was delayed for days by the inability of people to communicate with each other.
Steven Blum: All of the existing communications were out. They just were non-existent for probably 36 hours. Electricity is gone, power is gone. Your phone system is gone. Your ability to communicate is literally gone. Those people were blinded, they were deafened, and they were dumb.
Kathleen Blanco: And that was probably the most frustrating thing, and the most... the thing that hampered efforts the most, and not have a portable network in place to... to take care of that.
Smith: Secretary Ridge told me that post-crisis communications, emergency systems, was something that they had.
Michael Brown: And, for example, FEMA does have that. FEMA has...
Smith: So what happened to it?
Michael Brown: We used it. The problem is FEMA doesn't have enough of it.
Smith: But whose responsibility is that? Whose fault is that if FEMA doesn't have enough?
Michael Brown: Well, that's all their fault. That means that Congress and the administration and the FEMA director and everybody else needs to sit down and say, "If we're going to truly be ready for a catastrophic disaster, we need a, b, and c."
Smith: If we believe this president was focused on any one thing, it was certainly preparedness and the war on terrorism, but yet, four years after 9/11, we have no results on... on communications.
Warren Rudman: Yeah. Oh, I think that's a failure. I think it's a failure on the part of the Congress, it's a failure on the part of the administration, specifically a failure on the part of D.H.S. People should have paid more attention to that. I mean, if we ever learned anything, we learned on 9/11 in New York that those valiant people who lost their lives, many of them might not have lost their lives had they been able to talk to each other. They just weren't able to.
NARRATOR: The ability of first responders to talk with one another is called interoperability. Despite widespread recognition of its importance, very few cities have it.
Warren Rudman: You've got to get interoperability of communications or else you're going to have disaster no matter what goes on.
The primary channel is going to be Spec One. If Spec One goes down, NOPD guys, your backup channels are going to be on Spec Two.
Warren Rudman: If I were in a position to make a decision, the first thing I would do is to start funding interoperability for every major metropolitan area in this country, and I'd get it done
Smith: Here we are four years after 9/11.
Tom Ridge: Uh-huh.
Smith: And we still don't have robust interoperable communications. Why?
Tom Ridge: The interoperable communication dilemma is one that has existed to your point before 9/11, and the tragic consequences were most vivid on 9/11. Ultimately, a nationwide system, I think, is the goal of all the emergency responders, but it will take time to develop.
NARRATOR: Back in 2003, New Orleans got a chance to upgrade its system.
>> The city of new Orleans and seven surrounding parishes won a major federal grant to operate an emergency communications system.
NARRATOR: It was big news: a $7 million grant from the Department of Justice to build an interoperable communications network.
Deputies from opposite parishes will be able to communicate with special radios.
This is quite ambitious, but I think it reflects a realization that we must encounter the risks that we face together if we are going to be successful.
NARRATOR: The city was ready to build a network that would allow all existing first responder radios and phones to interconnect. But big tech companies with competing plans lobbied the mayor's office. With no federal guidance, the project stalled.
Smith: Why not just say, "You have to have such-and-such a system in place in one year from now, and you've got to buy this system to these specifications, and that's the deal"?
Tom Ridge: We're... we're not going to pick a vendor over another. You can keep pressing me on this point as long as you want. The fact of the matter is that they're spending hundreds of millions of dollars to make their systems interoperable. They've begun that process four years ago. The process continues today. And, in time, that is what will occur. It will not occur overnight, but there is sufficient intensity to this proposition that it will be done.
Smith: The Public Safety Wireless Network says that three states-- Delaware, Michigan, North Carolina-- have mature or widespread interoperability.
Tom Ridge: Yup.
Smith: Well, if Delaware, Michigan, and North Carolina can do it, why can't the rest of the country do it?
Tom Ridge: It's a federal system of governance, and it's one of the challenges as you build a department and try to create, not a federal capability, but a national capability.
Warren Rudman: Well, that's baloney. We impose standards on airports. We impose standards on interstate highways, on bridges. We impose standards on harbors. We impose standards on almost everything. And the federal government, if it's going to give out money, has a right to demand standards. And interoperability is one of those standards. And to say that somehow that that is impinging on federalism is, to use a polite word, baloney.
NARRATOR: Over the last three years, the Department of Homeland Security has handed out $8.1 billion to the states. They've bought everything from bullhorns to HAZMAT suits to helicopters.
Ricahrd Clarke: There are no specific goals, no specific requirements, and no plan to get from here to there. As a result we have cities that bought bulletproof vests for canine patrols...
No! Sit!
Richard Clarke: So that we have dogs with bulletproof vests. We have cities that bought air- conditioned garbage trucks with Homeland Security money, without ever solving their communications problems.
Richard Flakenrath: The Federal Government has handed out a lot of money. In my personal opinion it has handed out that money with far too few conditions on how the state and local agencies spend it. State and local agencies have the authority, under the Constitution, to spend money as they wish on things they want to buy.
Attention, citizens of New Orleans. Be advised that the Superdome and Convention Center have been closed.
Richard Flakenrath: That's the deal in a federal governance system. That, unfortunately, is federalism.
NARRATOR: It wasn't until day six of the disaster that the federal government flexed its muscle. 7,000 troops from the 82nd airborne and 1st cavalry divisions under the command of General Russell Honore hit the ground. The situation began to improve.
Michael Brown: I really believe the most serious mistake that I made was not just saying, "Look, we just can't get this done by ourselves; let's go ahead and get all these troops in here now. Let's don't get 500 troops to come in here and help with distribution. Let's get 10,000 troops in here and do something."
White-two, white-two, white- five.
NARRATOR: The Louisiana National Guard had been overwhelmed. Not only was its headquarters flooded, but 35% of its soldiers were on duty in Iraq and Afghanistan.
President Bush: Americans have every right to expect a more effective response in a time of emergency.
NARRATOR: Two weeks after Katrina, President Bush addressed the nation from New Orleans.
President Bush: It is now clear that a challenge on this scale requires greater federal authority and a broader role for the armed forces, the institution of our government most capable of massive logistical operations on a moment's notice.
NARRATOR: In his speech he called for all federal, state, and local agencies to review their performance.
President Bush: This government will learn the lessons of Hurricane Katrina.
NARRATOR: Military planners are now considering setting up a permanent rapid reaction unit designed to respond to domestic disasters. The price tag has not yet been determined. Meanwhile, plans have been drawn up to further reduce FEMA. In June, 2005, two months before Katrina, Director Michael Brown sat down to write a memo to the number-two official at Homeland Security. "This is to express serious concerns about the direction this is taking emergency management in this nation," Brown wrote. "The proposed organizational structure is doomed to fail. I don't want to see us fail this president or the nation."
Jane Bullock: This latest reorganization that Secretary Chertoff has suggested, FEMA loses more stature. FEMA becomes an office.. And not just that, it loses all of the preparedness functions. And FEMA becomes a very small response recovery mitigation organization.
NARRATOR: But on October 18, President Bush signed the order to take responsibility for preparedness out of FEMA. As everyone struggles to answer questions about Katrina, the storm's lesson remains clear: the high cost of being unprepared.
It came up pretty fast. Been pretty ineffective in my vertical evacuation. Oh, look, there's someone swimming around outside, going to get in my tree. Who's that? It's my neighbor, apparently. What the hell's he doing swimming down the block? Can't imagine what this guy's doing out.
The Federal Response
President George Bush suffered severe criticism for the federal response to Hurricane Katrina. He charged his Assistant for Homeland Security and Counter-Terrorism to oversee a study that determined what went right and wrong, and what changes should be made to prepare for the next Katrina.
Required Reading
Read the Foreword, Chapter 5, and Appendix A, and scan the rest of the material in "The Federal Response to Hurricane Katrina: Lessons Learned." The reading can be accessed from the Lesson 9 Checklist.
Required Reading
Read the Executive Summary (6 pages) of "A Failure of Initiative." If you are interested, you can access to the individual sections of the full report. The reading can be can be accessed from the Lesson 9 Checklist.

NGO Responses to Katrina
Non-Governmental Organizations play a crucial role in disaster relief. Some NGOs spring up shortly after a major disaster as groups of concerned citizens who want to help their neighbors. Other NGOs are enduring charitable organizations such as the Salvation Army that rapidly bring resources to bear in an emergency. The premier NGO for disaster relief in the United States is the American Red Cross.
The Red Cross Movement consists of the International Commission of the Red Cross/Red Crescent (ICRC), and The International Federation of the Red Cross/Red Crescent (IFRC). The ICRC based in Geneva, Switzerland is mandated by international treaty to support several functions during armed conflict including emergency humanitarian relief, protection of human rights, detainee visits, etc. The ICRC is funded by contributions by all the signatory governments to the Geneva Conventions and has a one billion Swiss Frank budget per year. The IFRC is the umbrella organization for the national Red Cross movements. Each national movement has its own charter and often has a relationship and charter from their national government to provide certain services and capabilities.
Mission Statement
The American Red Cross prevents and alleviates human suffering in the face of emergencies by mobilizing the power of volunteers and the generosity of donors.
Fundamental Principles of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement
Humanity
The International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, born of a desire to bring assistance without discrimination to the wounded on the battlefield, endeavours, in its international and national capacity, to prevent and alleviate human suffering wherever it may be found. Its purpose is to protect life and health and to ensure respect for the human being. It promotes mutual understanding, friendship, cooperation and lasting peace amongst all peoples. The principle of humanity expresses what the Movement places beyond anything else: the need to act in order to prevent and alleviate human suffering. Respect for human dignity and helping people—regardless of who and where they are—is paramount to everything we do.
Impartiality
It makes no discrimination as to nationality, race, religious beliefs, class or political opinions. It endeavours to relieve the suffering of individuals, being guided solely by their needs, and to give priority to the most urgent cases of distress. Non-discrimination is one of the most important aspects of protecting human beings in human rights law, humanitarian law and refugee law. Sadly, there are many factors for which people are discriminated against. The text of this principle does not include an exhaustive list of factors. But it makes clear that no group of people will be denied services or receive preferential treatment based on anything other than their needs.
Only by acting with impartiality can we ensure the Movement is trusted by all people to assist and protect them. We therefore have systems in place to ensure we deliver our support based on people’s needs alone and prioritize the most vulnerable at all times.
Neutrality
In order to continue to enjoy the confidence of all, the Movement may not take sides in hostilities or engage at any time in controversies of a political, racial, religious or ideological nature. The Movement must not take sides, or be regarded as doing so, either in its speech or actions at any time or place. Neutrality ensures the Movement has the confidence of all and can provide humanitarian support to all. Embodying the principle of neutrality at all times ensures the Movement can provide medical assistance to civilians and wounded or detained fighters during hostilities without being perceived as interfering in conflict. It is of the utmost importance that all parties in a conflict understand and respect the humanitarian role of a National Society.
Independence
The Movement is independent. The National Societies, while auxiliaries in the humanitarian services of their governments and subject to the laws of their respective countries, must always maintain their autonomy so that they may be able at all times to act in accordance with the principles of the Movement. The principle of independence means that the Movement must resist any interference—be it political, ideological or economic—capable of diverting it from embodying the principles of humanity, impartiality and neutrality. It is only by being truly independent that the Movement can respect these principles. Independence not only relates to the relationship between National Societies and States, but also between National Societies and any other forms of power or influence, such as religions, political parties, companies and so on.
Voluntary Service
It is a voluntary relief movement not prompted in any manner by desire for gain. The principle of voluntary service represents the common motivation uniting all those working within the Movement: a desire to help others. It is both a source of inspiration and a statement of solidarity. Whether members volunteer without pay or with some form of acknowledgement or even modest remuneration, it is not inspired by desire for financial gain but by individual commitment and devotion to the humanitarian purpose. This is freely chosen and accepted as part of the service the Movement provides to the community.
Unity
There can be only one Red Cross or one Red Crescent Society in any one country. It must be open to all. It must carry on its humanitarian work throughout its territory. Having only one Red Cross or Red Crescent Society in any given country ensures it can work efficiently. It avoids any risk of confusion in the public mind and means all people and communities are represented by one organization. A National Society must be active in all parts of the country so that even the hardest-to-reach communities can benefit from support when needed. This doesn’t mean that the level of activities must always be the same country-wide—the principle of impartiality may justify that certain areas need more support where the needs are greater. Similarly, National Societies must not discriminate when recruiting volunteers. They must ensure their membership includes a broad spectrum of people across the population so that humanitarian assistance is delivered to all people, by all people.
Universality
The International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, in which all Societies have equal status and share equal responsibilities and duties in helping each other, is worldwide. The universality of suffering requires a universal response. It is one of the Movement’s great strengths that we are present in virtually every country in the world through our 191 member National Societies. This principle also means that National Societies have a collective responsibility to support each other’s development and to work together in partnership and solidarity during disasters, for the benefit of all. When it comes to decision-making within the Movement, the principle of universality ensures that all National Societies have an equal vote during Statutory Meetings irrespective of their size or wealth.
The American Red Cross plays a key role in American disaster preparedness and response. While ARC volunteers made significant contributions during Katrina, the organization acknowledged shortcomings within its operations. In an effort to improve and be prepared for future Katrinas, the ARC published "From Challenge to Action: American Red Cross Actions To Improve and Enhance Its Disaster Response and Related Capabilities For the 2006 Hurricane Season and Beyond" in June 2006.
Required Reading
Read the Executive Summary and scan the rest of "From Challenge to Action" for a sense of the challenges Katrina posed for a major American NGO and the ARC's plans for change. The reading can be accessed from the Lesson 9 Checklist.
The Worst is yet to Come
Katrina was a disaster, but some would say the catastrophe was our response to the storm. The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 and Katrina caused serious consideration of the American ability to deal with the consequences of a serious natural or technological disaster. Political leaders, scholars, and citizens ask the legitimate question of what will America do as a nation to be prepared for the next Katrina, nuclear accident, or major terrorist attack?
Required Reading
Read the following research paper from Donald F. Kettl of the Fels Institute of Government of the University of Pennsylvania, entitled "The Worst is yet to Come: Lessons from September 11 and Hurricane Katrina." The reading can be accessed from the Lesson 9 Checklist.
9.4 Social Justice Issues
9.4 Social Justice Issues mxw142As we learned in a previous lesson, people experience risk and vulnerability to hazards differently. Quite often this is based on characteristics of social class, race, gender, and age. Hurricane Katrina brought this home to the American people as never seen before. The news media played a major role in highlighting the inequities and social justice issues Katrina made evident.
My experience is that many GIScience students are unaware of the social justice implications of GIS&T. These students often times see the technology as a neutral tool that supports good decision making. This impression is wrong. Every time a geospatial analyst makes a decision about what data or technique to use, there are potential social justice issues. At best, the non-critical geospatial analysts may make choices without thinking about the implications for traditionally disadvantaged groups. At worst, the analysts may make conscious choices to use data sets and methods that will discriminate against certain groups to the benefit of others for reasons of profit, power, influence, or favor with policy makers. My challenge to you is to recognize the implications in your choice of data, methods, and your analytical outcomes in regards to social justice issues. The technology may be value free and neutral, but the humans behind the technology are not.
Susan Cutter on Hurricane Katrina
The Social Science Research Council responded to Hurricane Katrina with an online project called "Understanding Katrina: Perspectives from the Social Sciences." As the SSRC puts it:
As analyses and "spin" of the Katrina crisis grow, we confront the sort of public issue to which a social science response is urgently needed. Accordingly, the SSRC has organized this forum addressing the implications of the tragedy that extend beyond "natural disaster," "engineering failures," "cronyism" or other categories of interpretation that do not directly examine the underlying issues-political, social and economic-laid bare by the events surrounding Katrina.
The SSRC believes the underlying failures of Katrina go far deeper than weather, bad levees, or good old boy government. The social science scholars involved seek to understand the deeper implications of underlying issues.
Dr. Susan Cutter, whom you will recall from the previous lesson, contributed the Understanding Katrina project with the essay "The Geography of Social Vulnerability: Race, Class, and Catastrophe". See reading below.
Required Reading
Read Dr. Cutter's essay on "The Geography of Social Vulnerability: Race, Class, and Catastrophe," and then examine the Understanding Katrina website and peruse any other essays that interest you. The links can be accessed from the Lesson 9 Checklist.

In the Wake of the Storm
The Russell Sage Foundation was established in 1907 by Mrs. Margaret Olivia Sage to foster the improvement of social and living conditions in the US. The foundation does this by fostering the development and dissemination of knowledge about US political, social, and economic problems. In the wake of Katrina, the foundation sponsored research on the social justice implications of Katrina. The resulting report entitled "In the Wake of the Storm: Environment, Disaster, and Race after Katrina" is a major contribution in understanding the social justice issues related to hazards, risks, and vulnerability.
Required Reading
Read the Executive Summary and scan the rest of "In the Wake of the Storm: Environment, Disaster, and Race after Katrina." The reading can be accessed from the Lesson 9 Checklist.
9.5 Geospatial Intelligence and Katrina
9.5 Geospatial Intelligence and Katrina mxw142The NGA and Katrina
Government and private sector geospatial intelligence practitioners have good reason to be proud of the contribution of GIS&T to Katrina response and recovery efforts. The National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency was mentioned in the "Federal Response to Hurricane Katrina" report in Appendix B on "What Went Right":
The National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) started collecting key infrastructure-related information (i.e. on airports, hospitals, police stations, emergency operations centers, highways, schools, etc.) well in advance of landfall and got this information into the hands of Federal, State, and local first responders in the affected region. As the storm was tracked, NGA pre-deployed analysts and mobile systems to the affected areas that provided expertise and information on the ground and facilitated the delivery of additional information from NGA offices elsewhere. Because they had assets in place and focused on the region, NGA provided the first comprehensive overview of the damage resulting from the hurricane and flood. NGA merged imagery with other information, creating hundreds of intelligence products per day that could be used and applied by response professionals to aid in decision-making. NGA assessments were multi-dimensional, timely, relevant, and continuous. They addressed many issues, including but not limited to: recovery planning and operations, transportation infrastructure, critical and catastrophic damage, dike stability and breaches, industry damage, and hazard spills. The NGA World Wide Navigational Warning Service also provided navigation information to the U.S. Navy, Merchant Marine, and Coast Guard, and relayed messages from the National Weather Service to people at sea. NGA also aided in the location and recovery of oil platforms. The imagery activities of NGA were essential to the restoration of critical infrastructure." See Also: U.S. National Geospatial Intelligence Agency, "Geospatial Intelligence Aids Hurricane Recovery Efforts," news release, September 7, 2005.
NGA is proud of its contribution to hurricane preparedness and relief efforts.
Required Reading
Read the September-October 2005 issue of the NGA Pathfinder magazine. The issue title is "NGA Makes the Difference: Hurricanes and Technology Challenges." The issue can be accessed from the Lesson 9 Checklist.
Many of my students in this course are geospatial analysts for NGA or the military. Shawna Wolin was a student in the first offering of this class, and she is the co-author of an article in the July-August 2006 NGA Pathfinder magazine.
Required Reading
Read Shawna Wolin's article "Partnerships: FEMA Looks to NGA for Disaster Help" (page 29-30) in the July-August 2006 issue of the NGA Pathfinder magazine for insight on how a classmate might be directly involved in the issues we study. The reading can be accessed from the Lesson 9 Checklist.
A Critical Look
My mission in teaching this course is to teach you to use higher order thinking skills and, most importantly, to be CRITICAL THINKERS. So let me tell you a story about trying to craft this lesson. The Penn State GEOINT faculty paid a visit to Washington to talk to key players in the geospatial intelligence business for national security, disaster preparedness, and international disaster relief. This included visiting the NGA College at Fort Belvoir and FEMA Headquarters in Washington, DC. To make a long story short, all the agency representatives thought this course and program were a great idea. They especially liked the critical thinking component of this course. However, no one wanted to take any risk by providing any unclassified case studies that were self-critical of their own operations. Perhaps these case studies do not exist or they are classified and unavailable. What is available from NGA is public affairs material like the Pathfinder magazine. Now, do not take me wrong. I have some background with the world of secrets and I understand protecting sensitive information and sources and methods. However, my experience and personal opinion is that too often secrecy is used to prevent true critical analysis, which is essential to process and produce improvement.
You just read several articles on NGA contributions during Katrina. Let me tell you about an interview with a key geospatial player from FEMA and that person's insights on NGA support for FEMA during Hurricane Katrina. (As the person did not respond to a request to provide written notes or participate in our forum, their privacy will be respected, and they will remain unnamed.)
The FEMA geospatial analysts had numerous requirements for imagery, data, and processed geospatial analytical products. NGA was on the scene and highly motivated to help. The problem was one of culture and orientation.
A historical conversation from a FEMA responder to Hurricane Katrina and some of the issues they noted:
- There were issues about data sharing due to the classified nature of some of the collection systems. Fortunately, commercial imagery solved many of these problems. However, the culture of secrecy hinders interagency coordination between defense oriented agencies such as NGA, and other federal, state, local, and NGO agencies who do not share that culture nor have the required clearances.
- NGA did not understand FEMA procedures and processes and thus did not always provide usable products. For example, FEMA must do damage assessments at various scales to include house by house assessments. These assessments drive the amount of relief funds that FEMA provides to individual homeowners. Katrina caused devastation on a scale that overwhelmed traditional ground damage assessment survey methods. Geospatial approaches seemed a natural solution to conduct damage assessment on such destruction. NGA used remote sensing products processed with GIS to provide damage assessment maps. Unfortunately, the map data did not suit the needs of FEMA and was unusable. The issue was educating the NGA analysts on FEMA customer needs, and having NGA be nimble enough to understand and craft technical solutions capable of creating useful products in a timely fashion.
- FEMA is a civilian agency that has been in crisis for over a decade. NGA is a Department of Defense combat support agency, as well as a member of the national intelligence community. There are cultural gaps between NGA (DOD really) and FEMA that get in the way of truly seamless interagency coordination.
(Note to students: consider for your case study in the related Canvas Discussion forum- Fema was in crisis at the time- is this still the case? Or how have things changed?)
Now, for those of you at NGA who may have worked Katrina and might be fuming, do not take the above observations as a criticism of you or NGA. My point is that to get better, you have to be willing to take a hard and candid look at what went wrong so that you can get better for the next time. Those of us outside the federal agencies hope they are doing this internally because they certainly are not doing it in view of the public. And that is a shame because there are citizens and scholars who might well have an outside perspective useful to the discussion.
Now consider the lessons learned from members of the American Society of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing (ASPRS) who were involved in Katrina. Read the report below and then look over the resources on the ASPRS website. The presentations are especially interesting. Andrew MacInnes of Plaquemines Parrish, LA is a graduate of the Penn State online master's in GIScience Program. His presentation on "Airborne and Satellite Imagery Use and Collection for Katrina and Rita is very interesting, and it has some amazing images.
Required Reading
Read the ASPRS report "Results and Recommendations on the Role of Airborne and Commercial Satellite Imagery in Emergency Response". The report can be accessed from the Lesson 9 Checklist.
As a final reading, consider this most interesting essay from the SSRC Understanding Katrina Project. Note the author's academic background and affiliation. Consider the implications of her insights for both geospatial intelligence and the broader issues we have been studying.
Required Reading
Read "The Red Pill" by Kathleen Tierney. The reading can be accessed from the Lesson 9 Checklist.
Reference:
National Geospatial Intelligence Agency (n.d.). Geospatial Intelligence Aids Hurricane Recovery Efforts. Retrieved Nov. 16, 2023 from https://www.fgdc.gov/organization/steering-committee/meeting-minutes/oct-2006/nga-preparedness.
9.6 Summary and Final Tasks
9.6 Summary and Final Tasks mxw142Summary
This lesson was a case study of Hurricane Katrina, and it concludes our three-lesson section on domestic disaster preparedness. In this section of the course, we examined the fundamentals of emergency management, including the National Response Plan and the National Incident Management System. We also examined the very important and often ignored issue of social justice in disaster preparedness and response, as well as the contribution of GIS&T to emergency management. This final case study of Hurricane Katrina allowed you to:
- discuss and critique the use of intelligence and especially geospatial intelligence in the planning for, and response to, Hurricane Katrina;
- synthesize the ideas of previous lessons to critique the role of intelligence and especially geo-spatial intelligence in relation to Hurricane Katrina;
- discuss the social justice implications for geospatial intelligence applications in Hurricane Katrina;
- compare the government response to Katrina with the government response to a more recent disaster;
- speculate on future applications of geospatial intelligence for disaster management.
Final Tasks
Deliverable: Lesson 9 - GRADED Discussion Forum (#3)
Return to Lesson 9 in Canvas. Look for the Lesson 9 - GRADED Discussion Forum (#3), where you will find the three required questions and an optional question for this assignment. The minimum requirement is that each of you post one primary response to each of my questions and comment on at least three of your classmates' posts. (Note: for the second discussion forum question, you are required to create a PowerPoint comparing the government response to Katrina with the government response to a more recent disaster and upload it to the corresponding discussion forum.)
Please post your primary response to the questions by Sunday evening to allow time for everyone to post comments by Tuesday night.
Before you move on to Lesson 10, double-check the Lesson 9 Checklist to make sure you have completed all of the required activities for this lesson.
Looking Ahead
Congratulations!! You have completed lessons 1 through 9 and are now ready to move on to the final lesson - Lesson 10 - Trends in Geospatial Intelligence.
For the final lesson, we will explore some other applications of geospatial intelligence and reflect on the future of the field. I will also ask that you complete two course surveys that will provide feedback to PSU and to me regarding the course content, delivery, graded requirements, etc. This feedback is essential to improving the course, so I appreciate your candid responses.
See you at the Critique!