Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Although it is not perfect, the Community Rating System is a good example of a federally based <br />program that offers incentives to localities for undertaking floodplain management activities. It has <br />been shown to be effective in encouraging new local initiatives and maintaining existing ones, Every <br />nonstructural measure discussed in this paper is rewarded to some extent by the Community Rating <br />System, <br /> <br />. States should encourage and assist their communities in joining, maintaining, and improving their <br />standing in the Community Rating System, to increase local capability. <br /> <br /> <br />. The successes of the local programs of Community Rating System-participating communities <br />should be publicized and transferred to more communities. <br /> <br />. The Federal Emergency Management Agency should consider identifYing certain Community <br />Rating System activities and phasing them in as additional standards and requirements for <br />community participation in the National Flood Insurance Program. <br /> <br />. Ways to streamline the Community Rating System should be sought continually. <br /> <br />Project Impact <br /> <br />Project Impact is a recent initiative developed by the Federal Emergency Management Agency that <br />fosters many of the sort of far-reaching mitigation approaches that the ASFPM has called for in the <br />past. Among other techniques, Project Impact combines establishing partnerships between the public <br />and private sectors, leveraging resources and energy, and making mitigation a standard part of <br />community planning, Through it, the Federal Emergency Management Agency challenges <br />communities to protect families, businesses, and communities by reducing their susceptibility to all <br />types of natural disasters, Project Impact is based on three premises. First, mitigation is a local issue, <br />best addressed by a local partnership of government, business, and private citizens. Second, private <br />sector participation is essential to comprehensive solutions, because floods and other disasters <br />threaten the economic and commercial growth oflocalities, Finally, mitigation is a long-term effort <br />that requires long-term investment. <br /> <br />. Project Impact should be continued and strengthened to promote more pre-disaster mitigation <br />and sustainability in communities throughout the nation. The initiative's underlying concepts <br />should be adopted in other federal and state programs, <br /> <br />COORDINATION, OVERSIGHT, AND EVALUATION OF PROGRAMS <br /> <br />Water resource issues are inextricably linked, and efficient accomplishment of agency mandates <br />requires coordination and collaboration among agencies. When Congress passed the National Flood <br />Insurance Act of 1968, it anticipated the gradual development of a broader, nation-wide effort to <br />reduce both flood damage and the loss of natural floodplain functions, The periodic progress reports <br />from the Administration to Congress required under the Act (the most recent was in 1994) all have <br />been titled A Unified National Program for Floodplain Management, and discuss the "program" as <br />though it were a distinct, viable initiative, In reality, however, the Unified National Program has <br />suffered from lack of high-level attention from past administrations, The United States has no unified <br />national program for floodplain management in practice. This stems in part from ambiguity in national <br /> <br />Association of State Floodplain Managers <br /> <br />-33- <br /> <br />National Flood Programs in Review 2000 <br />