Laserfiche WebLink
<br />VERSION 1.0 1/12/95 <br /> <br />B-C PROGRAM: Guidance <br /> <br />Expediting <br />B-C Anaiysis <br /> <br />Benefit-cost analysis of most common hazard mitigation projects is <br />easy and simple: many of the required data inputs are built into the <br />software as default values and most of the other required data are <br />readily obtainable. <br /> <br />There are data collection requirements necessary in order to conduct <br />benefit-cost analyses. Some data, such as flood hazard information <br />and zero flood depth elevations, are particularly important for the <br />analysis and accurate values must be obtained. Often the necessary <br />data are not particularly difficult to obtain. <br /> <br />By providing a quantitative, defensible framework, benefit-cost analysis <br />of hazard mitigation projects may expedite the approval process for <br />good projects by providing solid documentation of eligibility. Benefit- <br />cost analysis may also minimize the appeal process for projects which <br />are rejected by providing quantitative, rather than purely subjective <br />decision-making criteria. Furthermore, if there are disputes between <br />FEMA and applicants over the results of the benefit-cost analysis, all of <br />the input data are clearly on the table for review and discussion. <br /> <br />Thus, when the whole project evaluation process is considered, benefit- <br />cost analysis may actually reduce the effort required rather than <br />increase it. <br /> <br />Furthermore, there are several ways to conduct benefit-cost analyses <br />efficiently, including: <br /> <br />1. Use common data to evaluate projects in a single <br />neighborhood. Many of the data may be applicable to <br />numerous structures in a single neighborhood. For <br />example, flood elevations of 10,50,100, and 500-year <br />floods may be applicable to an entire neighborhood. <br />Other data inputs such as replacement value per square <br />foot, depth-damage function, etc., may be the same or <br />very similar for many structures in a neighborhood. <br /> <br />2. Evaluate projects In a single neighborhood <br />consecutively. To maximize the use of common data <br />and for consistency, it may be desirable to conduct all the <br />beneflt-cost analyses required for a given neighborhood <br />consecutively, changing only the data which differ from <br />project to project. Changes in only a small number of <br />input parameters (or sometimes only one, such as zero <br />flood elevation) may suffice to conduct many analyses, <br />once the first analysis is completed. <br /> <br />5-6 <br />