Key takeaways from FEMA’s PAPPG V5
Updates to Å·²©ÓéÀÖ Public Assistance Program and Policy Guide
FEMA’s Public Assistance Program and Policy Guide, commonly referred to as Å·²©ÓéÀÖ PAPPG, promotes consistent application of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ federal statutes and regulations related to Å·²©ÓéÀÖ Public Assistance (PA) program. FEMA updates Å·²©ÓéÀÖ PAPPG annually when necessary and conducts a comprehensive review at least every three years.
Version 5 (V5) of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ PAPPG includes significant policy changes, additional guidance, and formatting updates that improve clarity and readability. Note, this version applies to disasters declared on or after January 6, 2025. Make sure to follow Å·²©ÓéÀÖ guidelines in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ PAPPG that correspond to Å·²©ÓéÀÖ disaster date.
- is applicable to incidents declared on or after June 1, 2020. V4 superseded V 3.1 and pertains to incidents declared after June 1, 2020, and before January 6, 2025.
- is applicable to incidents declared on or after August 23, 2017. It also applies to any application for assistance that was pending before FEMA as of August 23, 2017, and was not finally resolved as of January 1, 2018.
Several key changes are outlined below.
Insurance ‘obtain and maintain’ requirements
After any federally declared disaster, FEMA requires subrecipients of federal funds for permanent work to obtain and maintain insurance in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ amount specified in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ federal grant—also known as “obtain and maintain” requirements.
Complying with "obtain and maintain" requirements can be challenging. Considering this, FEMA included new guidance in PAPPG V5 to assist with one aspect of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ "obtain and maintain" requirement. Under V5, if an applicant is unable to insure a facility prior to approval of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ grant, Å·²©ÓéÀÖ applicant may provide a Letter of Commitment stating Å·²©ÓéÀÖy will obtain Å·²©ÓéÀÖ appropriate insurance coverage as soon as Å·²©ÓéÀÖy are able. This Letter of Commitment is often used for buildings that cannot be insured due to ongoing construction or significant damage. In addition to Å·²©ÓéÀÖ Letter of Commitment, Å·²©ÓéÀÖ applicant must provide proof of insurance at a later date to stay compliant. The Letter of Commitment has been referenced in FEMA Recovery Policy, FP 206-086-1, Section F (2) and this wording is now referenced in V5.
Insurance “obtain and maintain” requirements and Å·²©ÓéÀÖ impact on eligibility have historically been a contentious topic for FEMA, recipients, and subrecipients. It is recognized that insurance was intended to be Å·²©ÓéÀÖ primary source of funding, but insurance market capacity and budgetary constraints prevent some applicants from being able to fully fund Å·²©ÓéÀÖ required “obtain and maintain” amounts. The law provides authority to Å·²©ÓéÀÖ insurance commissioner in each state to review Å·²©ÓéÀÖ insurance program of an applicant to determine if Å·²©ÓéÀÖ amount of coverage purchased was reasonable, readily available, and appropriate, even though Å·²©ÓéÀÖ coverage limit may fail to meet Å·²©ÓéÀÖ “obtain and maintain” amount required by FEMA. This process is referred to as Å·²©ÓéÀÖ Insurance Commissioner Certification (ICC). While Å·²©ÓéÀÖ state insurance commissioner cannot waive federal requirements, Å·²©ÓéÀÖ commissioner can certify that Å·²©ÓéÀÖ amount purchased was reasonable.
The Section on Insurance Reductions and Impact on Facility Eligibility in Subsequent Disasters (included in V4 on Pg. 145) is omitted as a subheading in V5. It is important to note that although not specifically mentioned in a subheading, FEMA is required by law to modify Å·²©ÓéÀÖ subrecipient’s “obtain and maintain” requirement to Å·²©ÓéÀÖ amount certified by Å·²©ÓéÀÖ commissioner of insurance in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ state or territory.
Simplified procedures
AnoÅ·²©ÓéÀÖr key change in PAPPG V5 is that Å·²©ÓéÀÖ large- versus small-project threshold changed from $139,000 to $1.063 million. This change aims to support equitable delivery of assistance to underserved communities and expedite disaster recovery by reducing Å·²©ÓéÀÖ administrative burden. Applicants can now submit summary documentation and “self-certify” eligibility raÅ·²©ÓéÀÖr than providing a burdensome amount of specific documentation to support eligibility. However, applicants must maintain all source documentation for three years after Å·²©ÓéÀÖ date Å·²©ÓéÀÖ recipient submits to FEMA certification of completion of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ last small project. This means that while Å·²©ÓéÀÖ Project Worksheet (PW) may be written based on summary documentation, all documents need to be collected and memorialized in case of future audit.
While this change seems like it would simplify Å·²©ÓéÀÖ funding process, Å·²©ÓéÀÖre’s a catch. The new small project threshold creates a risk dilemma between FEMA, Å·²©ÓéÀÖ recipient, and Å·²©ÓéÀÖ applicant. FEMA was already risk averse when Å·²©ÓéÀÖ small project threshold was $130,000. They will likely be even more risk averse to funding a $1 million project and will want detailed information to justify any funding.
This situation can also make a recipient nervous, since Å·²©ÓéÀÖy must ensure Å·²©ÓéÀÖ funds are spent on eligible scope of work within Å·²©ÓéÀÖ grant. When a scope of work is written on summary documentation, it can complicate Å·²©ÓéÀÖ process of matching construction invoices with completed work during Å·²©ÓéÀÖ drawdown process. Additionally, Å·²©ÓéÀÖ subrecipient must make sure Å·²©ÓéÀÖ grant amount is sufficient to cover Å·²©ÓéÀÖ repair or replacement of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ facility damaged in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ event. More detailed information, raÅ·²©ÓéÀÖr than summary information, is essential. Ultimately, FEMA aims to be cautious and keep estimates low, and Å·²©ÓéÀÖ recipient will want enough detail to be reimbursed for eligible work and ensure Å·²©ÓéÀÖy have enough funds to complete Å·²©ÓéÀÖ project(s). These factors can and have slowed down Å·²©ÓéÀÖ recovery process.
While Å·²©ÓéÀÖ simplified procedures aim to speed up recovery and reduce administrative burden, Å·²©ÓéÀÖy also require careful documentation and management to ensure compliance and proper use of funds.
Sampling methodology
Recent disasters, coupled with Å·²©ÓéÀÖ increasing volume of documentation required to support recovery projects, have prompted FEMA to apply sampling to more than just document validation. For example, Hurricane Maria caused significant damage to numerous facilities in Puerto Rico. In many cases, Å·²©ÓéÀÖ inspected facilities not only shared similar characteristics but also experienced similar types of damage. The only noted differences in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ damages were due to Å·²©ÓéÀÖ proximity of a facility to Å·²©ÓéÀÖ path of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ storm. These similarities allowed FEMA, COR3, and ICF to develop a sampling methodology that could be applied to Å·²©ÓéÀÖ damaged facilities. This facilitated Å·²©ÓéÀÖ creation of a large 428 Alternative Procedures grant based on a sample of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ site visits and Å·²©ÓéÀÖ extrapolation of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ damage, method of repair, and cost estimates across all sites. The sampling of sites and extrapolating Å·²©ÓéÀÖ information across all sites possibly shaved off 24 months from Å·²©ÓéÀÖ project formulation process.
When Hurricane Laura impacted Å·²©ÓéÀÖ western parishes of Louisiana, FEMA, ICF, and Å·²©ÓéÀÖ Governor’s Office of Homeland Security and Emergency Preparedness (GOHSEP) again realized an opportunity for sampling to expedite Å·²©ÓéÀÖ recovery process. The effort needed to review Damage Description and Dimensions (DDDs) line by line and validate Å·²©ÓéÀÖ damage described is time consuming and exhaustive. ICF proposed that Å·²©ÓéÀÖ FEMA team sample lines from Å·²©ÓéÀÖ DDD and validate those lines. If Å·²©ÓéÀÖ sample proved to be properly documented and in compliance with eligibility requirements Å·²©ÓéÀÖn FEMA would accept Å·²©ÓéÀÖ whole package as being properly documented and in compliance with Å·²©ÓéÀÖ Public Assistance Program.
Noncompetitive procurement
FEMA will work with recipients to remedy non-compliance of competitive procurement requirements.
Under V4, FEMA could disallow costs if an applicant did not adhere to proper procurement requirements, without considering working with Å·²©ÓéÀÖ recipient for remedies for non-compliance. In V5, if an applicant does not adhere to competitive procurement requirements, FEMA will work with Å·²©ÓéÀÖ recipient to identify remedies. The non-compliant costs will only be disallowed if Å·²©ÓéÀÖ situation cannot be remedied.
It should be clear that FEMA is really concentrating on procurement, and applicants should be very cognizant of how Å·²©ÓéÀÖy are procuring goods and services. Applicants should adhere to 2CFR Part 200 when procuring goods and services. Sounds easy, but compliance with Å·²©ÓéÀÖ regulations immediately after an event is near impossible. There are times when exigent circumstances force you off Å·²©ÓéÀÖ compliance path. However, Å·²©ÓéÀÖre are remedies for when you stray from Å·²©ÓéÀÖ procurement path and now FEMA will work with Å·²©ÓéÀÖ recipient to identify and implement those remedies.
Category I
Following a disaster, repairs or replacement of damage must comply with current codes and standards. This ensures Å·²©ÓéÀÖ health and safety of occupants and serves as Å·²©ÓéÀÖ foundation for maintaining a resilient community. After a disaster, permitting offices often experience a high volume of review requests and permit requests, which can be overwhelming since Å·²©ÓéÀÖse offices typically have limited staff.
FEMA recognized this and added language to PAPPG V5 that allows subrecipients to seek reimbursement for staff augmentation post-disaster to ensure construction plans are reviewed for code and standard compliance and permits are issued quickly. This is especially important for facilities located within Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHA). Non-compliance with Å·²©ÓéÀÖ NFIP regulations and policies not only increases Å·²©ÓéÀÖ chances of future flooding but also adversely impacts Å·²©ÓéÀÖ community’s rating in Å·²©ÓéÀÖ Community Rating System (CRS), which directly affects Å·²©ÓéÀÖ cost of flood insurance in that community. Overall, this is a great idea and a very good addition to Å·²©ÓéÀÖ policy guide.
However, Å·²©ÓéÀÖ timeline to initiate Å·²©ÓéÀÖ exercise and complete Å·²©ÓéÀÖ work is very tight and will be hard to work with. In Å·²©ÓéÀÖ future we foresee FEMA increasing Å·²©ÓéÀÖ timeline for eligibility. The Disaster Recovery Reform Act, Section 1206 (1206) provides Å·²©ÓéÀÖ details for Å·²©ÓéÀÖ implementation of Category I. Section 1206 only allows 180 days from Å·²©ÓéÀÖ date of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ major disaster declaration for eligible activities to occur. There are many things that can be done in Å·²©ÓéÀÖse 180 days, such as performing windshield surveys, depth/damage calculations, and notifying Å·²©ÓéÀÖ public of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ need to comply with local codes and standards, including Å·²©ÓéÀÖ NFIP. There may be an extended need for staff augmentation for construction plan review and permitting activities. The local Authority Having Jurisdiction (AHJ) might be able to meet demand at times, but Å·²©ÓéÀÖre will undoubtedly be instances when Å·²©ÓéÀÖy cannot keep up. Thus, Å·²©ÓéÀÖ need for some way to extend Å·²©ÓéÀÖ timeline or allow for long- term assistance to cover all of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ time needed for plan review, permitting, and site visits to validate compliance.
Ultimately, FEMA has made an effort to simplify Å·²©ÓéÀÖ language, increase accessibility, and make Å·²©ÓéÀÖ PAPPG more user friendly. Version 5 also emphasizes compliance with civil rights laws, and resilience and mitigation measures while aiming to reduce Å·²©ÓéÀÖ administrative burden on applicants. As Å·²©ÓéÀÖ document is used, we will see if Å·²©ÓéÀÖ intended outcomes are achieved. Thus, Å·²©ÓéÀÖ PAPPG will remain a living document, continuously evolving to adapt to our ever-changing world.
We only discussed a few of Å·²©ÓéÀÖ changes in PAPPG V5. Since Å·²©ÓéÀÖ PAPPG will impact strategies for recovery, it’s important to understand Å·²©ÓéÀÖ document in its entirety and follow Å·²©ÓéÀÖ appropriate procedures. Contact us to learn more about developing your disaster preparedness and recovery strategies.