State crisis managers say severe cuts to federal security grants, restrictions on money intended for preparedness, and funding delays tied to litigation are posing a growing risk to their ability to respond to emergencies.
It’s all causing confusion, frustration, and concern. The federal government shutdown isn’t helping.
“Every day we remain in this grant purgatory reduces the time available to responsibly and effectively spend these critical funds,” said Kiele Amundson, communications director at the Hawaii Emergency Management Agency.
The uncertainty has led some emergency management agencies to hold off on filling vacant positions and make rushed decisions on important training and purchases.
Experts say the developments complicate state-led emergency efforts, undermining the Republican administration’s stated goals of shifting more responsibility to states and local governments for disaster response.
In an emailed statement, the Department of Homeland Security said the new requirements were necessary because of “recent population shifts” and that changes to security grants were made “to be responsive to new and urgent threats facing our nation.”
A New Wrinkle Tied to Immigration Raids
Several DHS and FEMA grants help states, tribes, and territories prepare for climate disasters and deter a variety of threats. The money pays for salaries and training, as well as essential resources like vehicles, communications equipment, and software.
State emergency managers say that money has become increasingly critical due to an expanding range of threats, including pandemics and cyberattacks.
FEMA, a part of DHS, divided a $320 million Emergency Management Performance Grant among states on September 29. However, the following day it informed states that the money was on hold until they submitted new population counts. This directive required states to exclude those deported under U.S. immigration laws and to explain their methodology.
The amount of money distributed to the states is based on U.S. census population data. The new requirement compelling states to submit revised counts “is something we have never seen before,” stated Trina Sheets, executive director of the National Emergency Management Association. “It’s certainly not the responsibility of emergency management to certify population.”
With no guidance on calculating the numbers, Amundson reported that staff scrambled to gather data from the 2020 census and other sources, then subtracted numbers based on estimates from an advocacy group.
They are uncertain if their methodology will be accepted. Meanwhile, with FEMA contacts furloughed and the grant portal down during the federal shutdown, they cannot obtain clarification.
In its statement, DHS noted that FEMA needs certainty in funding levels before awarding grants, which includes updates to state populations attributed to deportations.
Experts contend that such delays could significantly impact local governments and agencies that receive grant money passed down from states due to their smaller budgets and staff. Additionally, FEMA has shortened the time frame recipients have to spend the funds from three years to one, which could hinder agencies' capabilities to undertake longer-term projects.
Bryan Koon, president and CEO of the consulting firm IEM and former Florida emergency management chief, emphasized the need for state governments and local agencies to adapt their budgets to accommodate any changes. “An interruption in those services could place American lives in jeopardy,” he warned.
Grant Programs Tied Up by Litigation
FEMA also made drastic cuts to some states’ allocations from another funding source. The $1 billion Homeland Security Grant Program is meant to distribute funds based on assessed risks, but recent allocations have varied significantly, raising concerns over equity.
New York received $100 million less than expected, a staggering 79% reduction, while Illinois faced a 69% cut. Both states, governed by Democrats, saw their funds slashed, while territories like the U.S. Virgin Islands received unexpectedly larger amounts.
The National Emergency Management Association asserted that grants should be allocated based on risk assessments and that it “remains unclear what risk methodology was used” for the latest funding distributions.
After several Democratic-led states challenged the funding cuts in court, a federal judge in Rhode Island imposed a temporary restraining order on September 30, forcing FEMA to withdraw award notifications and cease payments pending a further court ruling.
This freeze underscores the unfolding uncertainty and political volatility surrounding these awards, according to Frank Pace, administrator of the Hawaii Office of Homeland Security. Although Hawaii, a Democratic-controlled state, received more money than anticipated, they fear that the additional funds may be stripped away due to ongoing lawsuits.
In Hawaii, where a 2023 wildfire ravaged the Maui town of Lahaina and claimed over 100 lives, officials face potential delays in paying contractors, completing projects, and possible staff furloughs or layoffs if the funding freeze and government shutdown persist.
The plethora of setbacks prompted Washington state's Emergency Management Division to pause the filling of some positions “out of an abundance of caution,” as stated by communications director Karina Shagren.
A Series of Delays and Cuts Disrupt State-Federal Partnership
Emergency management experts argue that these developments have led to increased uncertainty for those accountable for preparedness.
The Trump administration has halted a $3.6 billion FEMA disaster resilience program, substantially reduced the FEMA workforce, and disrupted routine training.
Litigation issues are further complicating decision-making. Recently, a Manhattan federal judge ordered DHS and FEMA to restore $34 million in transit security grants withheld from New York City due to its immigration policies.
Another Rhode Island judge ordered DHS to permanently cease imposing grant conditions linked to immigration enforcement, after ruling those conditions were unlawful, only for DHS to attempt to apply them again.
Overall, this combination of events has led some states to anticipate a revised relationship with FEMA, as they move towards becoming less reliant on federal funding.
