Homeland Security
The Department of Homeland Secures should undergo reform, which is substantial to enhance improvements in its roles in the security sector, preparedness towards emergency and the immigration policy enforcement (Edwards, 2014). To achieve this, changes are needed in almost all departments of DHS and also putting more emphasis on the prioritization of the resources in every component. The well-organized aspect of managing emergency revolves around response recovery and mitigation measures to either human-made or natural disasters (Lucie, 2016). These are very critical elements which call for the actions of the president and the congress to ensure that FEMA stands alone and withdraw its operations as a department in DHS. The arguments for making FEMA stands alone are illustrated as follows.
The main argument of separating FEMA from DHS is that is bases on FEMA’s involvement in managing consequence, response action where DHS deals with preventive measures or protection against a response(Lucie, 2016). The function is different from the two departments; therefore, there is a need for the FEMA and DHS to be located in different roofs are considered to be parallel. Having the two departments in joint management might bring misunderstandings on planning and preparation in executing a possible emergency or a terrorism act. The distinct management of crisis and consequence should be sustainable and should avoid delay and confusion (Relyea & Hogue, 2005).
Secondly, the independent agency of FEMA should be restored, and the agency should be mandated with the responsibility to report directly to the president, and the director of the FEMA should further be included as the members of the cabinet (Edwards, 2014). The troubles in the executive system of FEMA can be transformed when the urgency is left to stand alone and delegate its duties independently. It is beyond doubt that FEMA had a poor performance during the 1990s when it was independent. However, the period also stipulates the success enjoyed by FEMA while conducting their operations with their own leader’s ability. Therefore restructuring the DHS from FEMA may lead to the success of the urgency as the difference which always occurs between the operational and the function o the staff can be minimized (Lucie, 2016).
The reorganization of the agencies of the government that is DHS from the FEMA might address the homeland security in a more efficient manner(Relyea & Hogue, 2005). Even if it may be challenging to implement the programs of DHS, the disparity of the agencies will lead to the achievement of the missions and process od the Home Department Service as a single urgency. The restructuring will make it useful to move friction points to other locations in the department. Creating an active organization that is performance-based could create an opportunity for strengthening the ability of the U.S to improve the security of the borders and the citizens (Edwards, 2014).
Lastly, the success of the organization depends on the structure and leadership. The organizational reform may depend on the structural design in the effort to fix managerial problems. Organizations are made of people who invariably implement the measures in dealing with an emergency (Lucie, 2016). The excellent structure of the organization of DHS may be made up of leaders who are patient and wise, thereby making the activities of the organization more effective. Realignment may enable crucial markers to assess the degree of performance and expectation of each department. Therefore it will be more important to think of long term impacts when it comes to homeland security ads terrorism is always a long term threat, and DHS should remain independent (Relyea & Hogue, 2005).
Challenges Facing FEMA and Mitigation Measures
For a period of time, FEMA has been experiencing many challenges in the process of executing the activities of the department. The U.S Congress requested the inspector general of FEMA to address the challenges acknowledged by the managerial system of the department and the mitigation measures to solve the problems, as explained below.
FEMA faces challenges in financial management, which have been a significant problem in the past years (Cigler, 2009). Ascertaining accurate financial information on the funds which have been set aside for running operations has lowered the accountability of the department. To mitigate this, the management system should produce accurate and relevant data on the ongoing program on a routine basis. The auditing activities should be carried out to check on the reliability of the financial information throughout a given year (Weiner et al. 2006).
Secondly, the weak information technology management system is another challenge faced by FEMA. The organization relies highly on technological resources to accomplish its mission. The use of technology to improve the speed and accessibility of vital information creates risks to the department (Cigler, 2009). The problem can be solved by auditing the security management system to incorporate the required changes and making adjustments to develop a new efficient system.
The Disaster Response and Recovery Program experiences many challenges, for instance, complex management of the massive disaster response and curtailing the increased cost of disaster (Weiner et al. 2006). FEMA is mitigating these issues through the establishment of comprehensive training programs and accreditation of the necessary programs which address the employees like infrastructure planning, property management, and federal coordination (Cigler, 2009).
FEMA also presents the problems on implementation of the flood insurance program Weiner et al. 2006). The actuality of the program design is complicated as there is insufficient premium finance to aid building reserves to help in meeting future losses. The second factor is the cost which is associated with the multiple loss property programs (Cigler, 2009). Therefore there is a need for FEMA to identify and analyze the concept of subsidy elimination to ascertain its effects and the problem of repetitive loss in the department.
Reference
Edwards, C. (2014). Terminating the Department of Homeland Security. DownsizingGovernment. Org, Cato Institute.
Lucie, H. Q. (2016). What Comes Around, Goes Around (and Around and Around): Reviving the Lost History of FEMA and its Importance to Future Disasters. Homeland Security Affairs, 12.
Relyea, H. C., & Hogue, H. B. (2005, August). Department of Homeland Security Reorganization: The 2SR Initiative. LIBRARY OF CONGRESS WASHINGTON DC CONGRESSIONAL RESEARCH SERVICE.
Weiner, D. L., Manzi, S. F., Waltzman, M. L., Morin, M., Meginniss, A., & Fleisher, G. R. (2006). FEMA’s organized response with a pediatric subspecialty team: the National Disaster Medical System response: a pediatric perspective. Pediatrics, 117(Supplement 4), S405-S411.
Cigler, B. A. (2009). Emergency management challenges for the Obama Presidency. Intl Journal of Public Administration, 32(9), 759-766.