Disaster Agency Failing Biggest Test, Critics Say

After hearing the desperate tales of dozens of Spanish-speaking victims of the Los Angeles riots who seemed unable to get the assistance they needed, Lourdes Saab figured there must be a better way to handle things.

She approached officials with the Federal Emergency Management Agency and was delighted to find that the disaster agency had printed aid applications in Spanish.

But they were in Puerto Rico, she was informed, and what’s more, the agency believed it unnecessary to import them to Los Angeles, one of the most heavily Latino cities in the country.

The episode seemed to crystallize a sense of frustration shared by many who have dealt with the disaster experts. “Absolutely chaotic. Nobody knew what they were doing,” said Saab, director of the Hispanic Women’s Council.

In the 14 years since its creation, FEMA has shed its obscure acronym status and--in this year of calamities--has assumed an unprecedented visibility. But the agency has been buffeted by controversy almost as fierce as the hurricane winds that recently ripped across Florida and Louisiana.

The whirlwind of accusations leveled at FEMA administrators include incompetence, mismanagement, inadequate training of field staff, bureaucratic insensitivity and discrimination against low-income disaster victims.

As a result, many contend that FEMA has botched relief efforts in two of the worst disasters in recent memory--the Los Angeles riots and Hurricane Andrew.

The issue of FEMA’s performance has become so sensitive that agency officials have all but stopped making public comments. Repeated requests to interview FEMA Director Wallace E. Stickney or associate director Grant Peterson yielded this response:

“Unless it can be shown that addressing these issues is of possible assistance to the victims, we’re not going to address (them) now,” FEMA spokesman Phillip S. Cogan said from the agency’s Florida command post.

FEMA’s role in administering disaster relief is multifold: It coordinates federal resources and manpower in the immediate aftermath of a disaster, dispenses financial aid to cover living expenses for disaster victims, and reimburses local governments for a portion of their costs of responding to the emergency and repairing damaged public facilities.

The agency’s performance in all three areas has been criticized.

“Just because they show up does not mean they are bringing relief,” said state Assemblyman Curtis Tucker Jr. (D-Inglewood), who, as chairman of the Assembly Special Committee on the Los Angeles Riots, has held public hearings on the urban disaster.

There is a groundswell of opinion that the agency must be radically reshaped to eliminate a burdensome bureaucracy that often seems to pit itself against the victims it is supposed to help.

And in the wash of complaints stemming from the agency’s performance after Hurricane Andrew, Sen. Barbara A. Mikulski (D-Md.), chairwoman of a U.S. Senate committee that oversees the agency, has called for an overhaul of federal disaster policy.

A recent House Appropriations Committee report lambasted FEMA as a “dumping ground” for political appointees and stated that “mismanagement . . . has undermined the mission of FEMA and employee morale.”

Based on its investigation, the committee has proposed slashing the agency’s administrative budget while imposing restrictions on such perks as chauffeur-driven cars.

Florida officials--the southern portion of their state devastated by Hurricane Andrew--jumped into the fray almost before the rains had stopped, complaining that FEMA had been slow to respond to urgent appeals for relief.

In one memorable scene that encapsulated emotions a few days after the deadly storm, the director of Dade County’s emergency services stood before a phalanx of news media and television cameras.

“Where in the hell are the cavalry on this one?” asked a visibly shaking Kate Hale.

Many grievances have mirrored those of Los Angeles officials, who recount incidents of delays in getting provisions to victims, apparent confusion among FEMA officials about the scope of their task, an inability to cut through governmental red tape, and difficulty reaching FEMA decision-makers.

Los Angeles city officials repeatedly raised concerns that riot victims were being given faulty information about federal programs, but their complaints were met with disbelief by agency higher-ups.

“I finally had my staff call the (FEMA) hot line to test them on several questions, and they were given the wrong answers. Only then did (agency officials) relent,” said Deputy Mayor Linda Griego.

Griego said FEMA never appeared in charge of events, and the agency’s procedures often proved a hindrance rather than a help.

“One of my biggest complaints was that if we didn’t ask for it, we didn’t get it,” she said. “Many (federal) resources that were available to us we just had to stumble onto. We didn’t see them coordinating anything. It was mostly the state people who were doing that.”

State officials also encountered problems in the process, but they do not lay all blame on FEMA.

“I’m not entirely happy with the way the whole disaster process works. It’s much too bureaucratic,” said Richard Andrews, director of the California Office of Emergency Services. “But on balance, with respect to the timeliness of their programs and their overall effectiveness, (FEMA) does a very good job.”

Some Florida officials also are not ready to fault the agency--at least not yet.

“I would say that the right questions to be asked are going to be for the long haul,” said Toni Riordon, a spokeswoman for the Florida Department of Community Affairs. “I would be very, very critical--and will be--in the event that the ongoing operation doesn’t run smoothly because that’s how things ought to be judged.”

FEMA officials insist that the agency is much better prepared to respond to a disaster such as Andrew than it had been in the past. After 1989’s Hurricane Hugo it began developing a Federal Response Plan outlining the roles of 27 federal agencies and the American Red Cross during a large-scale disaster. The plan is being used in Florida and Louisiana for the first time.

Because it focuses only on the immediate response and sidesteps such thorny issues as who qualifies for aid, critics question whether the plan will alleviate problems encountered by disaster victims in the long run.

In the aftermath of the Los Angeles civil disturbance, there is a mounting sense of disappointment and anger among many victims and their advocates over their dealings with the agency.

About 50% to 60% of victims who applied for financial aid such as rental assistance and family grants from FEMA are being rejected, most because they cannot adequately show that their claims are riot-related, according to agency officials.

By comparison, the Small Business Administration has approved about 70% of loan requests made by riot victims.

“What we seem to see in this agency, ironically, is a lack of understanding of the human element,” said Paul Lee, a Los Angeles attorney who is considering filing a suit against FEMA based on the high number of denials.

“Whenever you see a wholesale shifting of the burden on persons in need, it’s not a problem with one bureaucrat, it’s an agencywide problem.”

Many Florida disaster victims say they are feeling that burden. Yolanda Hernandez, 28, a mother of six whose home in Homestead was destroyed, has spent two nights in one of the makeshift tent cities that have sprouted in the wake of Andrew.

Hernandez said she was told by FEMA workers that an agent would have to come and inspect her home before she would be granted assistance. She has heard nothing since then.

“They are very slow and haven’t let me know anything,” she said with frustration. “It seems if you are not on top of them all the time they don’t help you.”

Critics believe much of FEMA’s apparent ineptitude lies in its heritage as an agency focused primarily on civil defense. They assert that only in the last year has FEMA begun to shift its attention--and resources--to respond to natural disasters.

In 1978, President Jimmy Carter ordered the creation of the Federal Emergency Management Agency to consolidate federal civil defense and disaster programs. But until very recently, much of the agency’s efforts were skewed heavily toward preparing the country for a nuclear war.

That emphasis escalated during the Reagan Administration, when the agency developed a multibillion-dollar plan to evacuate tens of millions of Americans from major metropolitan areas in the event of a nuclear attack.

The plan was roundly ridiculed--not only by peace activists but by many federal, state and local officials--as unrealistic and a waste of time and money, and it was discarded.

Yet, of FEMA’s $449-million operating budget for fiscal year 1992, $307 million was allocated for civil defense programs and the secretive federal preparedness division, which develops plans for protecting government officials in the event of a national security emergency.

By contrast, only $18 million was allocated for disaster relief programs and $22 million to prepare for earthquakes and hurricanes.

“This is an agency that as recently as months ago had big bucks going into developing underground shelters,” said Edward V. Badolato, a Virginia-based private disaster management consultant. “They are attempting to institutionally change course in the middle of massive disasters, and we are seeing the results.”

Badolato, who prepared a report for South Carolina officials on relief efforts after Hurricane Hugo, said the stories emerging from Florida are like reliving a nightmare.

Badolato remembered one young mother who had hitched a ride and waited in line for hours with her children at a South Carolina disaster center, hoping to get at least a few dollars or groceries to feed her family. Instead, she was handed an application and told to come back in a few days.

“If you talk to people today there is still bitterness,” Badolato said. “You don’t have to be the world’s best disaster agency to understand that either something is wrong with the process or else there is a severe misunderstanding of what to expect on the part of victims.”

Steve Ronfeldt, an attorney with the Legal Aid Society of Alameda County, said the agency performed no better after the Loma Prieta earthquake, which rumbled through the Bay Area a month after Hugo hit the Eastern Seaboard.

Communications were hampered because the agency sent virtually no Spanish-speaking staff, and some workers refused to go into poorer neighborhoods to assess damage, Ronfeldt said. In addition, there was no appeals process for victims who were denied aid.

Ronfeldt said there is no effective check on FEMA’s application process. Federal statutes prevent individuals from contesting adverse decisions in court. He and others say Congress must exercise more aggressive oversight of the agency.

Such scrutiny is already apparent. A House Appropriations Committee spending proposal for fiscal year 1993 asks that Congress be notified before FEMA attempts any changes in its administration or programs.

The July committee report--on which the budget recommendations are based--accused FEMA’s Stickney, a Bush Administration appointee, of being weak and uninterested in agency programs.

In enumerating examples of disarray at the top, the report cited the case of FEMA Executive Director Thomas R. McQuillan, who was relieved of his duties in May for allegedly trying to force a homosexual FEMA employee to provide a list of other homosexuals at the agency.

Critics hope that the harsh glare focused on FEMA will lead to improvements in national disaster policy. One idea bandied about for years--and receiving renewed interest after Andrew--would give the military a greater role.

Other proposals include slashing FEMA’s civil defense budget to match any cuts in defense spending, splitting the civil defense and disaster functions into separate agencies, and changing disaster relief programs to address shortcomings identified by disaster victims and officials.

Andrews, California’s emergency services director, said something as simple as establishing a single database of information for use by FEMA and other federal agencies involved in disaster relief, such as the Small Business Administration, could vastly improve efficiency and effectiveness.

But others are pessimistic that reforms will be accomplished easily. And in any case, critics say, the tough-sounding reform talk provides little salvation to Los Angeles riot victims or the hundreds of thousands of Florida residents still dazed from the devastation of Andrew.

“I have a message for the people of Florida,” said Lee, the Los Angeles attorney. “When you go back to your homestead and are picking over the debris, don’t look for the mementos. Pick up every receipt, every piece of paper or documentation. It’s the last thing on your mind and it shouldn’t have to be this way, but it might mean the difference in whether the federal government is there for you in the end.”

Times staff writer Sheryl Stolberg in Florida contributed to this article.