As states increasingly take on a more active role in disaster recovery, designing an effective Individual Assistance (IA) program requires a thoughtful balance of efficiency, equity, and coordination. Read on for key considerations for states developing or refining their IA programs.

1. Fraud detection and prevention

Robust fraud detection mechanisms are essential to protecting public funds and making sure that aid reaches those truly in need. States should:

• Implement identity verification tools and cross-check applications against known fraud databases. Consider contingency processes for cross-checking applications with other states in the absence of access to a federal clearinghouse.

• Use data analytics to flag anomalies or duplicate claims.

• Train staff to recognize red flags, and establish clear protocols for investigation and resolution.

Do remember that balancing fraud prevention with accessibility is critical; overly burdensome verification processes can inadvertently exclude legitimate survivors. A balanced and effective fraud monitoring process enables states to limit risk while streamlining assistance to impacted residents.

2. Maintaining a survivor-centered approach

A survivor-centered approach aims to ensure that assistance is accessible, equitable, and responsive to the diverse needs of disaster survivors. This includes:

• Decreasing the number of actions required from the survivor to receive aid by limiting the number of inspections, coordinating information-gathering among entities, etc.

• Coordinating with other existing and upcoming programs to establish universal applications to the extent possible.

• Offering multilingual support and ADA-compliant services.

• Providing case management from the onset of services to guide survivors through the recovery process and across programs as they become available.

• Listening to community feedback and involving survivors in program design to further enhance responsiveness and trust.

3. Streamlining coordination with recovery and mitigation programs

States can maximize the impact of IA by aligning it with broader recovery and mitigation efforts. For example:

• Integrate hazard mitigation into individual assistance. This can include streamlining post-disaster acquisitions and home elevations by coordinating with FEMA to further utilize existing IA mitigation authorities and providing supplemental funding and education to homeowners with disaster-damaged dwellings on cost-effective measures to build back more resiliently.

• Coordinate with housing, infrastructure, and economic recovery programs to support a holistic approach to rebuilding.

• Develop a programmatic continuum of care that facilitates warm case handoff to other programs and resources, tracks recovery outcomes, and establishes duplication of benefit (DOB) prevention processes.

This alignment will help improve outcomes, reduce duplication, and accelerate recovery timelines.

4. Pre-disaster coordination with other entities supporting individual disaster recovery

Effective IA programs are built on strong pre-disaster partnerships; pre-established frameworks enable faster, more cohesive responses when disasters strike. States should:

• Establish Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs) with governmental and nongovernmental partners that are likely to support individual and household recovery post-event, and work with them to build capacity.

• Develop data-sharing agreements that enable timely information exchange while still complying with privacy laws.

• Create standardized release of information processes to facilitate coordinated service delivery.

5. Policies and procedures for appeals, complaints, and recoupments

In any program providing financial assistance to individuals, appeals, complaints, and recoupments are inevitable. To prepare for this, states should:

• Establish a mechanism to intake public feedback and complaints, such as a hotline or email address. Track complaints/feedback received as well as any follow-up and disposition and related timelines.

• Have an established and published appeals process. Consider including deadlines for submission, required appeal components, and a limit on the number of appeals per applicant.

• Develop a process for recoupments and consider establishing a dollar threshold for when recoupments will be processed.

Call to action: Build now for maximum effect later

Designing an effective individual assistance program requires a balanced approach that prioritizes collaboration, coordination, and fraud prevention with survivors at the center every step of the way. By focusing on these key considerations, states can enhance their disaster recovery processes and provide timely, equitable support to those in immediate need.

Please reach out for more information or to start building your roadmap to your strongest individual assistance program.