Yuyun Lusiyani
Local emergency managers, the critical behind-the-scenes coordinators who mobilize essential help during disasters, have consistently voiced a stark reality: adequate resources are desperately needed to protect communities before harm arrives, not merely in its devastating aftermath. This urgent plea underscores a systemic vulnerability within the nation’s crisis-management infrastructure, a vulnerability tragically exposed when communities are left unprepared.
A comprehensive investigation by ProPublica, drawing on insights from over 40 current and former emergency managers across 11 states, reveals a landscape of agencies buckling under an ever-growing list of responsibilities, chronic underfunding, and an uncertain federal support structure. Their collective testimony paints a grim picture: a national emergency response system teetering on the brink, struggling to keep pace with escalating threats ranging from climate-fueled extreme weather to novel public health and technological hazards.
The Unseen Frontline: Expanding Responsibilities and Strained Resources
The core challenge for local emergency management agencies lies in their rapidly expanding mandate, often without a corresponding increase in personnel or budget. These agencies are tasked with an "all-hazards" approach to preparedness, encompassing mitigation, response, and recovery for an increasingly complex array of potential crises. However, many find themselves stretched perilously thin, managing diverse responsibilities far beyond traditional disaster planning.
In Saluda County, South Carolina, for instance, the emergency management director supervises a team of just six, yet their duties extend from overseeing the county’s entire IT department to managing a spay and neuter program. This breadth of unrelated tasks diverts crucial attention and resources from core emergency functions. Similarly, in San Bernardino County, California, one emergency manager recounted having to respond to novel challenges such as lithium battery fires, a rapidly emerging industrial hazard, and, at a previous agency, managing the logistical complexities of busloads of immigrants arriving from other states. These examples highlight how emergency managers are increasingly becoming generalists, forced to adapt to unforeseen demands with limited specialized support.
The most pressing issue cited by these frontline professionals is the severe lack of funding for additional staff. An internal study conducted approximately three years ago for one North Carolina emergency management agency recommended a team of over 20 staffers, yet they continue to operate with a mere 10. This disparity is not an isolated incident. Data from Argonne National Laboratory’s July 2025 emergency management survey, which gathered responses from 1,689 local emergency management agencies nationwide, reveals a alarming trend: more than half of these agencies operate with either one or no permanent full-time employees. Furthermore, a "notable percentage" of local emergency managers are volunteers, shouldering immense responsibilities without professional compensation or consistent support.
Samantha Montano, an emergency management associate professor and researcher at the Massachusetts Maritime Academy, critically argues that given the wide-ranging responsibilities and the increasing risks posed by climate change, part-time or volunteer emergency management positions should not exist. "To expect somebody to understand how to mitigate cyber risks and also recover from a tornado, I mean, these are different skill sets," Montano stated. "So to think that one person is going to be capable of doing all of those things, especially working part time or as a volunteer, is ludicrous." This reliance on understaffed, underfunded, and often volunteer-dependent agencies creates critical vulnerabilities, transforming potential emergencies into inevitable catastrophes.
Case Studies: Disasters Exposing Systemic Flaws
The consequences of these systemic flaws are tragically evident in recent events, where delayed or inadequate resources directly contributed to loss of life and exacerbated suffering.
One such case unfolded in Yancey County, North Carolina, in 2024, when Hurricane Helene unleashed its devastating fury. The storm, intensified by changing climate patterns, caused widespread destruction. In its aftermath, county commissioners finally approved additional emergency management staff – a step the former emergency manager had been requesting for years, but which only materialized after the disaster underscored its dire necessity. This reactive approach, common across the nation, highlights a dangerous pattern: investment often follows catastrophe, rather than preceding it. The Saluda County emergency management office, where Josh Morton works, bears a solemn memorial to two volunteer firefighters who lost their lives responding to Hurricane Helene, a poignant reminder of the ultimate cost of under-resourced preparedness.
Another tragic illustration occurred in St. Louis, Missouri, in May 2025. A powerful tornado ripped through the city, claiming four lives and injuring dozens. At the time, city officials were in the protracted process of upgrading their notoriously faulty outdoor warning system. The critical failure of this system during the tornado was a devastating blow. According to an external investigation commissioned by the city, the sirens were not activated, partly due to a miscommunication between then-emergency management commissioner Sarah Russell (who is nonbinary and uses they/them pronouns) and a fire alarm dispatcher. Russell maintained that the fire department was responsible for sounding the sirens.
However, the investigation further revealed a deeper, more systemic problem: even if the activation button had been pressed, more than a third of the city’s sirens were non-functional, and a later test confirmed that the activation button at the fire alarm office itself was also inoperative. This cascade of failures – from outdated equipment to unclear protocols and communication breakdowns – painted a stark picture of a system unprepared for a foreseeable threat.
Russell was terminated in August 2025, with their management of the tornado response cited as a contributing factor in their termination letter. Russell is appealing the decision, arguing that the incident fundamentally underscores the urgent need for proactive investment in emergency management. They had made multiple requests for additional specialized staff to help with core responsibilities, including updating the city’s severely outdated emergency response plan. "There’s always things that you would do different with hindsight," Russell reflected, "But there’s only so much you can do with so little resources and support."
St. Louis Mayor Cara Spencer, who had been in office for only a month at the time of the tornado but served as an alderwoman for the preceding decade, acknowledged being aware of the agency’s requests for additional funding. However, she noted that most city departments make such requests, implying a pervasive budgetary strain. In the wake of the tragedy, St. Louis moved swiftly to automate its tornado sirens and issued an executive order establishing the fire department as the primary authority over the sirens, replacing the previously ambiguous protocol. A city spokesperson confirmed that the new emergency management commissioner has since "implemented several improvements" to the emergency operations plan. Mayor Spencer, while recognizing "budget restraints are unfortunately the reality across many aspects of government," expressed pride in the team’s ability to implement improvements "with almost no additional funding." This statement, however, inadvertently highlights the core issue: critical improvements often occur only after a disaster, rather than being proactively funded to prevent loss.
The Funding Conundrum: Federal Shifts and Local Dependency
The strained budgets faced by local emergency management agencies are not a new phenomenon, but the situation has been exacerbated in recent months by increasing uncertainty surrounding federal funding. President Donald Trump’s administration has introduced policies and actions that have caused significant delays and shifts in emergency management funding to state and local agencies.
In April 2025, the administration cut federal grants designed to support local disaster-preparedness projects, although a judge later halted these efforts. This attempt to shutter a vital grant program sent ripples of concern through local agencies. Just a month later, in May 2025, federal officials further delayed grants that are crucial for funding the salaries of local and state emergency managers. These actions signal a broader executive order from the Trump administration to shift more of the burden of disaster preparedness onto state and and local governments, a move that critics argue is severely ill-timed given the escalating frequency and intensity of disasters.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the primary federal entity for disaster response, has also been subject to uncertainty. In December, the FEMA Review Council, established by President Trump to advise on agency reforms, was scheduled to vote on a long-awaited report outlining FEMA’s future. However, after a draft was leaked to CNN, the meeting was abruptly canceled, and the council’s work was extended until late March. This internal turbulence at the federal level adds another layer of instability to an already precarious system.
While several emergency managers expressed a desire for positive change within FEMA, many voiced profound concerns about the potential consequences of the federal government discontinuing grant programs – which fund critical salaries, equipment upgrades, and disaster-mitigation efforts – or drastically reducing reimbursement for local agencies responding to large-scale disasters without viable alternative funding streams. Such actions, they warn, would be catastrophic, particularly for small, rural regions that already operate with severely limited local budgets. One North Carolina emergency management director explicitly stated that without federal emergency management performance grants, which can cover 50% of an emergency manager’s salary, "we are looking at the loss of preparedness and response capabilities." Another manager called these grants "vital" to daily operations, underscoring their indispensability. FEMA did not respond to requests for comment regarding these concerns.
Kelly McKinney, vice president of emergency management at NYU Langone Health and a former deputy commissioner at the New York City Emergency Management office, observes that over the years, states have become "overly dependent" on funding administered by FEMA. Yet, crucially, there is no clear plan for alternative funding streams to compensate for potential federal divestment. "This crisis-management system in the United States is itself in crisis," McKinney declared, encapsulating the gravity of the situation.
The Visibility Gap: A Battle for Recognition and Proactive Investment
A significant underlying factor contributing to the chronic underfunding of emergency management agencies is what Samantha Montano terms a "public identity issue." Unlike highly visible first responders such as firefighters, EMTs, or law enforcement, emergency managers largely operate behind the scenes. This lack of public recognition often translates directly into smaller budgets.
Emergency managers frequently find themselves competing for funding with better-recognized agencies, struggling to articulate their value to elected officials who often lack a clear understanding of their multifaceted role. Compounding this challenge is a fundamental human tendency: it is inherently difficult to persuade people to invest in preventing a disaster that "hasn’t happened yet." This reactive mindset means that emergency management often remains an afterthought until a crisis forces it into the spotlight.
The increasing frequency and intensity of disasters, largely attributed to climate change, further exacerbate this challenge. Many emergency managers told ProPublica they are witnessing an uptick in extreme events, making it increasingly difficult to manage long-term recovery efforts (which can span years) while simultaneously preparing for the next storm, fire, or flood. In St. Louis, for instance, Commissioner Sarah Russell was still deeply embroiled in managing recovery efforts from severe flash flooding in 2022 when the devastating 2025 tornado struck, illustrating the relentless cycle of concurrent crises that frontline agencies must navigate.
Wike Graham, the emergency management director for the Charlotte-Mecklenburg area of North Carolina, articulated this frustration vividly. He noted that after a wide-scale disaster, the media’s typical first question is: "Did emergency management do what they were supposed to do?" Graham argues this is almost always the wrong question. Instead, he challenges communities and policymakers to ask: "Did you properly fund emergency management staff? And did you provide them with the resources that they need? Did you make emergency management a priority for your community?" His questions cut to the heart of the issue, shifting accountability from the individual responders to the systemic support they receive.
Towards a Resilient Future: The Call for Systemic Reform
The current trajectory of underinvestment and shifting federal responsibility is unsustainable. The fragmented, reactive approach to emergency management in the United States demands urgent systemic reform. Claire Connolly Knox, who directs the University of Central Florida’s master’s program for emergency and crisis management, has been studying the implications of a "decentralized FEMA." Her research suggests that many states are ill-prepared to fill the gaps that changes to federal support might create, estimating that it could take several legislative cycles for states to adapt. Furthermore, Knox points out that many states are not effectively tracking spending across multiple departments and various phases of emergency management, meaning "we don’t know the true cost" of mitigating, preparing for, responding to, and recovering from disasters. "When you start breaking that down," Knox concluded, "You start seeing that this isn’t a quick fix."
The findings of this investigation are a clarion call for a fundamental paradigm shift. The nation cannot afford to continue treating emergency management as a low-priority, backend function, activated only when catastrophe strikes. Instead, it must be elevated to a critical, front-and-center public safety imperative, receiving consistent, proactive investment commensurate with the escalating risks. This requires not only increased funding but also greater public recognition, a clearer understanding of emergency managers’ diverse roles, and a stable, coherent framework of federal, state, and local partnership. Without such a transformation, the cycle of preventable tragedy and costly, delayed recovery will only continue to intensify, leaving communities vulnerable to the ever-present threats on the horizon.
Joko Widodo
admin
Nila Kartika Wati
Lina Irawan
Jia Lissa