**Summary: Federal Funding Challenges Threaten State Emergency Response Capabilities**
State emergency management agencies across the United States are sounding the alarm over a growing crisis: ongoing funding challenges from the federal government are seriously impairing their ability to prepare for and respond to disasters. Recent drastic cuts to federal grants, new restrictions on how preparedness money can be used, and funding delays caused by litigation have left state and local emergency managers anxious, frustrated, and increasingly vulnerable as they try to safeguard their communities against an expanding array of threats.
**Confusion and Uncertainty Amid Grant Disruptions**
One of the most pressing problems facing state emergency management officials is the sudden disruption of critical federal grants. The issue has been compounded by the recent federal government shutdown, which has further delayed communication and disbursement of funds. Kiele Amundson, communications director for the Hawaii Emergency Management Agency, expressed the growing concern, noting, “Every day we remain in this grant purgatory reduces the time available to responsibly and effectively spend these critical funds.” The uncertainty has already led some agencies to freeze hiring, delay filling vacant positions, and make hasty decisions about essential training and equipment purchases—all of which could compromise their ability to respond effectively when disaster strikes.
**Federal Policy Changes Create New Hurdles**
The roots of the funding crisis can be traced to several recent changes in federal policy, particularly from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Historically, federal grants have played a crucial role in helping states, tribes, and territories prepare for a range of emergencies, including natural disasters, terrorist threats, pandemics, and cyberattacks. These grants cover not only the purchase of vital equipment and software, but also salaries and training for emergency response personnel.
However, the federal government has recently introduced new requirements that have complicated the grant application and distribution process. DHS officials say these changes are necessary to address “recent population shifts” and “new and urgent threats facing our nation.” As part of these efforts, FEMA divided a $320 million Emergency Management Performance Grant among states in late September, only to inform states the following day that the money would be withheld until they submitted revised population counts.
The new requirement specifically demanded that states exclude people who had been “removed from the State pursuant to the immigration laws of the United States” and to provide an explanation of their methodology. This was an unprecedented directive; Trina Sheets, executive director of the National Emergency Management Association (NEMA), commented, “It’s certainly not the responsibility of emergency management to certify population.” The lack of clear guidance on how to comply with this population-count requirement left state agencies scrambling. In Hawaii, Amundson described how staff had to cobble together data from the 2020 census and remove “noncitizens” based on estimates from an advocacy group, uncertain if their approach would be accepted by FEMA.
**Shutdown and Communication Breakdown**
The challenge was further exacerbated by the federal shutdown, which left FEMA contacts furloughed and the grant application portal offline. This meant states were left in the dark about whether their submissions were correct or when, or if, the funding would be released. Many states reported that they were still assessing the request or waiting for further guidance from federal authorities.
DHS has defended the requirement, saying that FEMA needs to be certain of accurate funding levels, including updates to state populations due to deportations, before awarding grant money. However, the practical effect has been to create significant delays. Emergency management experts warn that the impact will be felt most acutely at the local level, where smaller governments and agencies depend heavily on these funds to operate. Many local agencies have lean budgets and staffs, and disruptions in funding could force them to curtail vital programs or delay critical purchases.
Compounding the problem, FEMA has also reduced the window in which grant recipients must spend the money—from three years to just one. This forces agencies to rush through planning and procurement, making it difficult to undertake long-term projects or invest in lasting resilience.
Bryan Koon, president and CEO of the consulting firm IEM and a former Florida emergency management chief, emphasized the stakes: “An interruption in those services could place American lives in jeopardy.”
**Drastic Cuts and Legal Battles Over Homeland Security Grants**
Another major blow came in September, when FEMA drastically cut some states’ allocations from the $1 billion Homeland Security Grant Program, which is intended to be distributed based on assessed risks and is vital