Disaster Management Under DOGE – Advice & Predictions for Local Entities

With the rise of DOGE FEMA (Department of Government Efficiency) led by Elon Musk, FEMA applicants should prepare for potential shifts in the way disaster recovery funding is administered. While disaster relief funding is unlikely to be significantly cut, the way funds are allocated and monitored may change. Increased oversight, higher staff turnover, the potential for more state-level control, and the growing role of AI-driven audits could all impact applicants.

However, anything is possible. Federal disaster programs have evolved many times, and under the new administration, we may see changes that are difficult to predict. Municipalities, utilities, schools, and non-profits that rely on FEMA support should prepare to navigate a more complex and potentially stricter system.

Will FEMA Shift More Responsibility to States?

One possible shift is that FEMA may delegate more control over disaster recovery funds to individual states. This could mean that while FEMA still provides funding, state agencies would take on more responsibility for distributing grants, ensuring compliance, and managing applicant interactions.

If this happens, applicants may face:

State-by-state differences in process and interpretation of FEMA policies, leading to inconsistencies.
Longer timelines, as state agencies work to build their capacity for managing FEMA dollars.
More scrutiny, as both state and federal agencies impose additional checks on disaster recovery spending.

For applicants, this means understanding not just FEMA’s rules but also their state’s specific approach will be critical.

More Oversight, Stricter Processes

We expect FEMA to place a stronger emphasis on oversight, meaning applicants may face a more structured and tightly monitored process. The application and reimbursement procedures could involve greater scrutiny, requiring precise documentation and adherence to evolving policies.

It’s essential that municipalities, utilities, schools, and non-profits follow their procurement policies carefully and document every expenditure. FEMA may require proof that applicants have followed proper purchasing procedures, including competitive bidding where necessary. Having clear records and well-maintained documentation will be critical to avoiding delays or disallowed costs.

AI-Enabled Audits & Increased Enforcement

Another significant expectation is a rise in FEMA audits—many of which may be technology- or AI-enabled. Instead of relying solely on manual reviews, FEMA and other government agencies could use automation to analyze applications, flag inconsistencies, and detect potential fraud at a much faster rate than before.

This means:

More frequent and detailed audits, as technology allows FEMA to review large volumes of applications quickly.
Increased use of data analytics to cross-check applicant submissions against federal and state databases.
Less room for errors or inconsistencies, as AI can quickly flag missing documents, incorrect calculations, or noncompliant expenses.

Applicants should assume that their submissions will be reviewed not just by human analysts but also by algorithms designed to spot issues that might have been overlooked in the past. This makes thorough record-keeping and compliance more critical than ever.

Higher Staff Turnover at FEMA

Political transitions often lead to staffing changes, and FEMA is no exception. Turnover at the agency may be higher than normal, which could mean that many of the individuals reviewing applications and processing reimbursements are new to the complexities of disaster recovery grants. Some of these hires may be coming from non-government sectors, such as retail, where their experience does not necessarily align with the highly detailed and regulation-driven nature of FEMA’s programs.

This reality could lead to slower processing times, inconsistent guidance, and a greater need for applicants to be proactive in ensuring their requests are understood and processed correctly. Be prepared for potential delays and extra effort in explaining your documentation to less-experienced FEMA representatives.

A Higher Local Burden on Applicants

With stricter oversight, AI-driven audits, and potentially less institutional knowledge at FEMA, the burden of ensuring compliance may increasingly fall on applicants themselves. Local entities may need to be even more diligent in tracking their expenses, adhering to procurement rules, and maintaining thorough records. Expect FEMA to require more justification for costs and additional supporting documentation to prove compliance. Municipalities, utilities, schools, and non-profits should prepare by:

Keeping meticulous financial records, tracking every expenditure related to FEMA-funded projects.
Ensuring that procurement policies are strictly followed and that all contracts and purchases are well-documented.
Training staff on FEMA policies so that compliance efforts start at the local level, reducing the risk of rejected claims.

Mitigation Projects May Continue, With a Focus on High-Value Assets

Despite potential shifts in FEMA’s internal structure, we expect mitigation funding to remain a priority, particularly for projects that make strong economic sense. FEMA has historically supported efforts that protect critical, high-value assets such as mechanical and electrical equipment, irreplaceable historical or scientific items, and research laboratories—many of which are housed in vulnerable university basements. If mitigation funding continues at current levels, applicants should be prepared to demonstrate the long-term cost-effectiveness of their projects. The more an applicant can show how a proposed mitigation measure reduces future disaster losses—especially in terms of protecting essential infrastructure and assets—the higher the likelihood of approval. Universities, hospitals, and large-scale public facilities should pay particular attention to FEMA’s evolving priorities in this area.

The Importance of Having a Consultant

With these evolving challenges—greater oversight, AI-driven audits, higher staff turnover, and a potentially heavier administrative burden—having a consultant who understands FEMA’s policies could be more important than ever. A knowledgeable consultant can help guide your organization through the complexities of the application and reimbursement process, ensuring that all documentation is complete and compliant with FEMA’s latest requirements.

FEMA’s funding process remains accounting-heavy, with a myriad of policy rules that can be difficult to navigate. A consultant can provide critical support in preparing applications, tracking expenses, responding to FEMA requests, and avoiding costly mistakes that could result in lost funding. Investing in expert guidance can save time, reduce frustration, and increase the likelihood of securing the funding needed for disaster recovery.

Final Thoughts

FEMA’s approach to disaster funding and grant management may shift significantly under the DOGE FEMA administration. While funding will likely continue to flow, the way it is administered could change, with the potential for more state involvement, increased AI-driven oversight, and a higher burden on applicants. Mitigation funding is expected to remain intact, particularly for projects that protect high-value assets.

Given these possible changes, applicants must be proactive. Whether through internal training, better record-keeping, or seeking expert guidance, preparing now can make all the difference when navigating FEMA’s evolving disaster recovery programs.

In many cases, consulting costs may be reimbursed by FEMA, which is a win-win for applicants.