Disaster Management Costs Modernization Act
The Disaster Management Costs Modernization Act would amend section 324 of the Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act to let states, Indian tribes, and territories use unspent disaster management-cost funds for other eligible disaster recovery management activities. Under the bill, when a grant award is closed, any excess amount set aside for management costs could be redirected by the President to the same grantee or subgrantee for capacity-building, preparedness, recovery, mitigation, or management costs tied to other major disasters, emergencies, preparedness measures, or mitigation projects authorized under the Stafford Act.
The bill also extends the availability of those excess management-cost funds for up to five years after they are made available, and it applies only to future disaster declarations and future appropriations after enactment. In addition, it requires the Government Accountability Office to study actual management-cost usage and report to Congress within 180 days, including data on prior major disasters, amounts set aside, how the funds were used, and the duration and reasons for those disasters. The bill specifies that no additional funds are authorized to implement the change.
If enacted, the bill would modify federal disaster grant administration under the Stafford Act by creating a new mechanism to recycle unused management-cost funds into other disaster-related administrative and capacity-building needs. This would affect FEMA-administered grants for major disasters and emergencies, including assistance under sections 403, 404, 406, 407, and 502, and would give states, tribes, territories, grantees, and subgrantees more flexibility to close out projects while preserving funding for future disaster management needs. It would also require a GAO review that could inform future congressional decisions about whether current management-cost set-asides are appropriate.
The available context suggests generally positive and bipartisan sentiment. The bill was introduced by Senator Hassan with Senator Lankford as a cosponsor, which indicates cross-party support for the proposal. There are no recorded committee transcripts or votes in the provided material, so there is no evidence of formal opposition or amendment debate in the available record.
The main policy issue is whether unused disaster management-cost funds should be allowed to roll over for broader future use rather than being left unused or returned. Supporters are likely to view the bill as a practical way to improve disaster recovery efficiency, help close out grants, and strengthen preparedness and mitigation capacity. Potential concerns, though not documented in the provided record, could include whether the set-aside amounts are already sufficient, whether redirecting excess funds reduces fiscal discipline, and whether the five-year availability period or expanded eligible uses could complicate oversight. The GAO study appears intended to address those questions by evaluating actual costs and usage patterns.