6.4. Prioritize Mitigation Actions

Not every identified action needs to be included in the final action plan. There may be many reasons to not include an action. Some projects may not be technically feasible, lack political viability or funding, or face other constraints. However, by documenting them in the plan you leave the door open for future use.

The planning team will assess and prioritize the best mitigation actions for the community to carry out.

6.4.1. Cost-Benefit Review

The one criterion that must be part of the evaluation and prioritization process is a benefit-cost review. The planning team must weigh the benefits of a mitigation action against the cost. A full benefit- cost analysis, such as the FEMA BCA Module, is not required. A planning-level assessment of whether the costs are reasonable compared to the probable benefits will suffice. Cost estimates can be based on experience and judgment. They do not have to be exact.

Benefits include losses avoided, such as the number and value of structures and infrastructure protected by the action. Protecting people from injury and loss of life is another benefit. Qualitative benefits, such as quality of life and saving ecosystem function, can also be included in the review.

6.4.2. Criteria for Analysis

Cost-benefit is only one aspect of analyzing actions. As a planning team, think about the other criteria you will use to analyze the mitigation actions. Suggested criteria and sample questions to evaluate each action alternative include:

Life and Safety
- What impact will the project have on businesses, residences, and properties in the planning area?
- Will the project proactively reduce natural hazard risk?
Administrative/Technical Assistance
- Is there sufficient staff to implement the project?
- Is training required for the staff to implement the project?
- Is there political support for the project?
- Does the community have the legal authority to do the project
Project Cost and Economic Factors
- What is the cost of the project?
- Does the community have the funds for the project on the whole or the local match?
Support for Community Objectives
- Does the action advance other objectives or plans, like the capital improvement, economic development, environmental quality, or open space preservation?
Equity
- Will the action adversely affect underserved and socially vulnerable populations?
- Does the action build resilience for underserved and socially vulnerable populations?

Idea

Advancing Equity Through Action Development and Plan Implementation

Plan implementation requires continued attention on creating equitable outcomes within the planning area for underserved communities, neighborhoods, census tracts and vulnerable populations. Continuing to include underserved and disenfranchised people and their advocates can ensure that actions to increase resilience are built on diverse perspectives.

Think about your community outreach and engagement strategy. Steps taken to ensure equitable outcomes during that phase of the planning process may have included:

Making materials and meetings accessible, in terms of both the physical environment and delivery methods.
Providing frequent and varied ways for people to provide input.
Incorporating what you hear from vulnerable populations in the plan itself.

These same principles should apply to your mitigation action development process. Think about going beyond just a benefit-cost analysis that validates whether or not an action is cost-effective. Take the time to understand an action’s possible impacts and benefits beyond the monetary.

For example, you may choose a mitigation action that elevates homes in the 100-year floodplain. Here, you have a chance to make sure that the funding allocated for this action has the highest possible impact. Instead of simply providing retrofits on a first-come, first-served basis, take a more nuanced approach.

This could mean providing home elevations at no or low cost to the lowest-income homeowners, with tiers of assistance and funding based on household income. You could use a GIS overlay to filter risk exposure based on the socioeconomic status of an area’s residents. Then, you can target funding assistance to those with the highest risk. These strategies can help to make sure that the most vulnerable members of your community reach the same level of resilience as everyone else. This is a whole-community approach which benefits everyone in the long run.

6.4.3. Action Prioritization

After careful review, the planning team will have a list of actions that are acceptable and practical for addressing the problems identified in the risk assessment. The planning team can prioritize which actions to begin by assessing the importance of each item relative to the plan’s goals and the risks and capabilities. Actions could be prioritized by ranking them as high, medium or low importance. The plan must clearly define each of these terms. Actions may also be prioritized by start date or other methods. Prioritization may change over time as community characteristics, risks and available resources shift. The evaluation and prioritization process helps the planning team weigh the pros and cons of different actions. However, the decision-making process is not necessarily straightforward; it is highly specific to each jurisdiction. The example that follows describes one way to identify and prioritize mitigation actions. Your process should match the size, number and capabilities of the communities involved. Each participant may have different priorities for implementing actions. Annex B includes a worksheet that could be used to facilitate the evaluation and prioritization process (see Worksheet 7: Mitigation Action Selection). The following steps can help you identify and prioritize actions:

Form inclusive and diverse groups of planning team members and/or stakeholders to identify actions to address a set of problem statements from the risk assessment. These could be grouped by hazard or action type.

Ask the planning team to pick the criteria and process for evaluating and prioritizing the actions.
Present mitigation action alternatives and criteria to the public, elected officials and other stakeholders for feedback and acceptance. Make sure that outreach methods are inclusive and equitable.
Develop a worksheet and/or conduct a facilitated process to evaluate the alternatives based on the identified criteria and plan goals.
Ask the planning team to vote on or rank their highest priority actions for implementation.