MEMORANDUM
To: Dr. M. Ernita Joaquin
From: Lyndsey M. Ballinger
Date: September 2, 2013
Title: A Review and Recommendation on Public Administration Issues Following the
Hurricane Katrina Crisis
Introduction
The devastation resulting from Hurricane Katrina provides public administrators from
local to federal levels motive to codify practices in disaster preparedness and response as
well as gives urgency to our administrators’ efforts to compromise and execute laws and
plans. The government administrators’ ability to prevent, forecast, and manage a disaster
were all exposed as weak in the storm’s aftermath. Local and national administrators
failed to demand clear structure, and failed to demand quick execution to limit human
suffering after a predictable disaster.
Identifying the Public Administration Issues
Unclear chain of command with no unifying commander for all agencies, a lack of
communication and planning among response agencies and decentralized control over
resources are all failings in administrative functions identified in “Hurricane Katrina: A
Man-Made Crisis?” (2007). Despite an emergency plan that clearly stated the Mayor of
New Orleans to direct all disaster relief efforts, the city didn’t request aid from an agency
that had the most experience with disaster management; Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) and the Department of Homeland Security (DoHS) (“Hurricane
Katrina,” 2007). Knowing the high probability of flooding if a storm of Katrina’s
magnitude struck, the city and state administrators were bound to design and exercise a
plan using all resources necessary to serve their population. “The broad plans of
governmental action are not administrative; the detailed execution of such plans is
administrative,” states President Wilson (1887), implying that the administrators need to
employ and execute functions like Emergency Management. State officials didn’t yet
complete the disaster plan they worked on for two years and were not prepared to tackle
the issues of transporting evacuees and imposing law and order in the event of a severe
disaster (“Hurricane Katrina,” 2007). Woodrow Wilson (1887) defines, “The study of
administration, philosophically viewed, is closely connected with the study of the proper
distribution of constitutional authority.” This charges public officials, at all levels, to
define a point person in charge of overall relief efforts. The federal administrators within
FEMA and DoHS are charged to step in and apply expertise to the extent they have
available (“Hurricane Katrina,” 2007). Finally, there were no exercises to practice a
coordinated response to a disaster of this magnitude (“Hurricane Katrina,” 2007). These
exercises allow our administrators to best adapt our structures and laws to a “complex
and multiform state, and made to fit highly decentralized forms of government…”
(Wilson, 1887). Our public servants can find how to work towards establishing a lean
chain of command and find the appropriate point of contact for the magnitude of the
disaster to ultimately protect citizens (“Hurricane Katrina,” 2007).
Recommendations
Disaster Response and Emergency Management plans must be reviewed and
appropriately exercised. Chains of command must be clear, communication standards
must be set, and each level of public administration must practice this response in
coordinated efforts. Wilson (1887) states, “To be efficient [the study of administration]
must discover the simplest arrangements by which responsibility can be unmistakably
fixed upon officials; the best way of dividing authority without hampering it, and
responsibility without obscuring it.” Local government leaders must set up and
coordinate standards for communication. If critical information is communicated
effectively, federal agencies know when to trigger a proper response, even if local or state
authorities do not request it. Hurricane Katrina: A Man-Made Crisis? (2007) emphasizes
that the federal government’s ultimate duty is to protect it’s citizens. It is up to
administrators to apply the practice of assigning appropriate roles to the varying agencies
poised to respond to a local, state, or national disaster. Finally, the ultimate authority,
point person, and response to a disaster should be the President of the United States.
He/She is uniquely positioned to cut through bureaucratic tape, have access to all
communication, and every resource to respond as required by magnitude of the disaster
(“Hurricane Katrina,” 2007). This is not a power to exercise often, but in the case of
Katrina, when the local and state officials failed to respond, it is the burden of the
President to act as an ultimate point of contact.
Review and Summary
Despite laws and personnel ready to apply expertise in emergency response, Hurricane
Katrina devastated the Gulf region and was a pointed failure in public administration. It is
the role of public servant to assign roles, streamline communication and centralize
command and control during times of crisis. Hurricane Katrina was a stark reminder of
President Wilson’s urgent call for a foundation of intentional public administration.
References
Lalwani, T. (2007) Hurricane Katrina: A Man-Made Crisis? The Electronic Hallway,
www.hallway.org
Wilson, W. (1887) The Study of Administration, Political Science Quarterly, 2, 197-222