The national disaster recovery structure

The six recovery assistance processes make up the national disaster recovery system. The recovery support services are in charge of creating a framework for problem-solving, encouraging collaboration between federal and state authorities, stakeholders, and non-governmental partners, as well as to increase access to resources (Paton, & McClure, 2013). Every recovery support institution, according to Paton & McClure (2013), has a coordinating federal agency and subsidiary groupings that collaborate with local, state, tribal government representatives, corporate sector partners, and non-profit organizations. The recovery support function discussed in this essay is the Community Planning and Capacity Building Recovery Support Function (CPCB-RSF). After a disaster, different communities and their respective local governments are frequently required to work together in making complex decisions that eventually leads to recovery. Most of these decisions involve re-building, re-investment and building long-term resilience in case such an event occurs again. The challenge, however, is that most communities do not have the necessary resources needed to start the recovery process. The effect of such decisions impacts directly on the safety, prosperity and the identity of the affected community (Berkes & Ross, 2013).

Community Planning and Capacity Building

Community Planning and Capacity Building Recovery support Function (CPCB-RSF), is among the six Recovery Support Function (RSF), established in the Framework of National Disaster Recovery. Other Recovery Support Functions include the Infrastructure system, Natural and Cultural Resources, Health and Social Services and Economic Recovery (Lin, & Wang, 2016). The Planning and Capacity Building Recovery Support Function (CPCB), is mandated to help in engaging the community through the process of recovery, capacity building for the local plan implementation and recovery management. After a disaster, recovery planning is essential for building both short and long-term resilience, empowering the community leaders and stakeholders and provides an improved outcome for both the individual and the community in general. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), coordinates both governmental and non-governmental stakeholders to work together under the umbrella of CPCB-RSF, so as to share information and brainstorm on planning support resources. Various resources can be shared which include; funding, technical assistance, capacity building among other related programs (Phillips & Pittman, 2014). 

Eid & El-adaway (2016) highlights that the sole undertaking of the Community Planning and Capacity Building Recovery support Function (CPCB-RSF), is to help the local governments in effectively undertaking local-based management and recovery plans after an environmental disaster. Community Planning and Capacity Building Recovery (CPCB), also supports the state governments to come up with a strategy that will support local recovery in the event of a disaster. Chandra, Williams, Plough, Stayton, Wells, Horta, & Tang, (2013), identifies other coordinating agencies as; the department of homeland security, department of urban development and housing, Department of Agriculture, Department of Energy, health, and human services department among others. The non-governmental stakeholders include; the American Red Cross, American Institute of Architects, National associations of Development Organization among others

What Does The Community Planning And Capacity Building Recovery Support Function (CPCB-RSF) Do Before Disaster?

Planning and Capacity Building Recovery support Function (CPCB-RSF), mobilizes the federal government and the non-governmental organizations to help the local administration and communities prepare for a disaster and the recovery process (Chandra et al., 2013). The CPCB, partners with various stakeholders to communicate and coordinate the accessibility of guidance tools, materials, and training used when coming up with the local pre-disaster resilience plans and guidelines. Recovery Support Function (RSF), networks different agencies and institutions that are ready to assist regarding aid to the local government and community in case a calamity strike (Plough, Fielding, Chandra, Williams, Eisenman, Wells, & Magaña, 2013).

What Does The Community Planning And Capacity Building Recovery Support Function (CPCB-RSF) Do After A Disaster?

Community Planning and Capacity Building Recovery support Function (CPCB-RSF), facilitates and coordinates support in different partners in capacity, planning and resilience development that is necessary to the local community after a disaster which leaves the city vulnerable to more shocks. The coordination is doctored to fit the needs of the local community in the respective area where the disaster has stricken (Cullingworth & Caves, 2013). The following are the activities are commonly coordinated by the Community Planning and Capacity Building Recovery support Function (CPCB-RSF); Engaging the community after the disaster, which sometimes is met with various challenges such as human displacement, educate various stakeholder through peer-to-peer forums and seminars to create room for brainstorming on how to help the community and learn from previous lessons of the same scenario, Training and guiding other stakeholders on various community recovery management tools, the partners of CPCB can advise and support the community with mobilizing different stakeholder who can help the community and finally the CPCB helps the community to identify different opportunities, which they can exploit and assist them to overcome the challenges posed by the disaster (Plough et al., 2013).

In conclusion, Community Planning and Capacity Building Recovery support Function (CPCB-RSF), works hand in hand with Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), to help the community affected by any disaster recovery from it in short span of time without the community losing their primary source of income. This, in turn, helps the economy of the region to stabilize in short period and contribute to the national income.



































References

Berkes, F., & Ross, H. (2013). Community resilience: toward an integrated approach. Society & Natural Resources, 26(1), 5-20.

Chandra, A., Williams, M., Plough, A., Stayton, A., Wells, K. B., Horta, M., & Tang, J. (2013). Getting actionable about community resilience: the Los Angeles County community disaster resilience project. American journal of public health, 103(7), 1181-1189.

Cullingworth, J. B., & Caves, R. (2013). Planning in the USA: Policies, Issues, and processes. Routledge.

Eid, M. S., & El-adaway, I. H. (2016). Sustainable disaster recovery: a Multiagent-based model for integrating environmental vulnerability into decision-making processes of the associated stakeholders. Journal of Urban Planning and Development, 04016022.

Lin, P., & Wang, N. (2016). Building portfolio fragility functions to support scalable community resilience assessment. Sustainable and Resilient Infrastructure, 1(3-4), 108-122.

Paton, D., & McClure, J. (2013). Preparing for Disaster: Building household and community capacity. Charles C Thomas Publisher.

Phillips, R., & Pittman, R. (2014). An introduction to community development. Routledge.

Plow, A., Fielding, J. E., Chandra, A., Williams, M., Eisenman, D., Wells, K. B., & Magaña, A. (2013). Building community disaster resilience: perspectives from a large urban county department of public health. American journal of public health, 103(7), 1190-1197.