The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has faced growing scrutiny over its weather related denials of assistance. FEMA was established in 1979 with the mission to assist Americans in times of crisis, but many communities have yet to see the impact of FEMA in their neighborhoods. FEMA does not provide assistance for every single disaster. By following a set of regulated criteria, FEMA’s process of its weather related disaster is often subjected to knowing the severity, the state's capacity and population, and whether the state had followed procedural issues regarding documents, deadlines or other problems.
Former meteorologist Matthew Hladio explained that weather events like tornados, severe storms and straight-line winds are often underappreciated in FEMA assessments. “That misunderstanding can affect whether an event is classified a disaster and whether people get help.”
According to Hladio, weather events that are considered “routine” or less severe, such a localized flooding or storms, do not always qualify for the agency’s federal assistance as the incident is more isolated and local than a hurricane which has impacted more areas. This can be frustrating for residents of smaller communities who feel overlooked by the agency, despite experiencing their own hardships and losses.
When FEMA denies weather related disaster declarations, the impact is devastating for the affected communities. Residents are often stuck relying on their local government to give as much support as they need, but the localized government is not always well-equipped to provide the necessary resources for the recovery plans.
Without the agency’s assistance, many of the impacted communities struggle to find any source of recovery from the long-term effects of the natural disaster. FEMA’s denial of aid also has significant economic consequences by preventing businesses from accessing vital relief funds and hindering job recovery in the region.
Between 2020 and 2025, disasters spanned across the country from hurricanes to wildfires and record-breaking floods. While some communities were able to receive federal disaster funds and aid, others were not met with the same generosity. In 2024, for example, widespread destruction caused by the Park and Borel fires in California left residents reeling. Despite the visible damage, communities were met with silence as they anticipated a response which prompted local officials to request intervention from, then, President Biden.
In some instances, FEMA’s denial in assistance was cited by insufficient damage to justify their involvement in helping the impacted. This is such a case with Hurricane Hanna: a storm that formed off the coast of Africa before accelerating into the Gulf of Mexico. Hanna ultimately resulted in five indirect fatalities in Texas and caused an estimated $1.1 billion in damages across the United States.
Residents in the Rio Grande Valley were among the communities hit by the storm. Despite the severity, many reported delays or straight denials of assistance. FEMA initially provided a limited amount of aid for some of the areas involved. A 2020 report from local news station, ValleyCentral, highlighted families still struggling to rebuild months after the storm.
Hladio added that part of the issue stems from how FEMA differentiates an ‘emergency declaration’ and a ‘major disaster declaration’. “Emergency declarations often apply to more isolated, short-term incidents,” Hladio said. “But a major disaster declaration typically involves more widespread destruction and unlocks more federal resources. The difference can significantly impact whether a community gets meaningful help.”
The technical distinction becomes even more consequential when paired with more socioeconomic inequality. “Lower income areas are often the most overlooked,” Hladio emphasized. “They may not have the resources to recover on their own, there’s a perception that weather areas are more ‘worth’ the investment. That perception has real consequences for people living paycheck to paycheck.”
Residents of the storm impacted areas like South Texas echoed similar sentiments. After Hurricane Hanna, members of the communities argued that FEMA’s damage assessments failed to reflect the true altitude of the losses they faced.
Hladio noted recent examples in the Carolinas and Hawaii where disasters left long-lasting effects, but federal response either lagged or was limited. “It raises a fair question: what exactly does it take to qualify for help?” he asked. “And how do we make sure those who need it most aren’t left out?”
Given the growing numbers of extreme weather events caused by climate change, it’s clear that FEMA’s disaster assistance policies should be evaluated to the changes the world is undergoing. There is an urgent need for the agency to develop a more flexible and comprehensive criteria for disaster declarations that would reflect the realities of today’s climate patterns. This could include just adjusting the threshold for aid or helping ensure that smaller communities are not left behind in the disaster recovery process.
FEMA could improve its communication and their outreach methods to ensure that affected residents understand the criteria for aid and, then. allow communities to have better access to support from the aftermath of a disaster. This would help to alleviate confusion and ensure that more people receive the assistance they need.