FEMA handles floods and fires: Can it weather Trump?

• Trump mulls an end to FEMA on tour of disaster sites
• Federal agency key to both disaster preps and response
• Even its backers say agency is ripe for overhaul

RICHMOND, Virginia - The United States has suffered a record run of hurricanes and devastating wildfires this past year, and President Donald Trump has now ordered a review of the federal department that is tasked with handling ever more natural disasters.

Trump issued an executive order dated Jan. 24 calling for a review of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), which is challenged by disasters that strike more frequently and powerfully in a fast-changing climate.

Trump has even said he might like to see FEMA disbanded entirely.

Later on March 18, Trump signed an executive order that seeks to shift responsibility for disaster preparations to state and local governments.

Such a move would drastically overhaul the role of federal government in disaster preparation, emergency relief and reconstruction.

In mid-April, FEMA announced it would end a key initiative boosting local efforts to reduce disaster risk, known as the Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities Program.

The Natural Resources Defense Council advocacy group estimates the move will eliminate $3.6 billion in funding.

Here's what to know about Trump and FEMA:

What does the executive order say?   

The order sets up a council, co-chaired by the secretaries of homeland security and defence, to advise the president on "changes related to FEMA to best serve the national interest".

A report is due within 180 days of its first public meeting.

The order also raises "serious concerns of political bias" at FEMA and says it has lost "mission focus".

The agency has 10 regional offices and more than 20,000 staff.

It received $29 billion from Congress in December to fund ongoing relief efforts.

Trump cannot unilaterally end FEMA via executive order; getting rid of the agency would instead need an act of Congress.

What has Trump said about FEMA?

"FEMA has turned out to be a disaster," Trump said during a tour of a North Carolina neighbourhood destroyed by September's Hurricane Helene. "I think we recommend that FEMA go away."

In the Los Angeles area, devastated by fire, he said: "You don't need FEMA. You need a good state government."

What might happen if FEMA shut up shop?

As climate change fuels ever more billion-dollar disasters, residents, states and localities could be forced to cope solo in the run-up to and aftermath of any danger, experts say.

"If we abolish federal funding for disaster assistance, municipalities and states wouldn't be able to cover these types of catastrophic emergencies and people would be left to fend on their own," said Shana Udvardy, an analyst at the Union of Concerned Scientists advocacy group.

Beyond disaster response, FEMA also helps states prepare for disasters - work the public might not see, said Rob Moore with the Natural Resources Defense Council.

"There's all kinds of other things that happen in the background we don't see," he said.

Other experts said FEMA played a vital role - if hampered by inefficiencies that were also worth examining.

FEMA's reputation has struggled to recover after its poor handling of Hurricane Katrina in 2005.

"There is certainly opportunity to reposition FEMA as an independent agency and remove inefficiencies that come from being housed under the Department of Homeland Security," said Tom Kiernan, who runs American Rivers, an advocacy group.

What else could be affected without FEMA?

FEMA administers the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), which had close to 4.7 million policies providing almost $1.3 trillion in coverage as of the end of 2024.

FEMA also sets national standards for building codes and standards in floodplains, and its flood risk mapping helps guide construction countrywide, Moore noted.

"FEMA has an even larger role on flood disasters than it does elsewhere," he said.

States already request help from FEMA when disasters stretch agencies beyond their ability to respond, Moore said.

"I haven't heard a lot of states clamouring for FEMA to leave them alone and not come to their assistance. Maybe I've missed those stories," he said.

Left to their own devices, states could also pursue their own resilience measures, such as updating local building codes - though Moore noted that at-risk areas such as North Carolina are falling short in that regard.

This article was updated on Thursday April 24, 2025 at 15:30 GMT, to include the latest developments.

(Reporting by David Sherfinski and Carey L. Biron; Editing by Lyndsay Griffiths, Anastasia Moloney, and Ana Nicolaci da Costa.)