Federal Preparedness and Mitigation Programs Disasters can occur at any time, anywhere; The financial and human consequences are very difficult to predict. Over the last century, disasters have increased at a rapid rate as more than 50% of events require federal assistance. (FEMA, 2014) Federal mitigation plans and programs reduce the impact of a given disaster even with our dependence on taxes, the Treasury for relief. Mitigation is the effort to reduce the loss of life and property by lessening the impact of disasters. (FEMA, 2014) For mitigation to be effective we must understand risks, choices, investments and well-being. Mitigation has extreme value for society at large. Provides safer communities through reduced loss of life and structural damage. It minimizes flood-related disasters and increases the resilience of communities. Furthermore, the financial impact on individuals, communities and society as a whole is smaller. In 2012, over 357 triggered natural disasters were recorded, for a total of 9,655 deaths and 124.5 million people affected. (Matera, 2014) Therefore, risk analysis is an extremely important feature and consists of multiple programs to support the results. Mitigation measures are classified based on entities' needs on physical changes to the surrounding environment. There are two types of mitigation measures that can be taken; non-structural and structural. Non-structural mitigation is a mitigation measure that aims to reduce consequences, or the likelihood of their occurrence, by modifying “human action, human behavior or natural processes”. (FEMA, 2014) Nonstructural mitigation is highly dependent on education, training, and evaluation. You don't have to use engineering... middle of paper... lack of preparation makes it inefficient. It also lacks coherence because if an area has not been labeled a disaster zone but has suffered huge losses, no aid will be given. Finally, the meaning is unfair when the rich are remunerated through the common taxpayer rather than through necessary spending. When FEMA is underfunded, it is blamed for the response effort and not doing enough. This may be a valid argument why the burden should really fall on private insurance companies. Nobody likes paying for insurance. However, he has saved many people many times in the past. Most of Irene's victims did not have flood insurance, putting the federal government in a difficult position. In some cases, assistance programs are cut to finance the natural disaster. When we go to these parks, we have the right to find peace and tranquility.