On April 4, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) announced that the Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities Program (BRIC) was ending. The announcement stated that undistributed BRIC funds will be returned to the Disaster Relief Fund or the U.S. Treasury. The announcement stated that FEMA is working to develop an updated approach to mitigation that is more responsive to state and local requirements, achieves clear mitigation goals, and results in more timely funding. FEMA says it will rescind approximately $880 million in yet-to-be-spent funding for resilience projects and programs.
Congress established BRIC through the Disaster Recovery Reform Act of 2018 to ensure a stable funding source to support mitigation projects annually. The first round of BRIC funding occurred during the previous Trump administration in 2020, replacing a similar FEMA initiative known as the Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM) program. The program provided federal funding for hazard mitigation projects aimed at reducing the long-term risks and costs of natural disasters. Counties, along with states, municipalities and tribal governments, were eligible to apply through a national competitive process. BRIC supported projects such as flood control systems, wildfire prevention, stormwater management upgrades, and strengthened building codes. The program typically covered up to 75% of project costs and awarded more than $5 billion in grants.
The program received a large boost during the Biden administration after Congress passed the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, which authorized an additional $1 billion for the program over five years.
ASCE was actively involved in the passage of the Disaster Recovery Reform Act of 2018 and the creation of BRIC. ASCE has made it a priority to emphasize the importance of resilience, especially through the adoption of up-to-date building codes. BRIC grants criteria prioritized building codes and often offered incentives for their use.
Given the relatively short period in which it operated, assessing the program’s success is hard. However, the Trump Administration says BRIC grants have not increased the level of hazard mitigation as much as desired and may supplant state and local capital investment planning. The Administration has stated that they are considering a new direction for the BRIC Program.
The program cancellation is the latest blow to FEMA, which provides tens of billions of dollars annually in disaster aid and grants. The administration also froze $10 billion in disaster aid for nonprofits, including hospitals, as it scrutinizes FEMA programs for potentially helping undocumented migrants. Some Administration officials have even suggested shrinking or dissolving the agency and moving all disaster response to state and local control.
In a letter to Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, ASCE expressed concern about the decision to cut funding for the program and stated ASCE’s belief that programs like BRIC are sound investments that ultimately create significant savings for individual taxpayers, as well as local, state, and federal governments. Cuts to BRIC and other FEMA grants and programs will likely prove costly in the long term because the adoption and enforcement of current building codes and standards remain two of the most effective risk mitigation measures local and state governments can undertake.
A key recommendation to raise the grades in the 2025 Report Card for America’s Infrastructure was the importance of resilience in infrastructure planning, development, and construction. The report concluded that better outcomes can be realized in disaster recovery and response through project planning and development that prioritizes resilience. This practice enables policymakers to ensure public dollars are spent efficiently over a project’s lifespan. This was a key focus of the BRIC program, and ASCE is concerned that this focus could be lost.