A New Report Based on SPP Project Course Research Examines Why Extreme Heat has Never Qualified for Federal Disaster Aid and What States Can Do Instead
Extreme heat has become a growing public health challenge for states and cities, even as it becomes difficult to access federal disaster assistance for heat-related emergencies. A new report from the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), released January 13, examines why the disaster declaration process has not evolved to address extreme heat, and what policy options states can pursue instead.
The report, “In the Hot Seat: State and Local Governments Must Protect Their People From Extreme Heat,” builds on research originally conducted by Master of Public Policy student Colin Hartnett, as part of the School’s two-semester project course. The course pairs students with external clients to tackle real-world policy challenges through sustained research, analysis and client engagement. Supervised by Professor Anand Patwardhan, Hartnett partnered with NRDC to examine whether the federal disaster declaration process is suited to extreme heat emergencies.
After completing the course, Hartnett signed on with NRDC to continue the work as an independent consultant and expand the project into a full policy report.
The report finds that the federal disaster declaration framework was not designed with extreme heat in mind. “One of the main reasons is that the current process was designed around sudden, discrete events that are easily defined and have distinct incident periods, such as hurricanes and floods,” Hartnett said. Heat events, the report notes, often develop over weeks or months, vary significantly by region and can cause serious harm without a clear start or end point.
The way disasters are evaluated also presents a major barrier. The disaster declaration process prioritizes documented damage to property rather than harm to people. While floods, hurricanes and wildfires typically cause visible infrastructure damage that can be quickly documented, the primary impacts of extreme heat are illness and death.
Based on interviews with emergency managers, public health officials and climate experts in 11 states, including Maryland, the report concludes that states cannot depend on federal disaster declarations to meet their needs during extreme-heat events. It instead outlines steps state and local governments can take on their own, such as designating officials responsible for coordinating heat response, strengthening heat emergency and response plans, expanding early warning systems and budgeting proactively for heat preparedness, response, recovery and long-term resilience.
The report also highlights the need for better data. Without consistent ways to track heat-related deaths, illnesses and economic costs, states struggle to show how severe the impacts truly are, or why sustained investment in prevention and preparedness is needed.
Hartnett said the project course played a central role in shaping the research. He started with an open-ended policy question and worked closely with NRDC staff to understand the legal and administrative limits of the disaster declaration process. “This combination of policy analysis, client engagement and interviews helped to test the policy framework against on-the-ground realities,” said Hartnett, “including resource needs, data limitations and implementation challenges, ultimately allowing us to develop a set of policy recommendations that expanded far beyond the initial question.”
