Experts Agree on Need for Improvement In Disaster Response and Recovery

Published in tandem with research from the U.S. Chamber, Allstate, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce Foundation, this survey features insights from emergency managers, engineers, and resilience experts, highlighting the need for cross-sector collaboration and streamlined processes to ensure rapid resource sharing, coordinated decision-making, and recovery efforts that are aligned with local priorities.

The survey's results indicate that resilience stakeholders believe there is room for improvement in disaster response and recovery, from the distribution of federal government funds to better collaboration between the public and private sectors. They also believe it's important for all levels of government to play a major role in disaster response, recovery, and building resiliency-but especially look to state/local governments to play lead roles.

This survey is included as Appendix 2 in the 2025 Resilience Report.

Resilience Stakeholders View States as Being More Prepared for Disasters

Resilience stakeholders say state governments are the best prepared to deal with natural disasters compared to local and federal authorities. However, there is a clear sense that all government levels-federal, state, and local-are less prepared for large-scale or multiple simultaneous disasters.

When it comes to "typical," or seasonally-appropriate natural disasters, respondents generally believe that these levels of government are ready to handle them. While states are generally seen as more prepared to handle natural disasters, not many believe that the U.S., state, or local government are very prepared.

• 15%

  Only 15% say the U.S. is very prepared to manage a typical disaster

About a third of respondents believe that their state (32%) or local government (31%) is very prepared to manage typical disasters. This is even lower for the federal government: Just 15% say the U.S. government is very prepared to manage a typical disaster.

Fed Government Viewed as Effective at Disaster Response, Less at Building Long-Term Resilience

Less than one in five resilience stakeholders believe that the federal government is very effective in any of these areas (Disaster response-16%, Disaster preparedness-10%, Disaster recovery-8%, Building resilience-4%).

Majority Believe That All Levels of Government Should Play Major Roles in Disasters

At least four in five respondents believe that, in each disaster phase, local and state governments should play a major role.

Respondents are less likely to say that the federal government should play a major role in these phases, with more saying that state and local governments should play a major role. However, whether it's disaster preparedness, disaster response, disaster recovery, or building resilience-at least 50% of stakeholders think government should play a major role. In fact, a majority of stakeholders say that the federal government should play a major role in all phases.

Financial Assistance Is Most Needed Form of Federal Support

Resilience stakeholders say that the federal government's key role is to provide financial assistance during a disaster. Other forms of federal government support, such as logistical support and operational coordination, are a distant second.

Despite the stated importance of federal financial assistance, there is room to improve how efficiently federal grants and other funds are issued, stakeholders say. Around half say that funds are distributed efficiently for disaster response (53%) and preparedness (49%). Slightly fewer say the same for building resilience to future disasters (45%), direct services and financial assistance in communities (43%), and disaster recovery (40%).

• 45%

  say that federal grants and other funds are distributed efficiently for disaster response.

• 10%

  say that federal grants and other funds are distributed very efficiently for disaster response.

Notably, while there is a division over whether funds are distributed efficiently, few believe that they are distributed very efficiently. Just 1 in 10 respondents or fewer report that funds are issued very efficiently.

Resilience stakeholders prefer certain ways of distributing federal funds after a disaster-and state-managed programs are their favorite method.

Majority Say Disaster Recovery Funds Could Be Dispersed Faster

Resilience stakeholders say that more can be done to distribute disaster funding more efficiently. A majority of respondents suggest that disbursing funds faster and improving coordination with local agencies should be improvements that federal disaster recovery programs prioritize.

Room for Improvement on Public-Private Sector Collaboration

Nearly all resilience stakeholders report that there is improvement needed when it comes to coordinating private and public sector efforts on disaster response.

• 46%

  say that public-private efforts are well coordinated, but there is room for improvement.

• 50%

  say that public-private efforts are not well coordinated, and a lot of improvement is needed.

None of the respondents view these efforts as very well coordinated. A majority (59%) believe that clear and effective decision-making processes and efficient resource allocation would have the biggest impact in improving these public-private partnerships.

Survey Methodology

These findings are based on an Ipsos poll conducted between April 10-May 16, 2025. The survey included 146 professionals in disaster-related organizations across the continental U.S., Alaska, and Hawaii. Respondents were interviewed online in English.

To qualify, respondents had to be emergency managers, community planning and development officers, financial controllers, chief resilience officers, risk and resilience officers, or management-level professional at a disaster-related organizations. These professionals were contacted by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce Foundation and its partners. In-person follow-ups were conducted at the 2025 Building Resilience Conference, where attendees were invited to complete the survey.

No post-hoc weights were applied to the data, and the findings reflect the opinions of the respondents.

In partnership with: