It would be wise not to present too great a range. Otherwise, the funding sources
will either consider the calculations fl awed and imprecise (which, of necessity, they
are), or they will assume that the lowest end of the spectrum of need is suffi cient to
supply the hospital with an adequate defense for most situations, and therefore, let
that represent the highest level of their cooperation.
Th e third hurdle in the acquisition of funds is competition. Th ere are four areas
of competition for a disaster fund requests. Each of these areas is unique and presents
an obstacle that can derail even the best of requests. Th e key is to make the
plan far more compelling and necessary than other programs, and then to tailor
that request to the agendas of the politicians.
Th e fi rst area of competition comes from other hospitals. As every hospital in
the country requires disaster preparation, the competition for the small pot of federal
dollars is fi erce. Justifi cation for funding and political connections are the two
most important factors in securing that funding.
Th e second area of competition is with other disaster mitigation programs.
Th e usual area of consideration is the traditional fi rst responders: police, fi re, and
Emergency Medical Services (EMS). Because these institutions have the desired
moniker of fi rst responder, unlike the hospital’s belittling fi rst receiver label, funding
is skewed toward these deserving, but not uniquely deserving organizations,
leaving hospitals to scratch for the crumbs.
Th e third area of competition is with other disaster strategies. Th e most prominent
funding programs are dedicated to security and intelligence strategies, rather
than management and education. Th ese preventive strategies are far more appealing
and visible than the boring and unattractive task of cleaning up after a disaster.
Politicians would prefer to use the rhetoric of prevention and safety rather than
admitting that a disaster may occur despite all eff orts.
Th e fourth area of competition is other government programs, including the
military, which is currently the highest funding priority. Other areas of nondisaster
management are often more closely tied to political agenda and reputation. In addition,
the professional and lobbying relationships so rife in government divert funds
to pet projects and happy constituents.
Th erefore, the requests must also be specifi c and compelling, and tied to a particular
renovation, equipment purchase, or program. No government agency will
fi nance manpower or other ongoing expenses. Every outlay must be for a single
event, purchase, or training program. Th ere are few exceptions.