Through examination of case studies of past emergency and disaster events occurring in Kansas, Indiana, and North Dakota, recommendations have been derived designed to improve the efficiency of the Kansas Division of Emergency Management. The specific characteristics of emergency management examined within this study are the organization, functions and authority of the three state emergency management agencies. The efficiency of the three emergency management agencies examined in this study are assessed within four aspects of emergency management: preparedness, response, recovery, and mitigation. Emergency management organizations have three different kinds of organizational arrangements: (1) the emergency management director reports directly to the state's governor; (2) the emergency management director reports to the State Adjutant General; and (3) the emergency management director reports to a cabinet level official, such as the public safety director. The Kansas Division of Emergency Management is one of twenty-two states in which the state emergency manager reports directly to the Adjutant General. Indiana and North Dakota were selected for two reasons: (1) both Indiana and North Dakota have experienced significant similar types of natural disasters as has Kansas since 1990; and (2) Indiana's agency is of the type in which the emergency management director reports directly to the governor, providing a different perspective into emergency management. The North Dakota emergency management director reports to the Adjutant General providing insight into a similar emergency management system. The recommendations submitted in this study may increase the efficiency of the Kansas Division of Emergency Management Agency as well as that of other state's emergency management agencies. Recommendations are limited to the scope of this study but may serve to cultivate additional improvements in all facets of emergency management.

ADA 367860 Approved for public release; Distribution is unlimited. The opinions and conclusions expressed herein are those of the student-authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College or any other governmental agency. (References to these studies should include the foregoing statement.)