In a quiet and unexpected move, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) officially terminated its flagship Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) program in April—canceling all pending applications from fiscal years 2020 to 2023 and halting new funding opportunities for 2024. The agency labeled BRIC “wasteful and ineffective,” citing its failure to deliver meaningful disaster resilience despite significant federal investment. The surprise announcement left engineering professionals, state and local planners, and public safety advocates scrambling for answers.

Funded through the Disaster Recovery Reform Act of 2018 and launched in 2020, BRIC reflected a growing bipartisan consensus that the old disaster cycle—damage, rebuild, repeat—wasn’t sustainable. The program aimed to fund infrastructure upgrades that could reduce damage from hurricanes, wildfires, floods, and other disasters—saving lives and reducing long-term costs. Its existence marked a turning point in how resilience was prioritized in federal policy. Within just a few years, BRIC became one of the largest and most competitive mitigation funding sources in the country, with states and localities submitting billions of dollars in applications annually. From modernizing stormwater systems and elevating critical facilities to reinforcing energy grids and retrofitting buildings, BRIC-supported projects addressed long-standing vulnerabilities in communities of all sizes, particularly those facing repeated climate-related threats. The program also incentivized the use of forward-looking building codes and engineering standards, helping to embed resilience into everyday planning and development.

NSPE has long supported the core principles behind the BRIC program—advancing resilience through proactive, risk-informed planning and sound engineering. From reinforcing critical infrastructure to integrating nature-based solutions, the program reflected many of the values central to the work of Professional Engineers.

Although FEMA had previously signaled that a new mitigation initiative might be announced, the agency has since confirmed that no such program will be introduced. BRIC has now been officially zeroed out, and its infrastructure—including its competitive framework and multi-year project pipeline—has been dismantled. FEMA has said it will continue working with applicants whose projects had fully obligated Phase 1 funding, but the path forward for phased projects remains uncertain, and no comprehensive guidance has been released.

In response, NSPE reaffirmed its commitment to advancing risk reduction by joining other members of the Building Resilience Action Coalition (BRAC) in a letter to FEMA and the Department of Homeland Security. The letter called for continued federal investment in hazard mitigation and highlighted BRIC’s role in supporting technically sound, community-driven solutions. It emphasized the importance of predictable, sustained support—especially for local and state efforts that depend on clear guidance, stable funding, and the input of licensed professionals across disciplines.

NSPE’s participation reinforced its engagement in national conversations about disaster planning, infrastructure investment, and public safety—and affirmed the vital role of Professional Engineers in shaping whatever comes next, whether through federal programs or state-led initiatives.

On Capitol Hill, some lawmakers continue to show support for pre-disaster mitigation. The House appropriations bill for the Department of Homeland Security includes $105 million for such efforts—despite their exclusion from the President’s budget proposal. The bill also boosts funding for FEMA staffing and floodplain mapping, suggesting that Congress may seek to preserve core mitigation functions even as agency-level priorities change.

At the same time, a FEMA Reform Council is reviewing long-term structural changes to federal disaster management. Its recommendations—expected later this year—will address areas such as disaster response, federal-state coordination, and broader policy reform. Whether those proposals include the restoration of BRIC-like programs or introduce new approaches to mitigation remains to be seen.

Professional Engineers have long played a vital role in strengthening public safety through resilient design, risk reduction, and infrastructure planning. As these policy discussions continue to evolve, NSPE will remain engaged—advocating for programs and funding models that prioritize technical excellence and deliver lasting value to communities nationwide.