8/11/25 – The correlation between flood damage and flood-mitigation spending by Harris County Flood Control District (HCFCD) keeps dropping, indicating an increasing influence of other factors, such as race, on spending.
At the end of 2021, the coefficient of correlation between flood-mitigation spending and flood damage was .84. Statisticians consider that a strong correlation.
By the end of Q1 2024, it had dropped to .67, a positive but moderate correlation.
By the end of Q2 2025, it had dropped further to .64.
What is Coefficient of Correlation?
Coefficient of correlation measures the strength of association between two variables, for instance hours spent studying and exam scores.
Statisticians consider a correlation of 1.0 extremely strong. It is the highest possible and means that for every unit of change in one variable, there is a corresponding unit of change in another. As the coefficient decreases, the strength of the relationship also decreases.
Values close to +1 or -1 (e.g., 0.7 to 0.9 or -0.7 to -0.9) indicate a strong relationship.
Values between 0.3 and 0.7 (or -0.3 and -0.7) suggest a moderate relationship.
Values below 0.3 (or -0.3) indicate a weak relationship.
Less than Half of HCFCD Spending Today Explained by Flood Damage
Squaring the coefficient of correlation yields the coefficient of determination. That tells you the proportion of the variance in the dependent variable that’s explained by the independent variable.
Squaring .64 yields 41%. So, flood damage today accounts for less than half of Harris County’s flood-mitigation spending.
Harris County Commissioner Rodney Ellis’ has relentlessly pushed variousprioritization formulas that rely increasingly on race while de-emphasizing damage and flood risk. In fact, his formula now totally ignores flood risk.
The major changes in his formula coincide with the drop in the correlation between flood damage and flood-mitigation spending. The 2022 Prioritization Framework marked the beginning of the huge drop in the correlation.
But in fairness, also understand that special circumstances may apply to investments, such as HCFCD’s Frontier Program. It buys land in developing watersheds for huge, regional detention basins, then sells capacity back to developers. Still…
Notice how the lines in the graph below diverge for some watersheds. Some have proportionally more dollars than damage and vice versa for others. Clearly, politics have skewed spending.
A higher correlation would show the two lines more closely matching each other.Also note that the damage figures include five major floods since 2001. They are extracted from HCFCD Federal Reports.
The watersheds where the two variables most greatly diverge reduce the coefficient of correlation.
Where does your watershed stand in the dollar derby? Do you think you’re getting your fair share?
Here are the actual dollars and damaged structures in a table format. The last column shows the dollars per damaged structure.
Coefficient based on Spending and Damage Columns.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 8/11/2025
2904 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/Corellation-Damage-Dollars.png?fit=2254%2C1354&ssl=113542254adminadmin2025-08-11 22:14:272025-08-12 12:37:00Correlation Between Flood Damage, Mitigation Spending Keeps Dropping
8/10/25 – A reader asked me, “How could the July 4 Guadalupe flood tragedy happen?”
He sent me an article that quoted an associate professor from Syracuse University who studied FEMA’s flood maps. The professor said that people knew Camp Mystic buildings were in the 100-year floodplain. Then she said, “It’s a mystery to me why they weren’t taking proactive steps to move structures away from the risk…”
The good professor obviously doesn’t live in Texas. In the endless news coverage of the tragedy, some little known statistics have gone undiscussed. They put the Guadalupe tragedy in a larger context.
We also have 6,258 hospitals, emergency medical services, fire stations, police stations and schools in 1% annual chance floodplains. Camp Mystic is hardly alone.
One in Five Texans Lives in a Floodplain
The Texas State Flood Plan shows that 5,884,100 people live in Texas floodplains (100- and 500-year). The last full census shows that 29,145,505 people live in Texas. That means 20% of the state’s population lives in a floodplain. One in five people!
Only 2% of the people living in the Guadalupe River Basin live in floodplains. But 42% of all the people living in the San Jacinto watershed live in a floodplain.
Column 3 shows people living in 100-year floodplain (1% annual chance) and Column 4 shows the number in the 500-year (.2% annual chance) floodplain.The last column shows percentages of 5,884,100 that totals in the 100+500 column comprise.
And don’t forget, those numbers are all based on pre-Atlas 14 maps. Reportedly, Atlas-14 maps will show floodplains growing 50-100%. And Atlas-15 maps are already in the works. So, the numbers above understate the real dimensions of the problem.
In my opinion, the real question is not “How could the tragedy happen?” It’s “How could it NOT happen?”
Still, the professor raises a valid question.
Problems Don’t Get This Big By Accident
Why do so many Texans live in floodplains? A combination of things has created this perfect storm. Since starting this blog, I’ve written 2,876 articles about flooding. And I see certain recurrent themes:
Collectively, we have a bad case of willful blindness. Regulations don’t keep pace with reality. For instance, Montgomery County still hasn’t adopted updated drainage regulations which have been on the table for years.
People make bad home building and home buying decisions because of antiquated flood maps.
Flooding happens just infrequently enough that when something goes wrong, people can blame it on climate change or God.
Not all of these may apply to the Guadalupe river basin. But I’ve documented them multiple times in the San Jacinto basin. They form a starting point for investigation into the Guadalupe tragedy.
A Problem Too Big To Solve
At this point, in my opinion, the State’s flooding problem is too big to solve. The state flood plan comes with a $54 billion price tag. But we don’t have a dedicated source of funding to address the problems in it.
Worse, collectively we:
Keep kicking the can down the road by making endless plans to solve flooding, but rarely implementing them.
Don’t assume others will protect you. Protect yourself. Start by demanding accurate estimates of risk that we paid for a long time ago. That would at least make people aware of the flood risk they truly face. Then they can decide whether to take that risk.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 8/10/2025
2903 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/20240815-Residential-Bldgs-in-1-percent-Floodpolain.jpg?fit=1100%2C833&ssl=18331100adminadmin2025-08-10 15:45:072025-08-10 22:42:37Guadalupe Flood Tragedy: How Could It NOT Happen?
In late July, the U.S. House of Representatives Transportation and Infrastructure Committee introduced a bipartisan FEMA-reform bill.
Committee leaders say it “provides the most robust legislative reform of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and federal disaster assistance programs in decades.”
The Fixing Emergency Management for Americans (FEMA) Act of 2025 (H.R. 4669) was introduced after feedback the Committee received on the draft from Members of Congress and the emergency management stakeholder community.
The Committee hopes Congress will take the bill up when it returns from its August recess.
Streamlining Disaster Response and Recovery
According to the Committee, the FEMA Act streamlines the federal government’s disaster response and recovery programs while also making FEMA a cabinet-level agency once again, directly accountable to the President.
Sponsors say the bill rewards effective state and local preparedness, protects taxpayers, cuts red tape, and ensures that relief efforts are fast, fair, and free from political bias.
“The American people need an emergency management system that works quickly and effectively, not one that makes disaster recovery more difficult,” said Committee Chairman Rep. SamGraves of Missouri.
“But time and time again, we’ve heard the same story from state and local officials, emergency managers, and disaster victims,” said Graves. The federal process is too slow, complicated, and disconnected from the realities on the ground. Communities trying to rebuild are forced to navigate a maze of complicated rules, conflicting timelines, and mountains of burdensome paperwork.”
Comments from Both Sides of Aisle
He added, “FEMA is in need of serious reform, and the goal of the FEMA Act of 2025 is to fix it. This bill does more than any recent reforms to cut through the bureaucracy, streamline programs, provide flexibility, and return FEMA to its core purpose of empowering the states to lead and coordinating the federal response when it’s needed.”
Ranking Member Rick Larsen from Washingtonsaid. “This bipartisan bill will make FEMA stronger and more efficient, giving it the tools it needs to provide relief to disaster-impacted communities.”
Rep. Daniel Webster from Florida said, “I know firsthand the damage that hurricanes and natural disasters bring, and how important effective preparation, response and relief is when tragedy strikes. By streamlining FEMA and cutting red tape, we ensure that federal disaster response is faster, more efficient, and accountable to the American people.”
“FEMA’s mission is to help Americans in their darkest hour,” said Rep. Greg Stanton of Arizona. “The solution is not to tear FEMA down – it’s to work across the aisle to build FEMA up. This bipartisan bill takes common-sense steps to streamline the agency and make sure communities get disaster assistance quickly, efficiently and fairly.”
Restores FEMA’s original status as an independent agency.
It would report directly to the President and be overseen by its own inspector general. Returning FEMA to a Cabinet-level agency will empower the Administrator to lead a coordinated, government-wide response to disasters.
Puts disaster-impacted states in the driver’s seat
It would help dollars reach communities faster, inject common sense, and cut red tape that can drag out disaster recovery for decades. It would speed up rebuilding with faster, project-based grants. States could prioritize the highest need projects, without waiting years for reimbursement.
The bill would also incentivize states to make their own investments in mitigation, rainy-day funds, and private insurance policies.
This legislation also reforms federal permitting and procurement processes to speed up rebuilding projects and eliminate unnecessary delays.
Helps disaster aid work better for survivors, while saving taxpayer dollars
Disaster survivors will complete a single, streamlined application when applying for assistance, significantly reducing the paperwork burden.
FEMA must provide clear, understandable notices to disaster survivors, ending the confusion caused by complex and jargon-filled denial letters.
The Act alsoremoves disincentives that discourage donations from charities, so more non-federal support is available for disaster survivors. And it gives states more flexibility to determine the best emergency housing solutions.
Strengthens efforts to protect communities before a disaster occurs
The FEMA Act 2025 overhauls FEMA’s existing mitigation framework.
States can pre-vet mitigation projects through a peer-review process to speed up funding when disaster strikes and combine funds from federal programs to expedite the completion of critical projects.
The Act also clarifies building code requirements, so states can tailor standards to the hazards they face. And it encourages homeowners to invest in cost-effective mitigation improvements to reduce long-term disaster costs.
Prevents politicization of disaster aid and demands greater transparency and accountability from FEMA
The Act strictly prohibits any political discrimination in providing disaster recovery assistance. And it would create a public website that tracks disaster spending nationwide.
It would also eliminate outdated, conflicting, and unnecessary rules and regulations.
And it would assess: disaster fraud risks related to insurance coverage, identify theft, public alerting systems, and cost savings associated with the reforms in the discussion draft.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 8/9/2025
2902 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/HumbleFloodFromHCFCD-e1761946748900.jpg?fit=1100%2C821&ssl=18211100adminadmin2025-08-09 18:30:522025-08-10 17:34:56Bipartisan FEMA-Reform Bill Introduced in U.S. House
Correlation Between Flood Damage, Mitigation Spending Keeps Dropping
8/11/25 – The correlation between flood damage and flood-mitigation spending by Harris County Flood Control District (HCFCD) keeps dropping, indicating an increasing influence of other factors, such as race, on spending.
What is Coefficient of Correlation?
Coefficient of correlation measures the strength of association between two variables, for instance hours spent studying and exam scores.
Statisticians consider a correlation of 1.0 extremely strong. It is the highest possible and means that for every unit of change in one variable, there is a corresponding unit of change in another. As the coefficient decreases, the strength of the relationship also decreases.
Less than Half of HCFCD Spending Today Explained by Flood Damage
Squaring the coefficient of correlation yields the coefficient of determination. That tells you the proportion of the variance in the dependent variable that’s explained by the independent variable.
Squaring .64 yields 41%. So, flood damage today accounts for less than half of Harris County’s flood-mitigation spending.
Harris County Commissioner Rodney Ellis’ has relentlessly pushed various prioritization formulas that rely increasingly on race while de-emphasizing damage and flood risk. In fact, his formula now totally ignores flood risk.
The major changes in his formula coincide with the drop in the correlation between flood damage and flood-mitigation spending. The 2022 Prioritization Framework marked the beginning of the huge drop in the correlation.
But in fairness, also understand that special circumstances may apply to investments, such as HCFCD’s Frontier Program. It buys land in developing watersheds for huge, regional detention basins, then sells capacity back to developers. Still…
Notice how the lines in the graph below diverge for some watersheds. Some have proportionally more dollars than damage and vice versa for others. Clearly, politics have skewed spending.
The watersheds where the two variables most greatly diverge reduce the coefficient of correlation.
Where does your watershed stand in the dollar derby? Do you think you’re getting your fair share?
Here are the actual dollars and damaged structures in a table format. The last column shows the dollars per damaged structure.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 8/11/2025
2904 Days since Hurricane Harvey
Guadalupe Flood Tragedy: How Could It NOT Happen?
8/10/25 – A reader asked me, “How could the July 4 Guadalupe flood tragedy happen?”
He sent me an article that quoted an associate professor from Syracuse University who studied FEMA’s flood maps. The professor said that people knew Camp Mystic buildings were in the 100-year floodplain. Then she said, “It’s a mystery to me why they weren’t taking proactive steps to move structures away from the risk…”
The good professor obviously doesn’t live in Texas. In the endless news coverage of the tragedy, some little known statistics have gone undiscussed. They put the Guadalupe tragedy in a larger context.
We also have 6,258 hospitals, emergency medical services, fire stations, police stations and schools in 1% annual chance floodplains. Camp Mystic is hardly alone.
One in Five Texans Lives in a Floodplain
The Texas State Flood Plan shows that 5,884,100 people live in Texas floodplains (100- and 500-year). The last full census shows that 29,145,505 people live in Texas. That means 20% of the state’s population lives in a floodplain. One in five people!
To put that number in perspective:
And 5,884,100 is more people than live in any American city except New York City. Not even Los Angeles or Chicago has more residents than Texas floodplains.
Only 2% of the people living in the Guadalupe River Basin live in floodplains. But 42% of all the people living in the San Jacinto watershed live in a floodplain.
And don’t forget, those numbers are all based on pre-Atlas 14 maps. Reportedly, Atlas-14 maps will show floodplains growing 50-100%. And Atlas-15 maps are already in the works. So, the numbers above understate the real dimensions of the problem.
In my opinion, the real question is not “How could the tragedy happen?” It’s “How could it NOT happen?”
Still, the professor raises a valid question.
Problems Don’t Get This Big By Accident
Why do so many Texans live in floodplains? A combination of things has created this perfect storm. Since starting this blog, I’ve written 2,876 articles about flooding. And I see certain recurrent themes:
Not all of these may apply to the Guadalupe river basin. But I’ve documented them multiple times in the San Jacinto basin. They form a starting point for investigation into the Guadalupe tragedy.
A Problem Too Big To Solve
At this point, in my opinion, the State’s flooding problem is too big to solve. The state flood plan comes with a $54 billion price tag. But we don’t have a dedicated source of funding to address the problems in it.
Worse, collectively we:
Don’t assume others will protect you. Protect yourself. Start by demanding accurate estimates of risk that we paid for a long time ago. That would at least make people aware of the flood risk they truly face. Then they can decide whether to take that risk.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 8/10/2025
2903 Days since Hurricane Harvey
Bipartisan FEMA-Reform Bill Introduced in U.S. House
In late July, the U.S. House of Representatives Transportation and Infrastructure Committee introduced a bipartisan FEMA-reform bill.
Committee leaders say it “provides the most robust legislative reform of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and federal disaster assistance programs in decades.”
The Fixing Emergency Management for Americans (FEMA) Act of 2025 (H.R. 4669) was introduced after feedback the Committee received on the draft from Members of Congress and the emergency management stakeholder community.
The Committee hopes Congress will take the bill up when it returns from its August recess.
Streamlining Disaster Response and Recovery
According to the Committee, the FEMA Act streamlines the federal government’s disaster response and recovery programs while also making FEMA a cabinet-level agency once again, directly accountable to the President.
Sponsors say the bill rewards effective state and local preparedness, protects taxpayers, cuts red tape, and ensures that relief efforts are fast, fair, and free from political bias.
“The American people need an emergency management system that works quickly and effectively, not one that makes disaster recovery more difficult,” said Committee Chairman Rep. Sam Graves of Missouri.
“But time and time again, we’ve heard the same story from state and local officials, emergency managers, and disaster victims,” said Graves. The federal process is too slow, complicated, and disconnected from the realities on the ground. Communities trying to rebuild are forced to navigate a maze of complicated rules, conflicting timelines, and mountains of burdensome paperwork.”
Comments from Both Sides of Aisle
He added, “FEMA is in need of serious reform, and the goal of the FEMA Act of 2025 is to fix it. This bill does more than any recent reforms to cut through the bureaucracy, streamline programs, provide flexibility, and return FEMA to its core purpose of empowering the states to lead and coordinating the federal response when it’s needed.”
Ranking Member Rick Larsen from Washington said. “This bipartisan bill will make FEMA stronger and more efficient, giving it the tools it needs to provide relief to disaster-impacted communities.”
Rep. Daniel Webster from Florida said, “I know firsthand the damage that hurricanes and natural disasters bring, and how important effective preparation, response and relief is when tragedy strikes. By streamlining FEMA and cutting red tape, we ensure that federal disaster response is faster, more efficient, and accountable to the American people.”
“FEMA’s mission is to help Americans in their darkest hour,” said Rep. Greg Stanton of Arizona. “The solution is not to tear FEMA down – it’s to work across the aisle to build FEMA up. This bipartisan bill takes common-sense steps to streamline the agency and make sure communities get disaster assistance quickly, efficiently and fairly.”
The text of the FEMA Act of 2025 is available here.
A section-by-section summary of the FEMA Act is available here.
Summary of Key Provisions of FEMA Act of 2025
The FEMA Act of 2025:
Restores FEMA’s original status as an independent agency.
It would report directly to the President and be overseen by its own inspector general. Returning FEMA to a Cabinet-level agency will empower the Administrator to lead a coordinated, government-wide response to disasters.
Puts disaster-impacted states in the driver’s seat
It would help dollars reach communities faster, inject common sense, and cut red tape that can drag out disaster recovery for decades. It would speed up rebuilding with faster, project-based grants. States could prioritize the highest need projects, without waiting years for reimbursement.
The bill would also incentivize states to make their own investments in mitigation, rainy-day funds, and private insurance policies.
This legislation also reforms federal permitting and procurement processes to speed up rebuilding projects and eliminate unnecessary delays.
Helps disaster aid work better for survivors, while saving taxpayer dollars
Disaster survivors will complete a single, streamlined application when applying for assistance, significantly reducing the paperwork burden.
FEMA must provide clear, understandable notices to disaster survivors, ending the confusion caused by complex and jargon-filled denial letters.
The Act also removes disincentives that discourage donations from charities, so more non-federal support is available for disaster survivors. And it gives states more flexibility to determine the best emergency housing solutions.
Strengthens efforts to protect communities before a disaster occurs
The FEMA Act 2025 overhauls FEMA’s existing mitigation framework.
States can pre-vet mitigation projects through a peer-review process to speed up funding when disaster strikes and combine funds from federal programs to expedite the completion of critical projects.
The Act also clarifies building code requirements, so states can tailor standards to the hazards they face. And it encourages homeowners to invest in cost-effective mitigation improvements to reduce long-term disaster costs.
Prevents politicization of disaster aid and demands greater transparency and accountability from FEMA
The Act strictly prohibits any political discrimination in providing disaster recovery assistance. And it would create a public website that tracks disaster spending nationwide.
It would also eliminate outdated, conflicting, and unnecessary rules and regulations.
And it would assess: disaster fraud risks related to insurance coverage, identify theft, public alerting systems, and cost savings associated with the reforms in the discussion draft.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 8/9/2025
2902 Days since Hurricane Harvey