FEMA National Preparedness Goal: Core Capabilities and Targets

The FEMA National Preparedness Goal establishes the shared national standard for disaster and emergency preparedness across all levels of government, the private sector, and individual communities. This page defines the Goal's structure, explains how its 32 core capabilities function as measurable benchmarks, maps common operational scenarios to those capabilities, and clarifies the decision logic that governs capability prioritization and target-setting. Understanding the Goal is essential to interpreting how federal preparedness funding is allocated and how jurisdictions are evaluated for readiness.

Definition and scope

The National Preparedness Goal, published by FEMA under the authority of Presidential Policy Directive 8 (PPD-8, issued March 2011), defines the national preparedness standard as: "A secure and resilient Nation with the capabilities required across the whole community to prevent, protect against, mitigate, respond to, and recover from the threats and hazards that pose the greatest risk." (FEMA, National Preparedness Goal, 2nd Edition, 2015)

The Goal applies to the full range of stakeholders identified in FEMA's whole community framework: federal, state, territorial, tribal, and local governments, nongovernmental organizations, the private sector, and the public. It does not function as a regulatory mandate with enforceable penalties; instead, it serves as the performance standard against which preparedness programs, grant eligibility, and capability assessments are measured.

The scope is organized around five mission areas:

  1. Prevention — stopping imminent threats, particularly terrorism
  2. Protection — safeguarding citizens, assets, and critical infrastructure from threats
  3. Mitigation — reducing long-term risk and the impact of disasters
  4. Response — stabilizing the community after an incident
  5. Recovery — restoring and improving the social, economic, natural, and built environment

Each mission area contains specific core capabilities. Mitigation, Response, and Recovery collectively account for 27 of the 32 capabilities; 5 capabilities — Planning, Public Information and Warning, Operational Coordination, Cybersecurity, and Intelligence and Information Sharing — are designated as cross-cutting and appear across multiple or all mission areas.

How it works

The 32 core capabilities each carry a capability target — a specific, measurable statement describing what level of performance constitutes national preparedness. These targets are defined in the Goal itself and updated through the National Preparedness System, a six-step iterative framework that translates the Goal into actionable programs. The six steps, per FEMA's National Preparedness System documentation, are:

  1. Identify and assess risk
  2. Estimate capability requirements
  3. Build and sustain capabilities
  4. Plan to deliver capabilities
  5. Validate capabilities
  6. Review and update

Capability requirements are estimated using the Threat and Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment (THIRA) process, which jurisdictions complete periodically to establish their own capability targets based on locally identified threats. The companion Stakeholder Preparedness Review (SPR) then measures current capability against those targets, producing a gaps analysis that informs grant applications under programs such as the Homeland Security Grant Program (HSGP) and the Emergency Management Performance Grant (EMPG).

A critical structural distinction separates the National Preparedness Goal from the National Response Framework and the National Incident Management System: the Goal defines what level of capability must be achieved; the frameworks define how those capabilities are organized and deployed during actual incidents. The Goal is the standard; the frameworks are the operational architecture.

Capability targets are not binary pass/fail determinations. FEMA uses a five-level rating scale — from 1 (Least Prepared) to 5 (Most Prepared) — in the SPR to capture graduated capability levels, enabling jurisdictions to track progress over time rather than only measuring against an absolute threshold.

Common scenarios

Core capabilities map to specific incident types in predictable ways, which drives how preparedness investments are directed.

Mass casualty incidents (natural or man-made): The Response mission area capabilities of Mass Care Services, Emergency Medical Services, and Mass Search and Rescue Operations are stress-tested against scenarios involving 1,000 or more casualties. FEMA's Urban Search and Rescue task force system is the primary federal asset supporting the Mass Search and Rescue capability at the national level.

Cyberattacks on critical infrastructure: The Cybersecurity core capability, a cross-cutting capability spanning Prevention and Protection, applies directly. It is the only core capability that references a non-physical threat domain by name, reflecting the infrastructure vulnerabilities catalogued by the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA).

Catastrophic flooding: Long-duration flood events simultaneously engage Mitigation capabilities (Community Resilience, Long-term Vulnerability Reduction) and Recovery capabilities (Infrastructure Systems, Economic Recovery). Jurisdictions in Special Flood Hazard Areas, as mapped under the National Flood Insurance Program, face a higher baseline capability requirement for these areas in their THIRA scenarios.

Public health emergencies: The Response capability of Public Health, Healthcare, and Emergency Medical Services covers medical surge capacity. A jurisdiction with a single regional hospital serving a population of 500,000 would, under THIRA methodology, calculate a higher capability gap for this core capability than a jurisdiction with distributed hospital infrastructure.

Terrorism/weapons of mass destruction: Prevention and Protection capabilities — including Screening, Search, and Detection; Interdiction and Disruption; and Forensics and Attribution — are primarily activated in this scenario type and are among the capabilities most closely tied to federal intelligence-sharing frameworks.

Decision boundaries

Determining which capabilities receive investment priority involves structured decision logic rooted in three factors: the jurisdiction's THIRA risk profile, current SPR-measured capability gaps, and eligible use restrictions attached to preparedness grants.

National priority vs. local priority: The National Preparedness Goal does not rank the 32 capabilities against each other in a fixed hierarchy. Instead, capability prioritization is set at the state and urban area level through the THIRA/SPR cycle. A coastal jurisdiction will weight Infrastructure Systems and Operational Coordination differently than a landlocked jurisdiction facing wildfire exposure. The FEMA mission and core functions page provides further context on how federal priorities are communicated to grantees.

Grant-driven boundaries: HSGP funds carry Investment Justification requirements that must tie expenditures to documented capability gaps from the SPR. Capabilities rated at level 4 or 5 typically do not qualify for gap-filling investments under HSGP without additional justification. This creates a built-in constraint: sustained capabilities compete with developing capabilities for finite grant dollars.

Whole community vs. government-only scope: A structural boundary in the Goal's application is the distinction between government-owned capability and whole community capability. A jurisdiction may rely on private hospital systems, utility companies, or voluntary organizations to fulfill portions of a core capability target. When those non-governmental contributors are unavailable — due to their own damage or resource demands — the government-only capability gap may be substantially larger than the whole community assessment suggests.

Tiered federal vs. state vs. local responsibility: The Goal does not assign exclusive responsibility for any single capability to one level of government. However, 4 of the 32 capabilities — Nuclear Detonation Response, Radiological/Nuclear Detection, Forensics and Attribution, and Interdiction and Disruption — have a federal operational lead in almost all realistic scenarios, given the specialized equipment and legal authorities required. This contrasts with capabilities such as Public Information and Warning, where local governments hold the primary activation role, and federal involvement is supportive. The FEMA disaster declaration process is the formal trigger mechanism that determines when federal capability supplements state and local resources.

Comparing the 2nd Edition of the National Preparedness Goal (2015) against the 1st Edition (2011) reveals one substantive structural change: the addition of Cybersecurity as a distinct cross-cutting core capability, reflecting the expanding threat landscape identified in the 2013 National Infrastructure Protection Plan update. All other 31 capabilities were carried forward from the 1st Edition, though several capability targets were revised to reflect lessons from declared disasters between 2011 and 2015. A comprehensive overview of FEMA's scope and program authorities is available at the site index.

Read Next

FEMA National Response Coordination Center (NRCC) Operations The FEMA National Response Coordination Center (NRCC) serves as the primary federal multiagency coordination center for... FEMA Preparedness Resources for Households and Families FEMA's preparedness programs for households and families form the civilian-facing foundation of the national emergency... National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP): Coverage, Costs, and Claims The National Flood Insurance Program is the primary federal mechanism through which property owners in flood-prone areas can...