This report captures insights from nearly 90 floodplain management, policy, and AI experts who came together to explore how artificial intelligence can responsibly support flood risk management—while preserving transparency, technically defensible analysis, and professional judgment.

“Floodplain management depends on transparent, defensible flood risk data that can withstand technical, professional, and legal scrutiny, given the direct implications for public safety, financial risk, and property rights,” said ASFPM Foundation President, Dale Lehman, PE, CFM. “AI offers important opportunities to enhance this work, particularly through automation and administrative support that improve efficiency while preserving scientific rigor. However, in a regulatory environment, AI must complement rather than replace explainable, reproducible methods grounded in hydrologic, hydraulic, and coastal science.”

Through a series of presentations, panel discussions, and breakout sessions, the Forum resulted in three key takeaways:

• The effectiveness of AI hinges on the quality and governance of data;
• AI is a powerful tool, but human expertise and ethical oversight remain essential; and
• Realizing AI’s promise requires robust guardrails.

Following the Forum, the ASFPM Foundation—working in coordination with the ASFPM AI Subcommittee—synthesized Forum presentations and participant insights into a report. This report equips floodplain professionals with a foundational understanding of AI—its potential benefits and limitations—to support effective application in floodplain management. It also provides policymakers, including legislators and government agencies, with a clear starting point for understanding the key issues and tradeoffs that should inform national policy on the use of AI in flood risk management.

The report also distilled these discussions into 11 actionable recommendations to support both near- and long-term decision-making and help agencies, practitioners, and partners responsibly integrate AI into floodplain management. The recommendations focus on strengthening data governance; improving coordination across sectors; promoting transparency, trust, and professional oversight; building workforce capacity; and advancing practical AI applications that can be implemented today while preparing for future innovation.

Key actions discussed include expanding education and dialogue through webinars and forums; compiling and sharing AI use cases; establishing governance frameworks and professional standards; promoting data quality and accountability; fostering collaboration and co-development; piloting AI applications—particularly for communication—and exploring regulatory sandbox approaches.

In 2026 and beyond, the ASFPM Foundation will continue working with ASFPM and external partners to advance these recommendations and support the careful, constructive use of big data and AI across floodplain management. If you work at the intersection of flood risk, resilience, data, or public policy, this report offers valuable perspective on where the field is headed and how we can move forward responsibly.  

Read the full report on ASFPM Foundation’s website

This report is dedicated to the memory of Jenni Evans, PhD, a nationally respected meteorologist, educator, and champion for responsible innovation in floodplain management. As a panelist at the Forum, Dr. Evans brought an extraordinary depth of expertise to the intersection of artificial intelligence, advanced computation, and societal resilience. Her commitment to interdisciplinary collaboration, mentorship, and ethical science continues to inspire the ASFPM Foundation and the broader floodplain management community.

ASFPM Foundation gratefully acknowledges the critical financial support and subject-matter expertise provided by the Forum sponsors:

The post ASFPM Foundation Releases Report on Harnessing AI for Flood Risk Management first appeared on Association of State Floodplain Managers.

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) and Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC) introduced last week a bill, S. 4248 – Enhancing Long-Term, Efficient, and Viable Alternatives to Empower Flood-Prone Communities Act, in response to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ pause on certain flood studies and projects that include nonstructural approaches. The bill would require the Corps to resume that work and give nonstructural strategies equal standing alongside traditional infrastructure like dams, levees, and floodwalls.

Sen. Whitehouse told E&E News that when the USACE evaluated flood risk along Rhode Island’s coastline, “it found that nonstructural measures were the best long-term, cost-effective solution.”

At its core, the legislation focuses on a few practical changes:

• Restarting paused projects within 45 days and preventing future blanket pauses
• Reinforcing equal consideration for nonstructural solutions in all Corps studies
• Reducing barriers to implementation, including higher federal cost shares (up to 90–100% for some properties) and more flexibility for local partners
• Authorizing the Corps to develop and utilize planning approaches that are more  appropriate to non-structural designs rather than the standard structural projects

The bill also looks to make it easier to deliver projects at scale—allowing phased implementation and covering costs like temporary housing and relocation support.

A familiar message for floodplain managers

The debate surrounding the Corps’ pause echoes a point ASFPM Executive Director Chad Berginnis made in his Oct. 15 column following testimony by the Corps’ Assistant Secretary Adam Telle last fall: nonstructural approaches aren’t new—and they aren’t niche.

As Berginnis noted, these strategies are often complementary to structural projects, and in many cases—particularly in rural or geographically large areas—more cost-effective than traditional infrastructure. He also emphasized that the Corps already has the authority and technical expertise to deliver these projects at scale, even if implementation processes are still evolving.

For floodplain managers, the takeaway is straightforward: this bill doesn’t introduce new concepts—it reinforces approaches that already work. The difference is whether those tools remain available, funded, and prioritized. ASFPM’s policy team will continue to advocate and support the new legislation, as it addresses major issues that have stymied many worthy and cost-effective nonstructural projects for years.

The bill would require the agency to restart the studies and project construction affected by the pause, and prevent the agency from disbanding its National Nonstructural Committee, which was founded in 1985. We understand the Corps has recently taken the positive step of upgrading the agency’s status afforded nonstructural approaches by establishing a new Center Nonstructural of Expertise to help all Districts and be coordinated from the New Orleans District.

The “pause” was set six months ago to allow the Corps and the Administration to study whether nonstructural projects were an appropriate activity for the Corps, despite clear legislation going back to 1974 that mandates thorough examination of such alternatives in planning and pursuing projects.

Currently, the pause remains in place for many scores of projects across the nation, except for four “pilot” projects under study: a nonstructural portion of Fire Island to Montauk Point in New York; the Green Brook Project in New Jersey, part of the Norfolk Coastal Storm Risk Management Project in VA, and nonstructural elements of the Florida Keys Coastal Storm Risk Management Project. 

The post Bipartisan Bill Aims to Restart Nonstructural Flood Projects first appeared on Association of State Floodplain Managers.

The post Welcome New Members – March 2026 first appeared on Association of State Floodplain Managers.

Overview

Florida’s Senate Bill 948 (SB 948 (2025)), codified as Chapter 2025-166, Laws of Florida and Florida Statutes Sections 83.512 and 689.302, mandates that condo developers, landlords, mobile home park owners, and residential property sellers provide clear, written flood disclosures before leases or sales close. The law aims to ensure transparency about flood risks and past flooding events, protecting buyers and tenants from unexpected losses, and represents a significant step toward transparency in Florida real estate transactions.

Landlord Requirements

Applicability: Residential leases of 1 year or longer.

Disclosure Form: Must be a separate document, not part of the lease.

Information to Disclose:

• Whether the landlord has knowledge of any flooding that damaged the dwelling during their ownership.
• Whether the landlord has filed any insurance claims for flood damage, including through the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).
• Whether the landlord has received federal assistance for flood damage, such as FEMA aid.

Tenant Protections: If a landlord fails to disclose, and flooding causes substantial loss (50% or more of personal property value), the tenant may terminate the lease within 30 days and receive a refund for prepaid rent, while remaining responsible for rent owed prior to termination.

Seller and Developer Requirements

Sellers: Must provide a written flood disclosure at or before contract signing, confirming knowledge of past flooding, prior flood-related insurance claims, or federal assistance.

Condo/Co-op Developers: Must disclose flood history for both individual units and common areas. Buyers retain a 15-day cancellation right if disclosures are missing or misleading.

Purpose: Ensures buyers are aware that standard homeowners’ insurance does not cover flood damage, encouraging consideration of separate flood insurance.

Definition of Flooding

The law defines flooding broadly to include:

• Overflow of inland or tidal waters.
• Rapid accumulation of runoff or surface waters from rivers, streams, or drainage ditches.
• Sustained standing water from rainfall.

Role of Realtors

Realtors are responsible for ensuring clients receive and acknowledge flood disclosures, understand insurance limitations, and consider flood insurance options. Proper documentation helps prevent legal and financial issues after closing.

Effective Date

All provisions of the laws took effect October 1, 2025, and apply to leases, sales, and condo or mobile home transactions executed on or after that date.

The post Florida’s New Flood Disclosure Law: What Developers, Sellers, and Landlords Need to Know first appeared on Association of State Floodplain Managers.

Investing in FEMA’s core hazard mitigation and resilience programs is among the most cost-effective steps the federal government can take to reduce disaster costs, protect lives and property, and support state and local governments. Disaster resilience requires both robust funding and competent administration.

ASFPM recommendations for FY2027 focus on these seven issues:

1. Fully Fund and Stabilize the Flood Risk Mapping Program – $400 Million requested
2. Strengthen and Stabilize Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA) – $175 Million requested
3. Restore Confidence and Stability in Pre-Disaster Mitigation (BRIC) – $200 Million Plus 30% State Set-Aside
4. Restore NFIP Operational Capacity
5. Fund an NFIP Means-Tested Affordability Program Through New Appropriations
6. Cancel the NFIP’s Remaining Debt
7. Fund the National Dam Safety Program – $9.96 Million requested

Download the full written testimony

ASFPM will continue to submit testimony to the House and Senate on all key programs that impact flood and floodplain management programs.

The post ASFPM Outlines Seven Key Recommendations for FEMA Funding in FY2027 first appeared on Association of State Floodplain Managers.

The announcement follows a federal court order earlier this month requiring FEMA to restart the BRIC program after nearly a year of uncertainty.

According to FEMA, this new BRIC funding opportunity (DHS-25-MT-047-00-98) is specifically designed to:

• Prioritize infrastructure resilience by funding construction projects that are ready to implement and incentivizing the adoption of the latest hazard-resistant building codes. 
• Move money faster by eliminating phased projects, simplifying the National Competition scoring system and removing subapplication scoring by the National Review Panel. 
• Shift responsibility and authority to states, territories and Tribal Nations by removing funding for hazard mitigation planning and non-financial direct technical assistance provisions.   

Eligible applicants include states, the District of Columbia, U.S. territories and federally recognized Tribal Nations. Eligible subapplicants include local governments, communities, special districts and Tribal Nations applying through a state or territory.

Breaking down the numbers

For the Fiscal Years 2024-25 funding cycle, these are the available categories: 

• $112 million for states and territories (up to $2 million federal cost share for each applicant).
• $50 million Tribal Set-Aside (up to $2 million federal cost share for each applicant).
• $56 million for State or Territory Building Code Plus-Up (up to $1 million federal cost share per applicant) and $25 million for Tribal Nation Building Code Plus-Up to carry out eligible building code adoption and enforcement activities.
• $757 million for National Competition (up to $20 million federal cost share per subapplication).

Learn more on Grants.gov  

As an additional update, President Trump has extended the FEMA Review Council’s term through May 29, or until 10 days after the council submits its report—whichever comes first. 

The post BRIC Funding Alert: $1 Billion NOFO Now Open first appeared on Association of State Floodplain Managers.

Expanding the Regulatory Flood Hazard Area

A defining advancement in the 2025 Code is the expansion of the regulatory flood hazard area to include 0.2-percent annual chance flood zones (the 500-year floodplain). Under the updated provisions in Section R306 of the Residential Code (RCNYS) and Section 1612 of the Building Code (BCNYS), the regulatory framework now applies flood-resistant construction requirements to moderate flood hazard areas—shown on FIRMs as Zone B and Zone X (shaded).

Although the elevation requirement within these 500-year zones remains tied to the base flood elevation (BFE) associated with the 1-percent annual chance flood event, the expansion ensures that a broader set of buildings and infrastructure are evaluated for flood risk and constructed to consistent, resilient standards. For practitioners and communities, this shift represents a meaningful step toward addressing risk beyond the traditional 100-year footprint. Further, the expansion of the regulatory flood hazard area is consistent with a major provision of the newly published national consensus standard for flood resilient buildings, ASCE 24-24.  

Introducing Required Flood Elevation and Integrating Freeboard

The 2025 Uniform Code introduces the new term Required Flood Elevation (RFE)—a unifying concept for establishing elevation requirements across flood hazard areas. As defined in Section R306.1.4, the RFE is established as the greater of:

• The base flood elevation for the applicable flood source, plus:
  • 2 feet of freeboard; and
  • An additional 18 inches for sea level rise in flood hazard areas adjacent to tidal waters; or

• The elevation of the design flood associated with flood hazard areas depicted on a community’s adopted flood hazard map.

The continued requirement for 2 feet of freeboard remains an important buffer above the base flood, enhancing protection against events that exceed minimum expectations, or where regulatory mapping does not keep pace with natural or anthropogenic changes over time. Incorporating freeboard into the Required Flood Elevation calculation reflects longstanding best practices, while the expanded application into moderate hazard zones acknowledges that risk does not stop at the edge of the SFHA.

Accounting for Sea Level Rise in Tidal Areas

A key change to the 2025 Uniform Code is the explicit inclusion of sea level rise (SLR) considerations in tidal coastal areas. As noted in the Regulatory Impact Statement supporting the Code: 

“In both the Residential Code and Building Code, provisions for sea level rise in tidal coastal areas were added that increased the required flood elevation by adding an additional 18 inches in tidal areas over current code requirements, based on recommendations from DEC. This provision is based on the Title 6 Part 490 Projected Sea Level Rise medium sea level rise scenario projections for the 2050s.”
(Regulatory Impact Statement, Appendix B, p. 33,)

The net effect is an additional 18-inch elevation requirement added to the base flood elevation plus freeboard for tidal adjacent areas. This provision is grounded in the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation’s projected SLR medium scenario for the 2050s and reflects a recognition that regulatory design must anticipate emerging conditions—not just historical flood risk.

Technical Considerations and Implementation Guidance

While the expansion of the regulatory flood hazard area and the establishment of the Required Flood Elevation framework are conceptually straightforward, practical challenges remain when multiple flood zones or complex site conditions are present. For example, determining the appropriate base flood reference where adjacent zones have different BFEs, or where AO zones are involved, can present technical ambiguity.

To support consistent interpretation, the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) Division of Water has prepared a draft technical bulletin that will soon be published by the New York State Department of State to address these and other unique scenarios.

DEC Division of Water is also updating the model flood damage prevention ordinances and developing a Code Coordinated ordinance to reflect the 2025 Uniform Code provisions, with a goal of assisting communities to align local floodplain management ordinances with updated state requirements.

The post NYS Expands Flood Regulatory Framework with 500-Year and Sea Level Rise Provisions first appeared on Association of State Floodplain Managers.

The NFIP provides coverage to 4.7 million policyholders across 23,000 communities nationwide. In addition to insurance, the NFIP oversees floodplain management, flood hazard mapping, and flood mitigation to meet its statutory obligations. A small but dedicated federal staff carries out these functions by relying heavily on contracts, cooperative grants, arrangements, and other formal agreements with private insurers, state/local governments, and vendors. Ironically, this approach to administering the NFIP aligns with the Trump Administration’s priorities for state and local governments to play a more significant role in resilience and preparedness and for greater private sector involvement.

However, this public-private operating model is both a strength and a vulnerability. While it limits the federal staffing footprint, the NFIP cannot meet its statutory obligations without the ability to update, renew, and enforce these critical agreements. Disruptions can quickly impair core program functions, and statutory authorization alone is not sufficient to ensure operational continuity. And while the program is now authorized until September 30, 2026, operationally, the NFIP is far from healthy.

We began to see the warning signs last summer and fall. Even though Congress obligated funding, we did not see FY2025 Notice of Funding Opportunities (NOFOs) for three key programs:

• Cooperating Technical Partners (CTP) – a cooperative agreement through which states and regional entities lead flood mapping and remapping efforts
• Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA) – a grant program to mitigate at-risk flood-prone structures that have flood insurance
• Community Assistance Program (CAP) – a cooperative agreement through which states help FEMA manage NFIP floodplain management requirements for 23,000 communities  

Although a CAP NOFO eventually came out in August, none emerged for the CTP or FMA programs.  And while CAP awards were largely made by the end of the last fiscal year, states report they have not yet been reimbursed for work done in the first quarter of the fiscal year (Oct-Dec 2025).

Another troubling situation involves the RiskMAP regional task orders. From what I understand, the contracts were ready to go — sitting on the DHS Secretary’s desk — and simply left unsigned as the new federal fiscal year began last October 1. These contracts support much of the nation’s flood mapping. And keep in mind, this is for work that Congress has already appropriated money!

In addition, last fall the Project Management Contract for the RiskMAP program was not renewed. This meant, among other things, that Regional Office support was reduced to manage the project’s scope, budget, and timelines. The Community Engagement and Risk Communication (CERC) contract for RiskMAP was allowed to expire as well, shifting a lot of scope back to FEMA, even as the agency lost staff.  The NFIP Stakeholder Training Development and Delivery Contract, which was the primary contract used to train insurance agents on the NFIP, was also allowed to lapse.

Unfortunately, this pattern of negligent behavior has continued through the winter. As of last week, FEMA cancelled the contract to administer the NFIP Community Rating System (CRS). As a result, program operations— including annual recertifications, cycle verification visits, re-evaluations to increase rank, and entry into the program — are all on hold until FEMA staff assume those duties (which doesn’t seem likely), a new contract is issued, or statute is changed. This contractor had administered and implemented the CRS program on behalf of FEMA since the program’s inception in 1990. Currently over 1,500 communities nationwide participate in the CRS, covering 4.7 million NFIP policyholders — about 76% of the entire policyholder base. The core consequence of the funding reductions is straightforward: American families will pay more for flood insurance.

So, what will happen this spring? At the end of March, the Production and Technical Services (PTS) Standard Operations Contract will expire. This important contract covers things like RiskMAP portfolio management, including quality assurance, as well as levee support, due process support, building sciences, levee safety operations, dam safety, and national mitigation planning support. As it stands, although the existing contract has a 12-month scope, it was only funded for 10 months despite Congress fully funding the flood mapping program!

We also understand that an expiring Customer and Data Services (CDS) contract, which supports the National Flood Hazard Layer and the flood mapping library, was extended on a limited-service basis for 90 days. Meanwhile, the contracts for Letter of Map Change (MT-1 and MT-2) are set to expire in April. And we still have zero visibility on whether FY2025 funding that Congress appropriated will be made available for flood mapping through the CTP program or for flood mitigation through the FMA program. 

There are other contracts on the insurance side of the program that I have less visibility into but will expire this spring and summer if they are not extended.

Here is the bottom line. Due to negligence, incompetence, or both at the highest levels of the agency (whether it was FEMA leadership or DHS leadership — this is squarely a leadership issue), the NFIP is in critical condition. Despite it being authorized by Congress until September 30, 2026, the program is not getting the operational attention and support it needs.  

The NFIP’s delivery model depends on a small number of FEMA staff overseeing a program largely executed through grants, agreements, and contracts. When contracting breaks down — and staffing is insufficient to coordinate, process, and execute the contracts — the system begins to fail. These problems are further exacerbated when FEMA has essentially been under a gag order preventing most communication between them and their local, state, tribal, territorial, and nonprofit partners.

I, for one, am not sad to see what I believe was incompetent leadership depart DHS.  I can only hope that Senator Mullin, who is the President’s nominee to be the Secretary of DHS, will not only be a better leader but will care enough about the families and businesses of this country to ensure that FEMA — and the NFIP — recover and return to a stable condition.

Your partner in loss reduction,

Editor’s note: Updated March 17, 2026 to provide additional context to the CRS contract issue.

The post NFIP Code Blue first appeared on Association of State Floodplain Managers.

In the March 6 ruling, U.S. District Judge Richard G. Stearns addressed the ongoing delays in restoring the program, giving FEMA a strict 21-day-deadline to issue BRIC’s Notice of Funding Opportunity for Fiscal Year 2024. The order means the agency has to unfreeze the roughly $750 million in grants that have been in limbo since the original NOFO was cancelled in April 2025. 

In addition, FEMA has 14 days from the date of the order to communicate the status of current BRIC projects to the plaintiff states and file status reports with the court outlining remaining steps to reverse the termination of the BRIC program, including a schedule for the FY2025 and FY2026 BRIC funding cycles.  

“We are encouraged by the court’s clear timeline for restoring the BRIC program. Mitigation is a race against time, and this ruling provides the necessary framework for the agency to honor its commitments to the state and local partners who are on the front lines of disaster resilience,” said Chad Berginnis, ASFPM Executive Director. “We look forward to working closely with FEMA as they resume this vital program, ensuring that proactive investments in community safety remain a top priority.”

How the Legal Battle Reached This Point

This latest judgment will hopefully bring to an end a long legal battle between the 23-state coalition and the administration. On July 16, 2025, the coalition filed a lawsuit to prevent FEMA from terminating its BRIC program. On December 11, 2025, the court ruled in favor of the states, declaring the termination of the congressionally appropriated program unlawful and ordering FEMA to take all necessary steps to reverse course.

In February, the coalition filed a motion asking the District of Massachusetts to enforce its December 11 order, saying FEMA had offered no indication that it had complied with the order at that point.

“The uncertainty and ongoing delay continue to threaten the very existence of the states’ projects, leaving state emergency management agencies and local municipalities scrambling to fill funding gaps,” the states said in the motion. “Ultimately, plaintiff states continue to face the loss of an urgently needed program designed to protect against natural disasters and save lives.”

In response to that most recent filing by the states, the administration argued in a March 3 filing that “FEMA is currently reviewing the BRIC program” and “the goal of this review is to improve the BRIC program—not terminate it.” The agency also said the process has been slowed by staffing shortages and lapses in funding but added that it is working to comply with the court’s order.

In his March 6 decision, Judge Stearns acknowledged the tangible steps FEMA has taken toward compliance with the December 11 ruling but noted that several requirements remain unimplemented. He also recognized that some delays may stem from staffing shortages and the current budget freeze at the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. However, he concluded that the court’s directives are “reasonable steps” the agency can—and must—take even while leadership transitions at the DHS are underway.

“The judge’s order in this case was unequivocal: FEMA must restore the BRIC program,” Washington state Attorney General Nick Brown said in a press release. “We will keep fighting to make sure FEMA stops wasting time and carries out the program as Congress intended.”  

The lawsuit was co-led by attorney generals from Massachusetts and Washington and joined by the following states: Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Illinois, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Wisconsin.

A copy of Judge Stearns’ March 6 “Order to Enforce” is available here

The post FEMA Ordered to Restart BRIC Program first appeared on Association of State Floodplain Managers.

On The FloodZone, you can:

• Engage in discussions on real-world floodplain management issues
• Share tools, templates, guidance documents, and lessons learned
• Learn from professionals working in diverse geographic and regulatory environments
• Participate in the FloodZone Mentorship Program as a mentor or mentee

The FloodZone Spotlight: Mentorship

Are you new to the profession and looking to accelerate your career development? The FloodZone Mentorship Program offers structured, meaningful connections with experienced professionals in the field.

Mentees lead the process by identifying mentors whose experience aligns with their career goals. Mentor profiles include professional backgrounds and areas of expertise, allowing mentees to filter and identify strong matches. Once selected, mentees initiate the connection directly through the platform.

The mentorship page includes:

• A comprehensive Mentor Guide
• Mentor sign-up access
• A welcome packet for mentees
• Informational videos outlining program benefits

What This Program Can Do for You

Career Clarity & Growth
Define your goals, assess your strengths, and strengthen job-seeking skills through structured guidance and informed self-reflection.

Expand Your Professional Network
Build meaningful connections and gain an advocate invested in your long-term success.

Increase Confidence & Accountability
Receive constructive feedback on professional challenges while developing greater confidence in your expertise.

Interested in learning more? Visit the FloodZone Mentorship Program page within The FloodZone for full details.

The FloodZone is more than a discussion board—it’s a practitioner-driven professional knowledge network.

Login with your portal credentials and join the conversation:
https://asfpm.junolive.com/main/home

Your participation strengthens the collective expertise of the floodplain management community.

The post Stay Connected: Explore The FloodZone first appeared on Association of State Floodplain Managers.