This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-09-760T 
entitled 'Influenza Pandemic: Continued Focus on the Nation's Planning 
and Preparedness Efforts Remains Essential' which was released on June 
3, 2009. 

This text file was formatted by the U.S. Government Accountability 
Office (GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as part 
of a longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility. Every 
attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data integrity of 
the original printed product. Accessibility features, such as text 
descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes placed at the 
end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, are provided 
but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format of the printed 
version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an exact electronic 
replica of the printed version. We welcome your feedback. Please E-mail 
your comments regarding the contents or accessibility features of this 
document to Webmaster@gao.gov. 

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright 
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed 
in its entirety without further permission from GAO. Because this work 
may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the 
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this 
material separately. 

Testimony before the Ad Hoc Subcommittee on State, Local, and Private 
Sector Preparedness and Integration, Senate Committee on Homeland 
Security and Governmental Affairs: 

United States Government Accountability Office: 
GAO: 

For Release on Delivery: 
Expected at 2:00 p.m. EST:
Wednesday, June 3, 2009: 

Influenza Pandemic: 

Continued Focus on the Nation's Planning and Preparedness Efforts 
Remains Essential: 

Statement of Bernice Steinhardt:
Director, Strategic Issues: 

GAO-09-760T: 

GAO Highlights: 

Highlights of GAO-09-760T, testimony before the Ad Hoc Subcommittee on 
State, Local, and Private Sector Preparedness and Integration, Senate 
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. 

Why GAO Did This Study: 

As the recent outbreak of the H1N1 (swine flu) virus underscores, an 
influenza pandemic remains a real threat to our nation and to the 
world. Over the past 3 years, GAO has conducted a body of work to help 
the nation better prepare for a possible pandemic. In a February 2009 
report, GAO synthesized the results of this work, pointing out that 
while the previous administration had taken a number of actions to plan 
for a pandemic, including developing a national strategy and 
implementation plan, much more needs to be done, and many gaps in 
preparedness and planning still remain. 

This statement is based on the February 2009 report which synthesized 
the results of 11 reports and two testimonies covering six thematic 
areas: (1) leadership, authority, and coordination; (2) detecting 
threats and managing risks; (3) planning, training, and exercising, (4) 
capacity to respond and recover; (5) information sharing and 
communication; and (6) performance and accountability. 

What GAO Found: 

* Leadership roles and responsibilities for an influenza pandemic need 
to be clarified, tested, and exercised, and existing coordination 
mechanisms, such as critical infrastructure coordinating councils, 
could be better utilized to address challenges in coordination between 
the federal, state, and local governments and the private sector in 
preparing for a pandemic. 

* Efforts are underway to improve the surveillance and detection of 
pandemic-related threats in humans and animals, but targeting 
assistance to countries at the greatest risk has been based on 
incomplete information, particularly from developing countries. 

* Pandemic planning and exercising has occurred at the federal, state, 
and local government levels, but important planning gaps remain at all 
levels of government. 

* Further actions are needed to address the capacity to respond to and 
recover from an influenza pandemic, which will require additional 
capacity in patient treatment space, and the acquisition and 
distribution of medical and other critical supplies, such as antivirals 
and vaccines. 

* Federal agencies have provided considerable guidance and pandemic-
related information to state and local governments, but could augment 
their efforts with additional information on state border closures and 
other topics. 

* Performance monitoring and accountability for pandemic preparedness 
needs strengthening. For example, the May 2006 National Strategy for 
Pandemic Influenza Implementation Plan does not establish priorities 
among its 324 action items and does not provide information on the 
financial resources needed to implement them. 

The recent outbreak of the H1N1 influenza virus should serve as a 
powerful reminder that the threat of a pandemic influenza, which seemed 
to fade from public awareness in recent years, never really 
disappeared. While federal agencies have taken action on 13 of GAO’s 23 
recommendations, 10 of the recommendations that GAO has made over the 
past 3 years are still not fully implemented. With the possibility that 
the H1N1 virus could return in a more virulent form in a second wave in 
the fall or winter, the administration and federal agencies should turn 
their attention to filling in the planning and preparedness gaps GAO’s 
work has pointed out. 

What GAO Recommends: 

The February 2009 report made no new recommendations. This statement 
discusses the status of GAO’s prior recommendations on the nation’s 
planning and preparedness for a pandemic. 

View [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-09-760T] or key 
components. For more information, contact Bernice Steinhardt at (202) 
512-6543 or steinhardtb@gao.gov. 

[End of section] 

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee: 

I am pleased to be here today to discuss key themes from the body of 
work GAO has developed over the past several years to help the nation 
better prepare for, respond to, and recover from a possible influenza 
pandemic. An influenza pandemic remains a real threat to our nation and 
to the world, as we are witnessing during the current outbreak of the 
H1N1 (swine flu) virus. The previous administration took a number of 
actions to plan for a pandemic, including developing a national 
strategy and implementation plan. However, much more needs to be done, 
and many gaps in preparedness and planning still remain. At the same 
time, national priorities have been shifting as a global pandemic has 
yet to occur, and the nation's financial crisis and other national 
issues have become more immediate and pressing. Strengthening 
preparedness for large-scale public health emergencies, such as an 
influenza pandemic, is one of 13 urgent issues that we identified 
earlier this year as among those needing the immediate attention of the 
new administration and Congress.[Footnote 1] 

In the past 3 years, GAO has issued 11 reports and two testimonies on 
influenza pandemic planning.[Footnote 2] We synthesized the results of 
this work in a February 2009 report, which I will discuss in more 
detail today.[Footnote 3] We have made 23 recommendations based on the 
findings from these reports and testimonies, thirteen of which have 
been acted upon by the responsible federal agencies. While the 
responsible federal agencies have generally agreed with our 
recommendations and some actions are underway to address them, 10 
recommendations have not yet been fully implemented. While our February 
2009 report made no new recommendations, we updated the status of 
recommendations that had not yet been implemented as of February 2009. 
Many of the recommendations that remain unimplemented have become even 
more pressing in light of the very real possibility of a more serious 
return of the H1N1 virus later this year. Lists of our open 
recommendations and related GAO products that are referenced throughout 
this statement are located in attachments I and II. 

In summary, my statement will address the following issues which were 
drawn from the key themes of GAO's pandemic work: 

* Leadership roles and responsibilities for an influenza pandemic need 
to be clarified, tested, and exercised, and existing coordination 
mechanisms, such as critical infrastructure coordinating councils, 
could be better utilized to address challenges in coordination between 
the federal, state, and local governments and the private sector in 
preparing for a pandemic. 

* Efforts are underway to improve the surveillance and detection of 
pandemic-related threats in humans and animals, but targeting 
assistance to countries at the greatest risk has been based on 
incomplete information, particularly from developing countries. 

* Pandemic planning and exercising has occurred at the federal, state, 
and local government levels, but important planning gaps remain at all 
levels of government. 

* Further actions are needed to address the capacity to respond to and 
recover from an influenza pandemic, which will require additional 
capacity in patient treatment space, and the acquisition and 
distribution of medical and other critical supplies, such as antivirals 
and vaccines. 

* Federal agencies have provided considerable guidance and pandemic- 
related information to state and local governments, but could augment 
their efforts with additional information on state border closures and 
other topics. 

* Performance monitoring and accountability for pandemic preparedness 
needs strengthening. For example, the May 2006 National Strategy for 
Pandemic Influenza Implementation Plan (National Pandemic 
Implementation Plan) does not establish priorities among its 324 action 
items and does not provide information on the financial resources 
needed to implement them. 

This statement is largely based on our prior work, which was conducted 
in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. 
Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain 
sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our 
findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that 
the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and 
conclusions based on our audit objectives. 

Background: 

Given the consequences of a severe influenza pandemic, in 2006 GAO 
developed a strategy for our work that would help support Congress's 
decision making and oversight related to pandemic planning. Our 
strategy was built on a large body of work spanning two decades, 
including reviews of government responses to prior disasters such as 
Hurricanes Andrew and Katrina, the devastation caused by the 9/11 
terror attacks, efforts to address the Year 2000 (Y2K) computer 
challenges, and assessments of public health capacities in the face of 
bioterrorism and emerging infectious diseases such as Severe Acute 
Respiratory Syndrome (SARS). The strategy was built around six key 
themes, as shown in figure 1. While all of these themes are 
interrelated, our earlier work underscored the importance of 
leadership, authority, and coordination, a theme that touches on all 
aspects of preparing for, responding to, and recovering from an 
influenza pandemic. 

Figure 1: Key Themes of GAO's Pandemic Strategy: 

[Refer to PDF for image: illustration] 

Key Themes of GAO's Pandemic Strategy (shown as potentially 
interlocking puzzle pieces); 
* Performance and accountability; 
* Leadership, authority, and coordination; 
* Detecting threats and managing risks; 
* Information sharing and communication; 
* Capacity to respond and recover; 
* Planning, training, and exercising. 

Source: GAO. 

[End of figure] 

Influenza pandemic--caused by a novel strain of influenza virus for 
which there is little resistance and which therefore is highly 
transmissible among humans--continues to be a real and significant 
threat facing the United States and the world. Unlike incidents that 
are discretely bounded in space or time (e.g., most natural or man-made 
disasters), an influenza pandemic is not a singular event, but is 
likely to come in waves, each lasting weeks or months, and pass through 
communities of all sizes across the nation and the world 
simultaneously. While the current H1N1 outbreak seems to have been 
relatively mild, the history of an influenza pandemic suggests it could 
return in a second wave this fall or winter in a more virulent form. 
While a pandemic will not directly damage physical infrastructure such 
as power lines or computer systems, it threatens the operation of 
critical systems by potentially removing the essential personnel needed 
to operate them from the workplace for weeks or months. In a severe 
pandemic, absences attributable to illnesses, the need to care for ill 
family members, and fear of infection may, according to the Centers for 
Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), reach a projected 40 percent 
during the peak weeks of a community outbreak, with lower rates of 
absence during the weeks before and after the peak.[Footnote 4] In 
addition, an influenza pandemic could result in 200,000 to 2 million 
deaths in the United States, depending on its severity. 

The Homeland Security Council (HSC) took an active approach to this 
potential disaster by, among other things, issuing the National 
Strategy for Pandemic Influenza (National Pandemic Strategy) in 
November 2005, and the National Pandemic Implementation Plan in May 
2006.[Footnote 5] The National Pandemic Strategy is intended to provide 
a high-level overview of the approach that the federal government will 
take to prepare for and respond to an influenza pandemic. It also 
provides expectations for nonfederal entities--including state, local, 
and tribal governments; the private sector; international partners; and 
individuals--to prepare themselves and their communities. The National 
Pandemic Implementation Plan is intended to lay out broad 
implementation requirements and responsibilities among the appropriate 
federal agencies and clearly define expectations for nonfederal 
entities. The plan contains 324 action items related to these 
requirements, responsibilities, and expectations, most of which were to 
be completed before or by May 2009. HSC publicly reported on the status 
of the action items that were to be completed by 6 months, 1 year, and 
2 years in December 2006, July 2007, and October 2008, respectively. 
HSC indicated in its October 2008 progress report that 75 percent of 
the action items have been completed. At the request of the House 
Homeland Security Committee, we have ongoing work assessing the status 
of implementing this plan. 

Leadership Roles and Responsibilities Need to Be Clarified and Tested, 
and Coordination Mechanisms Could Be Better Utilized: 

Federal government leadership roles and responsibilities for pandemic 
preparedness and response are evolving, and will require further 
testing before the relationships among the many federal leadership 
positions are well understood. Such clarity in leadership is even more 
crucial now, given the change in administration and the associated 
transition of senior federal officials. Most of these federal 
leadership roles involve shared responsibilities between the Department 
of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the Department of Homeland 
Security (DHS), and it is not clear how these would work in practice. 
According to the National Pandemic Strategy and Plan, the Secretary of 
HHS is to lead the federal medical response to a pandemic, and the 
Secretary of Homeland Security will lead the overall domestic incident 
management and federal coordination. In addition, under the Post- 
Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act of 2006, the Administrator of 
the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) was designated as the 
principal domestic emergency management advisor to the President, the 
HSC, and the Secretary of Homeland Security, adding further complexity 
to the leadership structure in the case of a pandemic.[Footnote 6] To 
assist in planning and coordinating efforts to respond to a pandemic, 
in December 2006 the Secretary of Homeland Security predesignated a 
national Principal Federal Official (PFO) for influenza pandemic and 
established five pandemic regions each with a regional PFO and Federal 
Coordinating Officers (FCO) for influenza pandemic. PFOs are 
responsible for facilitating federal domestic incident planning and 
coordination, and FCOs are responsible for coordinating federal 
resources support in a presidentially-declared major disaster or 
emergency. 

However, the relationship of these roles to each other as well as with 
other leadership roles in a pandemic is unclear. Moreover, as we 
testified in July 2007, state and local first responders were still 
uncertain about the need for both FCOs and PFOs and how they would work 
together in disaster response.[Footnote 7] Accordingly, we recommended 
in our August 2007 report on federal leadership roles and the National 
Pandemic Strategy that DHS and HHS develop rigorous testing, training, 
and exercises for influenza pandemic to ensure that federal leadership 
roles and responsibilities for a pandemic are clearly defined and 
understood and that leaders are able to effectively execute shared 
responsibilities to address emerging challenges.[Footnote 8] In 
response to our recommendation, HHS and DHS officials stated in January 
2009 that several influenza pandemic exercises had been conducted since 
November 2007 that involved both agencies and other federal officials, 
but it is unclear whether these exercises rigorously tested federal 
leadership roles in a pandemic. 

In addition to concerns about clarifying federal roles and 
responsibilities for a pandemic and how shared leadership roles would 
work in practice, private sector officials told us that they are 
unclear about the respective roles and responsibilities of the federal 
and state governments during a pandemic emergency. The National 
Pandemic Implementation Plan states that in the event of an influenza 
pandemic, the distributed nature and sheer burden of the disease across 
the nation would mean that the federal government's support to any 
particular community is likely to be limited, with the primary response 
to a pandemic coming from states and local communities. Further, 
federal and private sector representatives we interviewed at the time 
of our October 2007 report identified several key challenges they face 
in coordinating federal and private sector efforts to protect the 
nation's critical infrastructure in the event of an influenza pandemic. 
[Footnote 9] One of these was a lack of clarity about the roles and 
responsibilities of federal and state governments on issues such as 
state border closures and influenza pandemic vaccine distribution. 

Coordination Mechanisms: 

Mechanisms and networks for collaboration and coordination on pandemic 
preparedness between federal and state governments and the private 
sector exist, but they could be better utilized. In some instances, the 
federal and private sectors are working together through a set of 
coordinating councils, including sector-specific and cross-sector 
councils. To help protect the nation's critical infrastructure, DHS 
created these coordinating councils as the primary means of 
coordinating government and private sector efforts for industry sectors 
such as energy, food and agriculture, telecommunications, 
transportation, and water.[Footnote 10] Our October 2007 report found 
that DHS has used these critical infrastructure coordinating councils 
primarily to share pandemic information across sectors and government 
levels rather than to address many of the challenges identified by 
sector representatives, such as clarifying the roles and 
responsibilities between federal and state governments.[Footnote 11] We 
recommended in the October 2007 report that DHS encourage the councils 
to consider and address the range of coordination challenges in a 
potential influenza pandemic between the public and private sectors for 
critical infrastructure. DHS concurred with our recommendation and DHS 
officials informed us at the time of our February 2009 report that the 
department was working on initiatives to address it, such as developing 
pandemic contingency plan guidance tailored to each of the critical 
infrastructure sectors, and holding a series of "webinars" with a 
number of the sectors. 

Federal executive boards (FEB) bring together federal agency and 
community leaders in major metropolitan areas outside of Washington, 
D.C., to discuss issues of common interest, including an influenza 
pandemic. The Office of Personnel Management (OPM), which provides 
direction to the FEBs, and the FEBs have designated emergency 
preparedness, security, and safety as an FEB core function. The FEBs' 
emergency support role with its regional focus may make the boards a 
valuable asset in pandemic preparedness and response. As a natural 
outgrowth of their general civic activities and through activities such 
as hosting emergency preparedness training, some of the boards have 
established relationships with, for example, federal, state, and local 
governments; emergency management officials; first responders; and 
health officials in their communities. In a May 2007 report on the 
FEBs' ability to contribute to emergency operations, we found that many 
of the selected FEBs included in our review were building capacity for 
influenza pandemic response within their member agencies and community 
organizations by hosting influenza pandemic training and exercises. 
[Footnote 12] We recommended that, since FEBs are well positioned 
within local communities to bring together federal agency and community 
leaders, the Director of OPM work with FEMA to formally define the 
FEBs' role in emergency planning and response. As a result of our 
recommendation, FEBs were included in the National Response Framework 
(NRF)[Footnote 13] in January 2008 as one of the regional support 
structures that have the potential to contribute to development of 
situational awareness during an emergency. OPM and FEMA also signed a 
memorandum of understanding in August 2008 in which FEBs and FEMA 
agreed to work collaboratively in carrying out their respective roles 
in the promotion of the national emergency response system. 

Efforts Are Underway to Improve the Surveillance and Detection of 
Pandemic-Related Threats in Humans and Animals, but Targeting 
Assistance to Countries at the Greatest Risk Has Been Based on 
Incomplete Information: 

International disease surveillance and detection efforts serve as an 
early warning system that could prevent the spread of an influenza 
pandemic outbreak. The United States and its international partners are 
involved in efforts to improve pandemic surveillance, including 
diagnostic capabilities, so that outbreaks can be quickly detected. 
Yet, as reported in 2007, international capacity for surveillance has 
many weaknesses, particularly in developing countries.[Footnote 14] As 
a result, assessments of the risks of the emergence of an influenza 
pandemic by U.S. agencies and international organizations, which were 
used to target assistance to countries at risk, were based on 
insufficiently detailed or incomplete information, limiting their value 
for comprehensive comparisons of risk levels by country. 

Pandemic Planning and Exercising Has Occurred, but Planning Gaps 
Remain: 

While the National Pandemic Strategy and National Pandemic 
Implementation Plan are important first steps in guiding national 
preparedness, important gaps exist that could hinder the ability of key 
stakeholders to effectively execute their responsibilities. In our 
August 2007 report on the National Pandemic Strategy and Implementation 
Plan, we found that while these documents are an important first step 
in guiding national preparedness, they do not fully address all six 
characteristics of an effective national strategy, as identified in our 
work.[Footnote 15] The documents fully address only one of the six 
characteristics, by reflecting a clear description and understanding of 
problems to be addressed. Further, the National Pandemic Strategy and 
Implementation Plan do not address one characteristic at all; they 
contain no discussion of what it will cost, where resources will be 
targeted to achieve the maximum benefits, and how benefits, risks, and 
costs will be balanced. Moreover, the documents do not provide a 
picture of priorities or how adjustments might be made in view of 
resource constraints. Although the remaining four characteristics are 
partially addressed, important gaps exist that could hinder the ability 
of key stakeholders to effectively execute their responsibilities. For 
example, state and local jurisdictions that will play crucial roles in 
preparing for and responding to a pandemic were not directly involved 
in developing the National Pandemic Implementation Plan, even though it 
relies on these stakeholders' efforts. Stakeholder involvement during 
the planning process is important to ensure that the federal 
government's and nonfederal entities' responsibilities are clearly 
understood and agreed upon. Further, relationships and priorities among 
actions were not clearly described, performance measures were not 
always linked to results, and insufficient information was provided 
about how the documents are integrated with other response-related 
plans, such as the NRF. We recommended that HSC establish a process for 
updating the National Pandemic Implementation Plan and that the updated 
plan should address these and other gaps. HSC did not comment on our 
recommendation and has not indicated if it plans to implement it. 

State and Local Pandemic Planning: 

We reported in June 2008 that, according to CDC, all 50 states and the 
three localities that received federal pandemic funds have developed 
influenza pandemic plans and conducted pandemic exercises in accordance 
with federal funding guidance. A portion of the $5.62 billion that 
Congress appropriated in supplemental funding to HHS for pandemic 
preparedness in 2006--$600 million--was allocated for state and local 
planning and exercising. All of the 10 localities that we reviewed in 
depth had also developed plans and conducted exercises, and had 
incorporated lessons learned from pandemic exercises into their 
planning.[Footnote 16] However, an HHS-led interagency assessment of 
states' plans found on average that states had "many major gaps" in 
their influenza pandemic plans in 16 of 22 priority areas, such as 
school closure policies and community containment, which are community- 
level interventions designed to reduce the transmission of a pandemic 
virus. The remaining six priority areas were rated as having "a few 
major gaps." Subsequently, HHS led another interagency assessment of 
state influenza pandemic plans and reported in January 2009 that 
although they had made important progress, most states still had major 
gaps in their pandemic plans.[Footnote 17] 

As we had reported in June 2008, HHS, in coordination with DHS and 
other federal agencies, had convened a series of regional workshops for 
states in five influenza pandemic regions across the country. Because 
these workshops could be a useful model for sharing information and 
building relationships, we recommended that HHS and DHS, in 
coordination with other federal agencies, convene additional meetings 
with states to address the gaps in the states' pandemic plans. As 
reported in February 2009, HHS and DHS generally concurred with our 
recommendation, but have not yet held these additional meetings. HHS 
and DHS indicated at the time of our February 2009 report that while no 
additional meetings had been planned, states will have to continuously 
update their pandemic plans and submit them for review. 

We have also reported on the need for more guidance from the federal 
government to help states and localities in their planning. In June 
2008, we reported that although the federal government has provided a 
variety of guidance, officials of the states and localities we reviewed 
told us that they would welcome additional guidance from the federal 
government in a number of areas, such as community containment, to help 
them to better plan and exercise for an influenza pandemic. Other state 
and local officials have identified similar concerns. According to the 
National Governors Association's (NGA) September 2008 issue brief on 
states' pandemic preparedness, states are concerned about a wide range 
of school-related issues, including when to close schools or dismiss 
students, how to maintain curriculum continuity during closures, and 
how to identify the appropriate time at which classes could resume. 
[Footnote 18] NGA also reported that states generally have very little 
awareness of the status of disease outbreaks, either in real time or in 
near real time, to allow them to know precisely when to recommend a 
school closure or reopening in a particular area. NGA reported that 
states wanted more guidance in the following areas: (1) workforce 
policies for the health care, public safety, and private sectors; (2) 
schools; (3) situational awareness such as information on the arrival 
or departure of a disease in a particular state, county, or community; 
(4) public involvement; and (5) public-private sector engagement. 

Private Sector Pandemic Planning: 

The private sector has also been planning for an influenza pandemic, 
but many challenges remain. To better protect critical infrastructure, 
federal agencies and the private sector have worked together across a 
number of sectors to plan for a pandemic, including developing general 
pandemic preparedness guidance, such as checklists for continuity of 
business operations during a pandemic. However, federal and private 
sector representatives have acknowledged that sustaining preparedness 
and readiness efforts for an influenza pandemic is a major challenge, 
primarily because of the uncertainty associated with a pandemic, 
limited financial and human resources, and the need to balance pandemic 
preparedness with other, more immediate, priorities, such as responding 
to outbreaks of foodborne illnesses in the food sector and, now, the 
effects of the financial crisis. 

In our March 2007 report on preparedness for an influenza pandemic in 
one of these critical infrastructure sectors--financial markets--we 
found that despite significant progress in preparing markets to 
withstand potential disease pandemics, securities and banking 
regulators could take additional steps to improve the readiness of the 
securities markets.[Footnote 19] The seven organizations that we 
reviewed--which included exchanges, clearing organizations, and payment-
system processors--were working on planning and preparation efforts to 
reduce the likelihood that a worldwide influenza pandemic would disrupt 
their critical operations. However, only one of the seven had completed 
a formal plan. To increase the likelihood that the securities markets 
will be able to function during a pandemic, we recommended that the 
Chairman, Federal Reserve; the Comptroller of the Currency; and the 
Chairman, Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC); consider taking 
additional actions to ensure that market participants adequately 
prepare for a pandemic outbreak. In response to our recommendation, the 
Federal Reserve and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, in 
conjunction with the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council 
and the SEC, directed all banking organizations under their supervision 
to ensure that the pandemic plans the financial institutions have in 
place are adequate to maintain critical operations during a severe 
outbreak. SEC issued similar requirements to the major securities 
industry market organizations. 

Further Actions Are Needed to Address the Capacity to Respond to and 
Recover from an Influenza Pandemic: 

Improving the nation's response capability to catastrophic disasters, 
such as an influenza pandemic, is essential. Following a mass casualty 
event, health care systems would need the ability to adequately care 
for a large number of patients or patients with unusual or highly 
specialized medical needs. The ability of local or regional health care 
systems to deliver services could be compromised, at least in the short 
term, because the volume of patients would far exceed the available 
hospital beds, medical personnel, pharmaceuticals, equipment, and 
supplies. Further, in natural and man-made disasters, assistance from 
other states may be used to increase capacity, but in a pandemic, 
states would likely be reluctant to provide assistance to each other 
due to scarce resources and fears of infection. 

The $5.62 billion that Congress provided in supplemental funding to HHS 
in 2006 was for, among other things, (1) monitoring disease spread to 
support rapid response, (2) developing vaccines and vaccine production 
capacity, (3) stockpiling antivirals and other countermeasures, (4) 
upgrading state and local capacity, and (5) upgrading laboratories and 
research at CDC. Figure 2 shows that the majority of this supplemental 
funding--about 77 percent--was allocated for developing antivirals and 
vaccines for a pandemic, and purchasing medical supplies. Also, a 
portion of the funding for state and local preparedness--$170 million-
-was allocated for state antiviral purchases for their state 
stockpiles.[Footnote 20] 

Figure 2: HHS Influenza Pandemic Supplemental Appropriations, Fiscal 
Year 2006 (dollars in millions): 

[Refer to PDF for image: pie-chart] 

Vaccine: 58%; $3,233; 
Antivirals[C]: 16%; $911; 
State and local preparedness[C]: 14%; $770; 
Other domestic[B]: 5%; $276; 
International activities[A]: 3%; $179; 
Medical supplies (personal protective equipment, ventilators, etc.): 
3%; $170; 
Risk communications: 1%; $51. 

Total: $5,590[D]. 

Source: GAO, HHS. 

Notes: Data are from HHS, Pandemic Planning Update III: A Report from 
Secretary Michael O. Leavitt (Washington, D.C.: Nov. 13, 2006). 

[A] International activities includes: international preparedness, 
surveillance, response, and research. 

[B] Other domestic includes: surveillance, quarantine, lab capacity, 
and rapid tests. 

[C] State and local preparedness includes funding for state subsidies 
of antiviral drugs. 

[D] This figure does not include $30 million in supplemental funding 
that was transferred to the U.S. Agency for International Development. 

[End of figure] 

An outbreak will require additional capacity in many areas, including 
the procurement of additional patient treatment space and the 
acquisition and distribution of medical and other critical supplies, 
such as antivirals and vaccines for an influenza pandemic.[Footnote 21] 
In a severe pandemic, the demand would exceed the available hospital 
bed capacity, which would be further challenged by the existing 
shortages of health care providers and their potential high rates of 
absenteeism. In addition, the availability of antivirals and vaccines 
could be inadequate to meet demand due to limited production, 
distribution, and administration capacity. 

The federal government has provided some guidance and funding to help 
states plan for additional capacity. For example, the federal 
government provided guidance for states to use when preparing for 
medical surge and on prioritizing target groups for an influenza 
pandemic vaccine. Some state officials reported, however, that they had 
not begun work on altered standards of care guidelines, that is, for 
providing care while allocating scarce equipment, supplies, and 
personnel in a way that saves the largest number of lives in mass 
casualty event, or had not completed drafting guidelines, because of 
the difficulty of addressing the medical, ethical, and legal issues 
involved. We recommended that HHS serve as a clearinghouse for sharing 
among the states altered standards of care guidelines developed by 
individual states or medical experts. HHS did not comment on the 
recommendation, and it has not indicated if it plans to implement it. 
[Footnote 22] Further, in our June 2008 report on state and local 
planning and exercising efforts for an influenza pandemic, we found 
that state and local officials reported that they wanted federal 
influenza pandemic guidance on facilitating medical surge, which was 
also one of the areas that the HHS-led assessment rated as having "many 
major gaps" nationally among states' influenza pandemic plans.[Footnote 
23] 

Federal Agencies Have Provided Considerable Guidance and Pandemic- 
Related Information, but Could Augment Their Efforts: 

The National Pandemic Implementation Plan emphasizes that government 
and public health officials must communicate clearly and continuously 
with the public throughout a pandemic. Accordingly, HHS, DHS, and other 
federal agencies have shared pandemic-related information in a number 
of ways, such as through Web sites, guidance, and state summits and 
meetings, and are using established networks, including coordinating 
councils for critical infrastructure protection, to share information 
about pandemic preparedness, response, and recovery. Federal agencies 
have established an influenza pandemic Web site [hyperlink, 
http://www.pandemicflu.gov] and disseminated pandemic preparedness 
checklists for workplaces, individuals and families, schools, health 
care and community organizations, and state and local governments. 

However, state and local officials from all of the states and 
localities we interviewed wanted additional federal influenza pandemic 
guidance from the federal government on specific topics, such as 
implementing community interventions, fatality management, and 
facilitating medical surge. Although the federal government has issued 
some guidance, it may not have reached state and local officials or may 
not have addressed the particular concerns or circumstances of the 
state and local officials we interviewed. In addition, private sector 
officials have told us that they would like clarification about the 
respective roles and responsibilities of the federal and state 
governments during an influenza pandemic emergency, such as for state 
border closures and influenza pandemic vaccine distribution. 

Performance Monitoring and Accountability For Pandemic Preparedness 
Needs Strengthening: 

While the National Pandemic Strategy and Implementation Plan identify 
overarching goals and objectives for pandemic planning, the documents 
are not altogether clear on the roles, responsibilities, and 
requirements to carry out the plan. Some of the action items in the 
National Pandemic Implementation Plan, particularly those that are to 
be completed by state, local, and tribal governments or the private 
sector, do not identify an entity responsible for carrying out the 
action. Most of the plan's performance measures consist of actions to 
be completed, such as disseminating guidance, but the measures are not 
always clearly linked with intended results. This lack of clear 
linkages makes it difficult to ascertain whether progress has in fact 
been made toward achieving the national goals and objectives described 
in the National Pandemic Strategy and Implementation Plan. Without a 
clear linkage to anticipated results, these measures of activities do 
not give an indication of whether the purpose of the activity is 
achieved. 

In addition, as discussed earlier, the National Pandemic Implementation 
Plan does not establish priorities among its 324 action items, which 
becomes especially important as agencies and other parties strive to 
effectively manage scarce resources and ensure that the most important 
steps are accomplished. Moreover, the National Pandemic Strategy and 
Implementation Plan do not provide information on the financial 
resources needed to implement them, which is one of six characteristics 
of an effective national strategy that we have identified. As a result, 
the documents do not provide a picture of priorities or how adjustments 
might be made in view of resource constraints. 

Concluding Observations: 

The recent outbreak of H1N1 influenza virus should serve as a powerful 
reminder that the threat of a pandemic influenza, which seemed to fade 
from public awareness in recent years, never really disappeared. While 
federal agencies have taken action on many of our recommendations, 
almost half the recommendations that we have made over the past 3 years 
are still not fully implemented. For one thing, it is essential, given 
the change in administration and the associated transition of senior 
federal officials, that the shared leadership roles that have been 
established between HHS and DHS along with other responsible federal 
officials, are tested in rigorous tests and exercises. Likewise, DHS 
should continue to work with other federal agencies and private sector 
members of the critical infrastructure coordinating councils to help 
address the challenges of coordination and clarify roles and 
responsibilities of federal and state governments. DHS and HHS should 
also, in coordination with other federal agencies, continue to work 
with states and local governments to help them address identified gaps 
in their pandemic planning. Moreover, the 3-year period covered by the 
National Pandemic Implementation Plan is now over and it will be 
important for HSC to establish a process for updating the National 
Pandemic Implementation Plan so that the updated plan can address the 
gaps we have identified, as well as lessons learned from the current 
H1N1 outbreak. 

Pandemic influenzas, as I noted earlier, differ from other types of 
disasters in that they are not necessarily discrete events. While the 
current H1N1 outbreak seems to have been relatively mild, it could 
return in a second wave this fall or winter in a more virulent form. 
Given this risk, the administration and federal agencies should turn 
their attention to filling in some of the gaps our work has pointed 
out, while time is still on our side. 

Chairman Pryor, Senator Ensign, and Members of the Subcommittee, this 
concludes my prepared statement. I would be happy to respond to any 
questions you may have. 

Contacts and Staff Acknowledgements: 

For further information regarding this statement, please contact 
Bernice Steinhardt, Director, Strategic Issues, at (202) 512-6543 or 
steinhardtb@gao.gov. Contact points for our Offices of Congressional 
Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last page of this 
statement. Individuals making key contributions to this testimony 
include Sarah Veale, Assistant Director; Maya Chakko; Melissa Kornblau; 
Susan Sato; Ellen Grady; Karin Fangman; and members of GAO's Pandemic 
Working Group. 

[End of section] 

Attachment I: Open Recommendations from GAO's Work on an Influenza 
Pandemic as of February 2009: 

Title and GAO product number: Influenza Pandemic: HHS Needs to Continue 
Its Actions and Finalize Guidance for Pharmaceutical Interventions, GAO-
08-671, September 30, 2008; 
Summary of open recommendations: The Secretary of HHS should 
expeditiously finalize guidance to assist state and local jurisdictions 
to determine how to effectively use limited supplies of antivirals and 
pre-pandemic vaccine in a pandemic, including prioritizing target 
groups for pre-pandemic vaccine; 
Status: In December 2008, HHS released final guidance on antiviral drug 
use during an influenza pandemic. HHS officials informed us that they 
are drafting the guidance on pre-pandemic influenza vaccination. 

Title and GAO product number: Influenza Pandemic: Federal Agencies 
Should Continue to Assist States to Address Gaps in Pandemic Planning, 
GAO-08-539, June 19, 2008; 
Summary of open recommendations: The Secretaries of HHS and Homeland 
Security should, in coordination with other federal agencies, convene 
additional meetings of the states in the five federal influenza 
pandemic regions to help them address identified gaps in their 
planning; 
Status: HHS and DHS officials indicated that while no additional 
meetings are planned at this time, states will have to continuously 
update their pandemic plans and submit them for review. 

Title and GAO product number: Influenza Pandemic: Opportunities Exist 
to Address Critical Infrastructure Protection Challenges That Require 
Federal and Private Sector Coordination, GAO-08-36, October 31, 2007; 
Summary of open recommendations: The Secretary of Homeland Security 
should work with sector-specific agencies and lead efforts to encourage 
the government and private sector members of the councils to consider 
and help address the challenges that will require coordination between 
the federal and private sectors involved with critical infrastructure 
and within the various sectors, in advance of, as well as during, a 
pandemic; 
Status: DHS officials informed us that the department is working on 
initiatives, such as developing pandemic contingency plan guidance 
tailored to each of the critical infrastructure sectors, and holding a 
series of webinars with a number of the sectors. 

Title and GAO product number: Influenza Pandemic: Further Efforts Are 
Needed to Ensure Clearer Federal Leadership Roles and an Effective 
National Strategy, GAO-07-781, August 14, 2007; Influenza Pandemic: 
Opportunities Exist to Clarify Federal Leadership Roles and Improve 
Pandemic Planning, GAO-07-1257T, September 26, 2007; 
Summary of open recommendations: 
(1) The Secretaries of Homeland Security and HHS should work together 
to develop and conduct rigorous testing, training, and exercises for an 
influenza pandemic to ensure that the federal leadership roles are 
clearly defined and understood and that leaders are able to effectively 
execute shared responsibilities to address emerging challenges. Once 
the leadership roles have been clarified through testing, training, and 
exercising, the Secretaries of Homeland Security and HHS should ensure 
that these roles are clearly understood by state, local, and tribal 
governments; the private and nonprofit sectors; and the international 
community; 
(2) The Homeland Security Council (HSC) should establish a specific 
process and time frame for updating the National Pandemic 
Implementation Plan. The process should involve key nonfederal 
stakeholders and incorporate lessons learned from exercises and other 
sources. The National Pandemic Implementation Plan should also be 
improved by including the following information in the next update: (a) 
resources and investments needed to complete the action items and where 
they should be targeted, (b) a process and schedule for monitoring and 
publicly reporting on progress made on completing the action items, (c) 
clearer linkages with other strategies and plans, and (d) clearer 
descriptions of relationships or priorities among action items and 
greater use of outcome-focused performance measures; 
Status: 
(1) HHS and DHS officials stated that several influenza pandemic 
exercises had been conducted since November 2007 that involved both 
agencies and other federal officials, but it is unclear whether these 
exercises rigorously tested federal leadership roles in a pandemic; 
(2) HSC did not comment on the recommendation and has not indicated if 
it plans to implement it. 

Title and GAO product number: Avian Influenza: USDA Has Taken Important 
Steps to Prepare for Outbreaks, but Better Planning Could Improve 
Response, GAO-07-652, June 11, 2007; 
Summary of open recommendations: 
(1) The Secretaries of Agriculture and Homeland Security should develop 
a memorandum of understanding that describes how the U.S. Department of 
Agriculture (USDA) and DHS will work together in the event of a 
declared presidential emergency or major disaster, or an Incident of 
National Significance, and test the effectiveness of this coordination 
during exercises; 
(2) The Secretary of Agriculture should, in consultation with other 
federal agencies, states, and the poultry industry, identify the 
capabilities necessary to respond to a probable scenario or scenarios 
for an outbreak of highly pathogenic avian influenza. The Secretary of 
Agriculture should also use this information to develop a response plan 
that identifies the critical tasks for responding to the selected 
outbreak scenario and, for each task, identifies the responsible 
entities, the location of resources needed, time frames, and completion 
status. Finally, the Secretary of Agriculture should test these 
capabilities in ongoing exercises to identify gaps and ways to overcome 
those gaps; 
(3) The Secretary of Agriculture should develop standard criteria for 
the components of state response plans for highly pathogenic avian 
influenza, enabling states to develop more complete plans and enabling 
USDA officials to more effectively review them; 
(4) The Secretary of Agriculture should focus additional work with 
states on how to overcome potential problems associated with unresolved 
issues, such as the difficulty in locating backyard birds and disposing 
of carcasses and materials; 
(5) The Secretary of Agriculture should determine the amount of 
antiviral medication that USDA would need in order to protect animal 
health responders, given various highly pathogenic avian influenza 
scenarios. The Secretary of Agriculture should also determine how to 
obtain and provide supplies within 24 hours of an outbreak; 
Status: 
(1) Both USDA and DHS officials told us that they have taken 
preliminary steps to develop additional clarity and better define their 
coordination roles. For example the two agencies meet regularly to 
discuss such coordination; 
(2) USDA officials told us that it has created a draft preparedness and 
response plan that identifies federal, state, and local actions, 
timelines, and responsibilities for responding to highly pathogenic 
avian influenza, but the plan has not been issued yet; 
(3) USDA told us that it has drafted large volumes of guidance 
documents that are available on a secure Web site. However, the 
guidance is still under review and it is not clear what standard 
criteria from these documents USDA officials and states should apply 
when developing and reviewing plans; 
(4) USDA officials have told us that the agency has developed online 
tools to help states make effective decisions about carcass disposal. 
In addition, USDA has created a secure Internet site that contains 
draft guidance for disease response, including highly pathogenic avian 
influenza, and it includes a discussion about many of the unresolved 
issues; 
(5) USDA officials told us that the National Veterinary Stockpile now 
contains enough antiviral medication to protect 3,000 animal health 
responders for 40 days. However, USDA has yet to determine the number 
of individuals that would need medicine based on a calculation of those 
exposed to the virus under a specific scenario. Further, USDA officials 
told us that a contract for additional medication for the stockpile has 
not yet been secured, which would better ensure that medications are 
available in the event of an outbreak of highly pathogenic avian 
influenza. 

Source: GAO. 

[End of table] 

[End of section] 

Attachment II: Related GAO Products: 

Influenza Pandemic: HHS Needs to Continue Its Actions and Finalize 
Guidance for Pharmaceutical Interventions. [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-671]. Washington, D.C.: September 
30, 2008. 

Influenza Pandemic: Federal Agencies Should Continue to Assist States 
to Address Gaps in Pandemic Planning. [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-539]. Washington, D.C.: June 19, 
2008. 

Emergency Preparedness: States Are Planning for Medical Surge, but 
Could Benefit from Shared Guidance for Allocating Scarce Medical 
Resources. [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-668]. 
Washington, D.C.: June 13, 2008. 

Influenza Pandemic: Efforts Under Way to Address Constraints on Using 
Antivirals and Vaccines to Forestall a Pandemic. [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-92]. Washington, D.C.: December 21, 
2007. 

Influenza Pandemic: Opportunities Exist to Address Critical 
Infrastructure Protection Challenges That Require Federal and Private 
Sector Coordination. [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-36]. Washington, D.C.: October 31, 
2007. 

Influenza Pandemic: Federal Executive Boards' Ability to Contribute to 
Pandemic Preparedness. [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-1259T]. Washington, D.C.: September 
28, 2007. 

Influenza Pandemic: Opportunities Exist to Clarify Federal Leadership 
Roles and Improve Pandemic Planning. [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-1257T]. Washington, D.C.: September 
26, 2007. 

Influenza Pandemic: Further Efforts Are Needed to Ensure Clearer 
Federal Leadership Roles and an Effective National Strategy. 
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-781]. Washington, D.C.: 
August 14, 2007. 

Emergency Management Assistance Compact: Enhancing EMAC's Collaborative 
and Administrative Capacity Should Improve National Disaster Response. 
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-854]. Washington, D.C.: 
June 29, 2007. 

Influenza Pandemic: DOD Combatant Commands' Preparedness Efforts Could 
Benefit from More Clearly Defined Roles, Resources, and Risk 
Mitigation. [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-696]. 
Washington, D.C.: June 20, 2007. 

Influenza Pandemic: Efforts to Forestall Onset Are Under Way; 
Identifying Countries at Greatest Risk Entails Challenges. [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-604]. Washington, D.C.: June 20, 
2007. 

Avian Influenza: USDA Has Taken Important Steps to Prepare for 
Outbreaks, but Better Planning Could Improve Response. [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-652]. Washington, D.C.: June 11, 
2007. 

The Federal Workforce: Additional Steps Needed to Take Advantage of 
Federal Executive Boards' Ability to Contribute to Emergency 
Operations. [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-515]. 
Washington, D.C.: May 4, 2007. 

Financial Market Preparedness: Significant Progress Has Been Made, but 
Pandemic Planning and Other Challenges Remain. [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-399]. Washington, D.C.: March 29, 
2007. 

Influenza Pandemic: DOD Has Taken Important Actions to Prepare, but 
Accountability, Funding, and Communications Need to be Clearer and 
Focused Departmentwide. [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-06-1042]. Washington, D.C.: September 
21, 2006. 

Catastrophic Disasters: Enhanced Leadership, Capabilities, and 
Accountability Controls Will Improve the Effectiveness of the Nation's 
Preparedness, Response, and Recovery System. [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-06-618]. Washington, D.C.: September 6, 
2006. 

[End of section] 

Footnotes: 

[1] GAO's 2009 Congressional and Presidential Transition Web site: 
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/transition_2009]. 

[2] We also have three pandemic-related reviews underway on the 
following topics: (1) plans to protect the federal workforce in a 
pandemic; (2) the status of implementing the National Strategy for 
Pandemic Influenza Implementation Plan (National Pandemic 
Implementation Plan); and (3) the effect of a pandemic on the 
telecommunications capacity needed to sustain critical financial market 
activities. 

[3] GAO, Influenza Pandemic: Sustaining Focus on the Nation's Planning 
and Preparedness Efforts, [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-09-334] (Washington, D.C.: Feb. 26, 
2009). 

[4] GAO, Influenza Pandemic: Further Efforts Are Needed to Ensure 
Clearer Federal Leadership Roles and an Effective National Strategy, 
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-781] (Washington, D.C.: 
Aug. 14, 2007). 

[5] On May 26, 2009, the President announced the full integration of 
White House staff supporting national security and homeland security. 
The HSC will be maintained as the principal venue for interagency 
deliberations on issues that affect the security of the homeland, such 
as an influenza pandemic. 

[6] Pub. L. No. 109-295, Title VI. 

[7] GAO, Homeland Security: Observations on DHS and FEMA Efforts to 
Prepare for and Respond to Major and Catastrophic Disasters and Address 
Related Recommendations and Legislation, GAO-07-1142T (Washington, 
D.C.: July 31, 2007). 

[8] [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-781]. 

[9] GAO, Influenza Pandemic: Opportunities Exist to Address Critical 
Infrastructure Protection Challenges That Require Federal and Private 
Sector Coordination, [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-36] 
(Washington, D.C.: Oct. 31, 2007). 

[10] The 18 critical infrastructure and key resource sectors are: food 
and agriculture; banking and finance; chemical; commercial facilities; 
commercial nuclear reactors, materials, and water; dams; defense 
industrial base; drinking water and water treatment systems; emergency 
services; energy; governmental facilities; information technology; 
national monuments and icons; postal and shipping; public health and 
healthcare; telecommunications; transportation systems; and critical 
manufacturing. Critical infrastructure are systems and assets, whether 
physical or virtual, so vital to the United States that their 
incapacity or destruction would have a debilitating effect on national 
security, national economic security, and national public health or 
safety, or any combination of those matters. Key resources are publicly 
or privately controlled resources essential to minimal operations of 
the economy or government, including individual targets whose 
destruction would not endanger vital systems but could create a local 
disaster or profoundly damage the nation's morale or confidence. 

[11] [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-36]. 

[12] GAO, The Federal Workforce: Additional Steps Needed to Take 
Advantage of Federal Executive Boards' Ability to Contribute to 
Emergency Operations, [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-515] (Washington, D.C.: May 4, 
2007). 

[13] Issued in January 2008 by the Department of Homeland Security 
(DHS) and effective in March 2008, the NRF is a guide to how the nation 
conducts all-hazards incident response and replaces the National 
Response Plan. It focuses on how the federal government is organized to 
support communities and states in catastrophic incidents. The NRF 
builds upon the National Incident Management System, which provides a 
national template for managing incidents. 

[14] GAO, Influenza Pandemic: Efforts Under Way to Address Constraints 
on Using Antivirals and Vaccines to Forestall a Pandemic, [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-92] (Washington, D.C.: Dec. 21, 
2007). 

[15] The six characteristics of an effective national strategy include 
(1) purpose, scope, and methodology; (2) problem definition and risk 
assessment; (3) goals, subordinate objectives; activities, and 
performance measures; (4) resources, investments, and risk management; 
(5) organizational roles, responsibilities, and coordination; and (6) 
integration and implementation. GAO, Combating Terrorism: Evaluation of 
Selected Characteristics in National Strategies Related to Terrorism, 
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-04-408T] (Washington, D.C.: 
Feb. 3, 2004). 

[16] We conducted site visits to the five most populous states-- 
California, Florida, Illinois, New York, and Texas--for a number of 
reasons, including that these states constituted over one-third of the 
United States population, received over one-third of the total funding 
from HHS and DHS that could be used for planning and exercising 
efforts, and were likely entry points for individuals coming from 
another country given that the states either bordered Mexico or Canada 
or contained major ports, or both. Within each state, we also 
interviewed officials at 10 localities, which consisted of five urban 
areas and five rural counties. 

[17] DHS and HHS and other agencies, Assessment of States' Operating 
Plans to Combat Pandemic Influenza: Report to Homeland Security Council 
(Washington, D.C.: Jan. 2009). 

[18] National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, Issue 
Brief: Pandemic Preparedness in the States--An Assessment of Progress 
and Opportunity (Sept. 2008). 

[19] GAO, Financial Market Preparedness: Significant Progress Has Been 
Made, but Pandemic Planning and Other Challenges Remain, [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-399] (Washington, D.C.: Mar. 29, 
2007). 

[20] Supplemental funding for pandemic preparedness and response is 
provided in both the Senate-and House-passed versions of a 2009 
supplemental appropriation currently under consideration. The Senate 
bill includes $1.5 billion as requested by the administration and the 
House bill provides a total of $2.05 billion. 

[21] Antivirals can prevent or reduce the severity of a viral 
infection, such as influenza. Vaccines are used to stimulate the 
production of an immune system response to protect the body from 
disease. 

[22] [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-668]. 

[23] [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-539]. 

[End of section] 

GAO's Mission: 

The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and 
investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting 
its constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance 
and accountability of the federal government for the American people. 
GAO examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and 
policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance 
to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding 
decisions. GAO's commitment to good government is reflected in its core 
values of accountability, integrity, and reliability. 

Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony: 

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no 
cost is through GAO's Web site [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]. Each 
weekday, GAO posts newly released reports, testimony, and 
correspondence on its Web site. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly 
posted products every afternoon, go to [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov] 
and select "E-mail Updates." 

Order by Phone: 

The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO’s actual cost of
production and distribution and depends on the number of pages in the
publication and whether the publication is printed in color or black and
white. Pricing and ordering information is posted on GAO’s Web site, 
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm]. 

Place orders by calling (202) 512-6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or
TDD (202) 512-2537. 

Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card,
MasterCard, Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional 
information. 

To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs: 

Contact: 

Web site: [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm]: 
E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov: 
Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470: 

Congressional Relations: 

Ralph Dawn, Managing Director, dawnr@gao.gov: 
(202) 512-4400: 
U.S. Government Accountability Office: 
441 G Street NW, Room 7125: 
Washington, D.C. 20548: 

Public Affairs: 

Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov: 
(202) 512-4800: 
U.S. Government Accountability Office: 
441 G Street NW, Room 7149: 
Washington, D.C. 20548: