CHALLENGE OVERVIEW
2024 RIVERINE COMMUNITY
RESILIENCE CHALLENGE
APPLICATION DEADLINE: MAY 6, 2024, 2PM EST
ALL INQUIRIES SHOULD BE DIRECTED TO
[email protected]RISERESILIENCE.ORG 1
CHALLENGE OVERVIEW
Table of Contents
Overview 3
Topic Areas 5
Flood Event Early Warning 5
Landscape and Building Adaptation 8
Community Insurance Program 11
RISERESILIENCE.ORG 2
CHALLENGE OVERVIEW
Overview
As climate change brings more frequent and intense storms, riverine communities are increasingly vulnerable to unique flood
threats that can change lives in an instant. On August 30, 2021, Hurley, Virginia, experienced severe consequences when 7
inches of rainfall from the remnants of Hurricane Ida led to a riverine flood that tragically took one life, destroyed 19 homes,
and severely damaged 24 more. Less than a year later, on July 12, 2022, similar circumstances struck Whitewood and Pilgrims
Knob in Virginia. Though no lives were lost in this latter event, the storm led to the destruction of 21 homes and damage to 25
others.
In both instances, FEMA did not provide individual homeowner assistance, and few affected residents received insurance payouts.
The hazards of such events are multifaceted, including heavy rain, strong winds, high and swift waters, and mudslides.
These natural forces can cause significant damage to buildings, potentially leading to destruction, injuries, or fatalities.
Furthermore, they often result in large quantities of debris, the collection and removal of which are not only costly but also
time-consuming, adding to the challenges faced by impacted communities.
Before a disaster, communities need several key preparations to mitigate the impact of flooding:
• Affordable Building Protection: Implementing cost-effective measures to make buildings more flood resistant.
• Early Warning Systems: Establishing awareness and alert mechanisms for imminent flooding threats, including
varying threat levels.
• Pre-Event Coordination Plan: Developing a swift and efficient coordination plan that can be activated immediately
after a flooding event. This plan will support relief efforts and help meet residents’ needs at various stages after an
event.
• Insurance Programs: Having insurance options in place to aid residents in managing the disruptions caused by
flooding, and to support home repair or rebuilding efforts post-event.
After a disaster, the focus shifts to recovery and reinforcement:
• Rebuilding and Repair Funds: Securing access to funds for repairing or rebuilding damaged properties within a set
timeframe, ideally supported by a sustainable risk transfer insurance model.
• Support for Residents’ Recovery: Often residents require support to find shelter, food, and other needs after an
event. Understanding those needs will be an important part of this Challenge.
• Guidance for Resilient Reconstruction: Offering expertise and guidance in repairing or rebuilding damaged buildings
to better withstand future flooding events.
RISERESILIENCE.ORG 3
CHALLENGE OVERVIEW
The RISE Riverine Community Resilience Challenge aims to source innovative solutions that support comprehensive pre- and post-
disaster protection for the entire Southwest region of Virginia, including areas within LENOWISCO PDC, Cumberland Plateau PDC,
Mount Rogers PDC, and the New River Valley Regional Commission by addressing the range of needs described above.
With its rich biodiversity and socio-economic fabric, Southwest Virginia offers a unique pilot site for developing, testing, and
refining innovative solutions that enhance environmental adaptability. Innovators have a rare opportunity to validate their
technologies in real-world conditions, ensuring their solutions are both effective and scalable across different ecosystems and
cultures.
Below are Challenge Topic Area descriptions, including links to related regional flooding analyses and datasets for download.
Following this initial Challenge, a subsequent effort will aim to broaden the impact and application of solutions, further
strengthening disaster preparedness and resilience throughout Southwest Virginia
RISERESILIENCE.ORG 4
CHALLENGE OVERVIEW
Topic Areas
Flood Event Early Warning
Riverine Flooding Early Warning Problem(s)
Forecasting riverine flooding is a topic of interest nationally and internationally. According to recent research, from 2000 to
2018, 5338 water-related disasters have been reported and have led to over 326,000 fatalities and economic losses of more than
USD 1.7 trillion globally. The UN Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction is an international effort with 4 priorities:
• Understanding disaster risk
• Strengthening disaster risk governance to manage disaster risk
• Investing in disaster risk reduction for resilience
• Enhancing disaster preparedness for effective response, and to “Build Back Better” in recovery, rehabilitation and
reconstruction
In the US recently, several events focused attention on riverine flooding:
• In Hurley, Buchanan County, Virginia, on August 30th, 2021, within hours, 7” of rain caused life-threatening flash
flooding that damaged or destroyed homes, roads, and bridges. $17M relief funding was secured.
• In Whitewood, Buchanan County, Virginia, on July 12th, 2022, within hours, 6”+ of rain caused life-threatening flash
flooding that destroyed 21 homes and damaged 25 more. $18M relief funding was secured.
• Record heavy rain from 9th to 11th July 2023 triggered the worst flooding seen in the state of Vermont, USA, since
Tropical Storm Irene in 2011.
Riverine flooding events are getting more severe and frequent. There is a need for accurate, timely, advance warning to
protect the communities. Solutions being sought in this topic will meet some of the priorities of the Sendai Framework
thereby having potentially international application.
The goals in this Topic Area are:
1. To produce localized (community-by-community) forecasts of flooding events that will give communities adequate
forewarning of severe (pluvial induced) riverine flooding allowing residents and emergency services time to either
evacuate or prepare for the event and the recovery thereafter. In the event evacuation is possible or recommended,
evacuation direction guidance is needed.
2. Provide regional planners, municipalities, and state agencies with information and suitable information distribution
tools and protocols and with which to manage land use, and plan.
3. Provide guidance for identifying those parcels threatened by significant flooding that should not be built on or, if they
are, alerting owners.
Successful solutions will address at least one of the above.
RISERESILIENCE.ORG 5
CHALLENGE OVERVIEW
The Pain Points in Current Solutions
The need for flood early warning systems has become greater in the past years. The elements and limitations of current
programs as well the needs for new generations have been described in the literature. In order to produce a flood early
warning system for the riverine communities advances are required in all four areas:
1. Risk knowledge: Understanding the nature of riverine flooding in terms of duration, water levels, water speeds, and
other hazards.
2. Monitoring and forecasting: Since most of these events are caused or exacerbated by heavy rainfall events, the
inclusion of meteorological observations and forecasts, as well as other sensor information, will be critical to feed the
necessary analysis models which will lead to hazard assessment and prediction.
3. Warning, dissemination, and communication: Applying analysis results to identify hazardous events (location,
severity, and duration) and producing and delivering meaningful and timely information and guidance.
4. Response: Recipients of the warnings need them in a timely and manageable manner and know and understand the
necessary responses. Past warning systems (and their distributed warnings) have been seen to cause system overload,
confusion, and lack of clarity within the emergency management organizations as well as residents.
There are needs for further development, integration and testing in all these four areas for a flood early warning system for
the riverine communities.
The National Weather Service’s Flood Hazard Outlook (FHO), while a valuable tool, exhibits several limitations in its
application as a riverine flooding early warning system:
1. Lack of Localized Flood Risk Details: The FHO does not provide specific information on localized flood risks. This is a
significant limitation for communities and emergency responders who need detailed, area-specific data to adequately
prepare and respond to flood threats.
2. Non-representative Graphics: The graphics included in the FHO do not accurately represent the actual extent or
expected footprint of flooding. This lack of precise visual representation can lead to misinterpretation of the flood
threat in specific areas, potentially causing inadequate preparation or response.
3. Limited Communication Infrastructure in Target Areas: Many riverine environments, particularly those most
vulnerable to flooding, lack basic communication infrastructure like telephones, cell networks, or cable systems.
This impedes the dissemination of FHO information to the communities that need it most, reducing the overall
effectiveness of the warning system in real-time situations.
RISERESILIENCE.ORG 6
CHALLENGE OVERVIEW
These points highlight critical areas where the FHO falls short in providing an optimal solution for early warning in riverine
flooding scenarios.
Solutions Being Sought
RISE is seeking solutions to produce localized, accurate, and rapidly updated forecasts to warn communities of impending
threats, provide evacuation guidance, and can communicate the information and guidance in real-time to the communities.
Successful end-to-end solutions will provide:
• Identification of flooding affected regions from 12 hours before pluvial-induced flooding events, continuously updated
through the passage of the rainfall activity.
• Generation of flood event warnings and the development of a warning-generation protocol to keep potentially
affected regions aware of threats.
• Inclusion of communication infrastructure to ensure that messages/data get transferred to required personnel in a
timely manner.
• Protocols for actions to messages for all constituents (e.g., emergency managers, rescue squads, first responders, etc.).
It is understood that various districts’ emergency management systems operate in different ways. Flexibility will have to be
built into solutions for adaptability to different departments and regions. To accommodate this, selected winners will have
access to emergency personnel within chosen pilot site regions who will assist in providing guidance in the design of the
information requirements and concept of operation.
Data Available Upon Request
Some data that may be useful or helpful:
• Weather: The High-Resolution Rapid Refresh (HRRR). Other NOAA/NWS products may be used as applicants see fit.
• Topography: The Virginia LiDAR Inventory Web Mapping Application for the State of Virginia.
• Hurley flood event modeling (Data sets available upon request.)
• LENOWISCO report by UVA.
• LENOWISCO CEDS report.
RISERESILIENCE.ORG 7
CHALLENGE OVERVIEW
Landscape and Building Adaptation
The Landscape and Building Adaptation Problem(s)
Building adaptation strategies are increasingly recognized as crucial for mitigating the impacts of flooding. Modeling has
shown that in the absence of building adaptation, nationwide damages from riverine flooding will increase by 20%–30% under
high levels of global warming. In the past, four types of flood adaptations for buildings have been the focus of attention:
1. Dry Floodproofing: This method involves making the flood-exposed areas of a building watertight to prevent water
inundation. It is typically suitable for flood events up to 3 feet, corresponding to a 1% Annual Exceedance Probability
(AEP). Dry floodproofing is an effective way to protect the interior of a building from flood damage.
2. Wet Floodproofing: This approach includes measures that allow floodwaters to enter the structure but minimize
potential damage. It’s not always applicable in mountainous riverine environments due to technical constraints.
However, advancements in building design and adaptation may broaden the applicability of wet floodproofing in
these areas.
3. Building Elevation: Elevating a structure above the designated flood elevation level is another effective adaptation
strategy. It is more straightforward for buildings with basements other than those on slab foundations. Building
elevation is typically considered for flood events up to 8 feet (1% AEP).
4. Buyout/Demolition: For properties facing more than eight feet of flooding (1% AEP), structural solutions like
floodproofing and elevation may become impractical. In such cases, buyout or demolition is often the only viable
option to mitigate risk.
Post-flood, events frequently result in significant landscape changes, impacting the suitability of certain areas for rebuilding.
Recognizing this, there’s a growing consensus that some land parcels are no longer fit for traditional construction. Identifying
the most beneficial post-flood use for these areas presents a challenge. Potential solutions include repurposing them into green
spaces or community amenities, which are less infrastructure-intensive and more flood-resilient. Alternatively, these areas
could serve as testing grounds for innovative building methods designed to withstand flooding.
Adopting such adaptive building strategies not only addresses the immediate effects of flooding but also bolsters long-
term resilience and sustainability in areas vulnerable to water-related disasters. Tailoring these strategies to fit the unique
environmental and topographical features of each location ensures that they provide the most effective defense against future
flooding events. This approach aids in safeguarding communities while maintaining the ecological balance and aesthetic value
of the landscape.
While it is understood that building adaptation can only withstand up to a certain level of flooding threat, using building
adaptation as an approach to risk mitigation will, if successful, have an effect of lowering the total cost of risk transfer
(insurance) for a community. This is an important aspect of this topic area and will be a key finding of winners’ solutions.
Landscape adaptations are also of interest in this topic, particularly those that are needed to either enhance or support the
building adaptations or provide other protection to surrounding buildings or property.
RISERESILIENCE.ORG 8
CHALLENGE OVERVIEW
The Pain Points in Current Solutions
While there are several physical constraints in deciding the best building adaptation approach (on a parcel-by-parcel basis), cost is
an important driver. One approach is to perform a benefit-cost analysis of implementing flood adaptations on each property. A good
description of the Benefit-Cost Analysis of Flood Protection Measures states:
“….benefits are defined as damages avoided; therefore, the benefits of a project are equal to the damages without the project
minus the damages with the project. If the project is technically sound, the damages with the project should be less than the
damages without it and the net benefits will be positive.
Most flood damage is physical and includes structural damage to buildings, loss of contents in those buildings, damage to
infrastructure, and damage to special or unique facilities. Nonphysical damage includes income loss for wages and profits to
businesses, emergency response, temporary relocation, and post-flood cleanup.
Flood protection projects can be one or a combination of flood barriers (levees and floodwalls), building elevation, building
relocation, and floodproofing. The costs of the project are mainly the capital cost of construction and O&M costs consisting of
periodic inspection, preventive maintenance, and repairs throughout the useful life of the project.”
In addition, a summary of unit costs for dry floodproofing and elevation are available here.
Floodproofing, elevation and property acquisition can each be cost-effective adaptations in certain situations, depending on the desired
return on investment (e.g., benefit cost ratio) and each may be subsidized in the United States if they can be shown to be cost-effective.
In mountainous riverine communities, proposing building adaptations for flooding typically requires a parcel-by-parcel assessment,
which can be a complex and time-consuming process. Furthermore, flooding events can alter the topography, necessitating
a reassessment of adaptation strategies for each parcel as the suitability of previous solutions may change. In towns or more
concentrated living communities, the adaptations may be considered for groups of houses with similar attributes (e.g., first floor
height, construction, etc.). Both scenarios are of interest in this Challenge.
RISERESILIENCE.ORG 9
CHALLENGE OVERVIEW
Assessing landscape adaptations involves weighing the pros and cons of various solutions, which can be more intricate and
vary widely depending on each specific parcel. This complexity arises from the need to consider a variety of factors, including
environmental impact, cost, and effectiveness of each solution in the unique context of the parcel.
It is also expected that the benefits and protections of the building/landscape adaptations will also yield benefits in the
cost of insurance, as these buildings will withstand some greater level of threats. Credit will be given to those solutions that
address and quantify those benefits.
Solutions Being Sought
RISE is seeking solutions that:
1. Consider building/landscape mitigations in the four areas described above. Either new or existing adaptation
techniques may be applied. Additional mitigations may be considered if the applicant provides comprehensive details
of the technology and its benefits. Both rural and more urban environments may be considered.
2. Identify the most appropriate and cost-effective building/landscape adaptations on a parcel-by-parcel basis including a
method or access to a method, for performing a benefit-cost analysis for every building and parcel.
3. Provide mitigation that can be implemented on properties pre- and post-disaster.
4. Offer a benefit-cost analysis (BCA) on a parcel-by-parcel basis using the most current topography and flood event
datasets.
5. May be implemented using local labor and contractors, to support the local business community and workforce.
6. Provide analysis and estimate of the reduced cost of insurance enabled by the mitigations.
Data Available Upon Request
• First Street Foundation database.
• Event flood event modeling datasets: Hurley data sets available upon request.
• Topography: The Virginia LiDAR Inventory Web Mapping Application for the State of Virginia.
• LENOWISCO report by UVA.
• LENOWISCO CEDS report.
• Cumberland Plateau report.
RISERESILIENCE.ORG 10
CHALLENGE OVERVIEW
Community Insurance Program
The intent of this effort is to establish a riverine flood insurance policy design covering the region of Southwestern Virginia
(as defined by the coverage areas of the four PDC’s: LENOWISCO PDC, Cumberland Plateau PDC, Mount Rogers PDC, and the
New River Regional Commission). In describing the problems and desired solutions for a Community Insurance Program, it is
necessary to consider the needs of both the payment recipients (e.g., residents, businesses) and the payment providers (e.g.,
insurers).
The Residents’ Community Insurance Problem(s)
Costs and impacts of the effects of a flooding event are borne by several parties:
• Homeowners
• Renters
• Rental property owners
• Municipalities
• Local businesses
Many homeowners and renters in rural areas lack flood insurance. As a result, financial aid (and other support) for these
communities after flood events typically comes from state flood relief funds, which are often allocated through specific budget
requests, or from charitable donations. However, these funds are primarily directed towards homeowners, often leaving
renters without similar support.
In the past, rebuilding and other support has been provided through donations to the local United Way:
‘Recovery from major natural disasters is always going to be a long process”, said Travis Staton, President and CEO of
United Way of Southwest Virginia.
“Typically, 24 to 36 months is a good turn-around,” he said. “Overall, we are making tremendous progress.”
The nonprofit raised about $1 million for Hurley relief, with $850,000 of that “already out the door” to residents, he said.
It raised $928,000 for Whitewood and Pilgrim’s Knob, with close to $500,000 of that already distributed.’
RISERESILIENCE.ORG 11
CHALLENGE OVERVIEW
The Insurance Providers’ Problem(s)
The median income of the region is low (one of the reasons that many in the community do not participate in flood insurance
programs) and therefore has a high Social Vulnerability Index (see map below). Such highly vulnerable communities typically
have increased vulnerability to the effects of natural disasters. The intent of this topic is to build a sustainable insurance
program that helps these residents and others.
Several considerations should be taken into account in such an insurance program:
• The needs of residents and businesses identified in the previous section) should be met as much as possible
• The costs of riverine flooding events to each of the constituents above have not been fully characterized at a regional
level. Understanding these costs is key to building a useful flood insurance program.
• When developing an insurance program, there is not just an interest in transferring risk from one party to another,
but also in reducing the costs of repairs, protections, etc. The solutions from the other topic areas in this Challenge
address, in different ways, approaches to reduce these costs.
• To make the riverine insurance program sustainable, the total cost of risk needs to be spread over several parties.
Insurance products may need to be layered to make them useful.
RISERESILIENCE.ORG 12
CHALLENGE OVERVIEW
The Pain Points in Current Solutions for Residents
The State government allocated $17M for recovery in Hurley and $18M for Whitewood. These funds became available around
15 months after the respective events, and were intended for homeowners to repair/rebuild their properties or reimburse
already-incurred expenses with receipt proof. This system, however, led to several issues:
• Residents’ needs ranged from those needs immediately after the event (1-7 days), where the needs were for water,
food shelter, and cash, to longer term (1 month - 1 year) repairing or rebuilding dwellings, or relocating permanently
elsewhere.
• Residents who completed repairs without keeping receipts couldn’t get full reimbursement.
• The delay in fund disbursement forced residents to either cover costs for an extended period or move away.
• Non-homeowners (e.g., renters) were not eligible for these funds.
• Support was not provided to businesses to compensate for the loss of and/or disruption of business.
In Hurley’s flood, immediate relief and support depended exclusively on charitable donations.
Also, in the Whitewood flood:
“According to an online dashboard maintained by United Way of Southwest Virginia, a lead agency in the recovery effort,
21 homes were destroyed; as of Aug. 31, six had been built to replace them. Another 25 had major damage of $10,000 or
more, and 18 had been repaired. Twenty-five more homes saw damage of $10,000 or less.”
The Pain Points in Current Solutions for Providers
Current insurance programs’ (e.g., NFIP) premiums are not generally affordable, nor are the programs sustainable in their
current form in this region. Often, FEMA payouts are triggered by flooding produced by named storm events. Severe
convective events are not typically named storms, and so FEMA support cannot be guaranteed.
Funding allocated by State for Hurley and Whitewood ($17M and $18M respectively) were special legislative appropriations
using Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) funds from the Commonwealth, which arrived around 14-15 months after the
events. While this relief was very helpful it is neither sustainable nor quick.
RISERESILIENCE.ORG 13
CHALLENGE OVERVIEW
Solutions Being Sought
Solutions are being sought for the design of an insurance program that:
• Provides support to households and businesses after events by shifting risk through insurance and other financial
strategies, ensuring protection against major losses. In its final form, support should align with Residents’ needs (see
above).
• Address residents’ and businesses’ needs at (approximately) defined times:
• Pre-flood event.
• Within hours after the flood event.
• Up to one week after the flood event.
• Up to one month after the flood event.
• Up to one year after the flood event.
• Needs may range from food, shelter, and short-term funds to building replacement costs. Part of the Challenge will be
to document these needs.
• Pays out after clearly describable and measurable flooding event level if a parametric program is proposed.
Approaches other than parametric programs will also be considered.
• Provides payout funds quickly and in a way that is accessible by all constituents – in conjunction with findings from
the Residents’ Community Insurance topic area.
• Considers riverine flooding as the only peril.
• Is sustainable throughout the region of Southwest Virginia covered by the LENOWISCO PDC, Cumberland Plateau
PDC, Mount Rogers PDC, and the New River Regional Commission. Some sustainability objectives are:
• The insurance program design incentivizes adaptation which will bend the total cost curve down over time.
• The program will allocate costs in an equitable way.
• The cost of the program is affordable and defendable to stakeholders based on scope and allocation of costs.
• The total cost is affordable over long time horizons to the stakeholders paying the costs contemplated.
• The premium payment(s) allocation is clear.
• Clear rules and processes are set for fund distribution.
• Is supported by a resident recovery program to provide guidance pre- and post-event assistance and guidance. Offers
pre- and post-event assistance and guidance through a resident recovery program. The goal of this Challenge is not to
develop such a program, but to design an insurance program that can work with and aid in such support programs.
These considerations are crucial for the program’s effective and sustainable operation.
RISERESILIENCE.ORG 14
CHALLENGE OVERVIEW
Clearly for a solution design process to be successful access to various stakeholders in the region will be necessary. Applicant
Winners will be given access to these stakeholders to design their solutions.
There are several steps to be taken in developing a flood insurance program such as this. It is up to the winning applicants to
apply their own processes and analyses to their final design.
Datasets Available Upon Request
• First Street Foundation database.
• Event flood event modeling datasets: Hurley data sets available upon request.
• Topography: The Virginia LiDAR Inventory Web Mapping Application for the State of Virginia.
• LENOWISCO report by UVA.
• LENOWISCO CEDS report.
• Cumberland Plateau report.
This program is made possible through support from Virginia’s Department of Housing and Community Development.
RISERESILIENCE.ORG 15
