Mitigation Strategy Action Evaluation Mitigation alternatives or actions need to be prioritized based on certain considerations. The PA STEEL evaluation process addresses all the major factors when weighing the costs to the benefits of implementing one action over another. This job aid contains information on the methodology and process that can be followed by participating jurisdictions to evaluate and prioritize unique hazard mitigation actions for their particular communities. In order to evaluate and prioritize the mitigation actions, participants should identify the favorable and less favorable factors of each action using the PA STEEL planning concept. Evaluation methodology is presented in the table below. PA STEEL Criteria Considerations + Favorable - Less favorable Not Applicable Alternative N Actions P A S T E E L Political Administrative Social Technical Economic Environmental Legal Laws Waste of / Required Challenge Goals Operations Economic Authority / Community Federal / Acceptance Feasible Solution w/ w/ to Impacts Action HAZMAT Segment Endangered Land Legal Allocation Support Funding Local Action of Support on on on on Authority Champion of Maintenance Goals Outside Community Cost Contributes Consistent Consistent Political Public Staffing Effect Population Secondary Benefit Effect Effect Species Effect Site Environmental State Existing Potential Funding Technically Long-Term Example: Action 2.1.1: + + _ N + + + + _ _ N + + N + _ + + _ _ N + + Smith Bridge Replacement
Mitigation Strategy Action Evaluation Mitigation alternatives or actions need to be prioritized based on certain considerations. The PA STEEL evaluation process addresses all the major factors when weighing the costs to the benefits of implementing one action over another. This job aid contains information on the methodology and process that can be followed by participating jurisdictions to evaluate and prioritize unique hazard mitigation actions for their particular communities. In order to evaluate and prioritize the mitigation actions, participants should identify the favorable and less favorable factors of each action using the PA STEEL planning concept. Evaluation methodology is presented in the table below. Alternative Actions PA STEEL Criteria Considerations + Favorable - Less favorable N Not Applicable P Political A Administrative S Social T Technical E Economic E Environmental L Legal Political Support Champion Public Support Staffing Funding Allocation Maintenance / Operations Community Acceptance Effect on Segment of Population Technically Feasible Long-Term Solution Secondary Impacts Benefit of Action Cost of Action Contributes to Economic Goals Outside Funding Required Effect on Land / Effect on Endangered Species Effect on HAZMAT / Waste Site Consistent w/ Community Environmental Goals Consistent w/ Federal Laws State Authority Existing Local Authority Potential Legal Challenge Example: Action 2.1.1: Smith Bridge Replacement + + _ N + + + + _ _ N + + N + _ + + _ _ N + +
Mitigation%20Strategy%20Action%20Evaluation(PA%20STEEL)_horizontal.docx