Resilience Office and Strategy

Full Title:
National Coordination on Adaptation and Resilience for Security Act of 2026

Summary#

This bill adds a new office and duties to the National Security Act of 1947 to improve how the federal government plans for and responds to natural hazards and environmental change. It creates a Chief Resilience Officer at the National Security Council, requires a National Resilience Strategy, sets up interagency working groups and a Partners Council on Resilience, and creates a public clearinghouse of resilience information. The bill aims to make federal resilience work more coordinated and to better support state, local, tribal, territorial, and private partners.

  • Main change: President must designate a Chief Resilience Officer (CRO) at the National Security Council to lead interagency coordination on resilience.
  • Strategy required: CRO must produce a National Resilience Strategy within 2 years and update it every 3 years, with an implementation plan from each agency.
  • Advisory council and working groups: A Partners Council on Resilience (mostly non-federal members) and one or more interagency working groups must be formed to advise and coordinate.
  • Clearinghouse: Within 1 year, the CRO must create an adaptation and resilience clearinghouse to share data, tools, and technical help.
  • Oversight and sunset: The Comptroller General (GAO) must assess implementation 2 years after each strategy; the new requirements end after the third GAO assessment or 10 years, whichever is earlier.
  • Definitions and scope: The bill defines “natural hazards,” “non-Federal partners,” and other terms, and requires focus on the most vulnerable communities, military installations, and nature-based and predisaster mitigation options.

What it means for you#

  • Federal agencies
    • Agencies requested to join working groups must respond and provide personnel and resources to support those groups.
    • Agency heads must describe in the implementation plan how they will carry out the strategy, including interagency agreements and use of a federal clearinghouse.
  • State, local, tribal, territorial governments
    • The bill aims to identify gaps and federal funding needs for these governments and to recommend ways federal programs can better help them access funds and technical help.
    • Members of these governments may be appointed to the Partners Council to advise the CRO.
  • Military installations
    • The strategy must address resilience of U.S. military installations at home and abroad and consider national security impacts of natural hazards.
  • Nonprofits and private sector
    • Non-federal organizations and private firms can be appointed to the Partners Council and may use the clearinghouse to find technical assistance and funding information.
  • Communities at risk
    • The strategy must prioritize vulnerable and underresourced communities and may include recommendations on retreat, relocation, and nature-based solutions.
  • General public
    • Draft and final strategies and implementation plans will be published and open for a 60-day public comment period before final submission.

Expenses#

No publicly available information.

  • The bill requires agencies to provide staff, conduct studies, and support working groups. This suggests increased administrative workloads for participating agencies.
  • Establishing and running a clearinghouse likely requires staff, IT systems, and ongoing maintenance.
  • GAO (Comptroller General) assessments are required after each strategy implementation, which likely produces additional federal evaluation costs.
  • The bill does not specify new mandatory funding or appropriations for these activities.

Proponents' View#

  • The bill appears intended to create a single federal coordinator for resilience work to reduce duplication and improve planning across agencies.
  • It could be seen as improving national security by making federal investments and planning more focused on the risks from natural hazards to communities and military infrastructure.
  • The required strategy, implementation plans, and periodic GAO assessments aim to increase accountability and measure progress over time.
  • The Partners Council and clearinghouse are meant to boost support for underresourced and rural communities by improving access to technical help and information.
  • The bill encourages use of predisaster mitigation, nature-based solutions, and consideration of retreat or relocation where needed.

Opponents' View#

  • One concern is that the bill does not list which federal agencies must participate; “represented agencies” are defined by CRO appointments, so the scope of agency involvement could be unclear.
  • The bill requires agency heads to approve participation in working groups within 60 days, but it does not specify penalties or enforcement if they do not comply.
  • The Partners Council is exempted from a federal law that normally governs advisory committees; this may raise questions about transparency, public access to meetings, or oversight.
  • The bill sets tasks (strategy, clearinghouse, agency implementation plans) but does not set new funding. A possible trade-off is that agencies may need to reallocate staff time and funds from other work to meet these requirements.
  • The sunset after 10 years or after the third GAO assessment means the changes are not permanent unless reauthorized; it may be unclear whether this time frame is long enough to achieve lasting coordination.