Floodlines

Risk is not equally distributed. Neither is the money to address it

Vermont has been hit by two catastrophic floods in twelve years. The money meant to prepare for the next one isn't going where the risk is greatest.
Read the Full Story →
More than half of Vermont towns have never received a dollar in federal flood mitigation funding, including many of the state's highest-need communities. Federal money tends to follow where damage has already happened, not where future risk is greatest.
This dashboard maps flood risk, social vulnerability, and FEMA mitigation funding across Vermont's 250+ towns. The central question: does the money go where it's needed most? Explore how the answer changes depending on how you define need.
How to Read This Map
The default view places each town into a funding quadrant based on two questions: How high is the need? and How much funding has been received?

Use the model selector to compare different ways of measuring risk: total expected losses, risk per resident, and FEMA's National Risk Index. Across all three models, roughly half of Vermont towns have received no federal flood mitigation funding — including many in the highest-need quartile.
Metric:
Start here:
Compare flood risk against funding received
Context Layers:
Model:
How risk is measured changes which towns appear most vulnerable
Show Metric As:
Statewide Percentile Compared to VT Avg
Flood Risk
Expected annual flood loss — a dollar estimate of damage per year based on local hazard intensity and property exposure. Higher rank = greater expected damage.
Vulnerability
A composite of demographics that shape recovery capacity: poverty, age, and access to transportation. Higher rank = harder to bounce back after a flood.
Combined Need
A combined measure of flood risk and social vulnerability. Towns with high need face both significant exposure and limited capacity to recover without outside support.
Mitigation Funding
Flood-related FEMA Hazard Mitigation Assistance grants received since 1990, adjusted for inflation. Higher values indicate more funding received.
Funding Gap
The gap between a town's need rank and its funding rank. The wider the gap, the greater the disparity. This is the dashboard's central argument.
NFIP Claims per Capita
Inflation-adjusted NFIP insurance payouts per resident since 1989. This is a reactive benchmark. Unlike the other metrics, NFIP claims measure where flood damage has already occurred, not where future risk is greatest. Compare this layer against Flood Risk to see how closely funding follows past damage versus projected exposure.
Quadrants
Each town is placed based on its flood need rank and total funding received. Quadrant Analysis is the dashboard's default view — it encodes the central question directly.
Town Population
Total population. Provides context for interpreting risk and funding levels. Higher values indicate more populated towns.
Funding Totals
Total mitigation funding received, represented as bubble size. Larger bubbles indicate more funding.
River Corridors
River corridors defined by State of Vermont ANR. Shaded areas show mapped flood-prone river corridors. Many underfunded towns overlap these high-risk zones.
Total Risk (Expected Annual Loss)

Expected annual loss in dollars. Larger towns with more infrastructure tend to score higher. Asks: who loses the most?

Risk per Person (Expected Annual Loss per Capita)

Expected annual loss divided by population. Surfaces small, high-exposure towns that total-loss models obscure. Asks: who is most at risk relative to their size?

FEMA National Risk Index

FEMA’s National Risk Index combines hazard exposure, social vulnerability, and community resilience into a single composite measure, standardized at the national level.

Town Snapshot

The map shows statewide comparisons. This panel shows detailed local values.
N.b., Risk and funding rankings change depending on how flood risk is defined.

Risk & Exposure

  • statewide flood risk percentile
  • the state average
  • land area within river corridors
  • expected annual flood loss
  • expected annual flood loss per resident
  • residents

Social Vulnerability

  • statewide vulnerability percentile
  • residents below poverty
  • residents age 65+
  • households without a vehicle
  • median household income
  • renter-occupied housing

Funding

  • statewide funding percentile
  • total mitigation funding
  • funding per resident
  • NFIP claims per resident

Need vs Funding

  • overall need percentile
  • state average per-resident funding
  • funding alignment gap

Model: Total Risk (Expected Annual Loss)

Funding is only weakly correlated with total expected flood loss. A few high-loss towns attract significant grants, but many high-need towns receive little or nothing.

Model: Risk per Person (Expected Annual Loss per Capita)

Adjusting for population reshuffles the map. Smaller, high-exposure towns rise in need, but their funding levels rarely follow. Switching to this view is where priorities diverge most sharply.

FEMA National Risk Index

FEMA's own composite risk benchmark shows similar patterns. Funding appears driven more by where damage has already occurred than by where risk is currently greatest.

Axes show percentile rankings relative to other Vermont towns, not raw dollar values or FEMA scores.
Statewide Percentile Compared to VT Avg
Data sources: U.S. Census Bureau (TIGER/Line) (town boundaries), American Community Survey (demographics), FEMA National Flood Hazard Layer and Vermont ANR River Corridors (flood risk), OpenFEMA Hazard Mitigation Assistance (funding), FEMA National Risk Index (risk benchmarks), and OpenFEMA NFIP Redacted Claims (flood insurance claims).
Notes on data: