26 / 200
26
E
UR
A
MERICA
Florida is a “disaster-prone state with a crowded intergovern-
mental landscape” (Caruson & MacManus, 2012: 170),
therefore each county government legally constitutes an EM
agency and appoints a director
acco
rding to Chapter 252.38 of
the Florida Statute. The county EM directors are primarily
responsible for coordinating with state governments and other
local governments in dealing with local EM. Municipalities are
also encouraged to create an EM agency which, under law, shall
coordinate its activities with those of the county EM agency.
There are 67 counties in Florida. This study uses county
location and county population as criteria in sampling
interviewees. Because Florida counties are grouped as seven
regions under the Florida EM system (Florida Division of
Emergency Management, n.d.a), this study selected three
counties (i.e., the largest, a medium-size, and the smallest
counties) from each region to include in the sample. Such a
selection criterion is helpful for examining the effect of
population size on local EM collaboration in the various
geographic areas of Florida. County emergency managers in the
sample counties are treated as interview subjects. A total of 21
counties were selected. The population size and geographic
characteristics of the selected counties are shown in Appendix 1.
As for city-level interviewees, this study followed the
selection rules from the Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI)
grant program and chose the cities of Miami, Tampa, Fort
Lauderdale, Jacksonville, and Orlando as sample cities because
these large cities pay attention to local EM initiatives and are
capable of applying for and handling federal support funds.
These five areas were allocated UASI grant money in FY2010.
City emergency managers in the above five cities were contacted
for interviews.
After sending out interview invitations twice within a
month, a total of 15 counties and cities agreed to be interviewed
during the months of July and August 2011, including six large