We need to reform disaster housing policy to unlock modular construction’s full potential.
The modular construction industry plays a vital role following natural and man-made disasters; assisting with both short-term disaster relief and longer-term rebuilding efforts, including emergency temporary housing. There is simply no better or faster means of providing shelter, schools and medical facilities in times of great need.
There are three huge advantages to using modular construction after a disaster. Modular is:
1. Scalable. The modular industry has the capacity to build 500,000 square feet of space per week and can ramp up to higher levels if necessary. That means it can provide more than 2,000 potential beds per week for displaced residents, depending on the level of design complexity.
2. Deployable. Dozens of modular companies already maintain a fleet of commercial modular buildings that can be quickly deployed for schools, medical facilities and other uses. There’s no reason they can’t also have residential units at the ready.
3. Fast. Homes can be manufactured in the factory while sites are being prepped, reducing completion time by as much as 50%. This speed-to-delivery can help get people out of shelters and into homes very quickly.
So, given these advantages, why aren’t more modular homes being built in disaster areas?
Photo courtesy of: Modular Building Institute
Stymied by Stafford
Historically, the modular industry’s role has been heavily focused not on medium- or long-term housing but on providing immediate, short-term relief and shelter for displaced victims and emergency personnel. This is because of the so called “18-month rule” in the Stafford Act (Stafford), a federal law that specifies how the federal government can assist state, local and tribal governments in responding to major disasters and emergencies.
Stafford limits the time period during which FEMA (the Federal Emergency Management Agency) can provide assistance, including financial assistance for renting alternate housing or the provision of temporary housing units, for individuals and households impacted by a major disaster. This type of assistance is limited to an 18-month window starting from the date the President declares a major disaster.
This limitation reduces the industry’s ability to offer longer-term solutions for victims of natural disasters.
The response to the Maui wildfires shows there’s a better way. The Stafford rule only applies within the continental United States, and because of this, two modular companies were able to quickly manufacture and ship permanent homes to the islands. For more detail, see “Rebuilding Maui” in this issue.
We Should Learn From History
One of the first disaster responses I helped coordinate for the industry was following Hurricane Katrina in August 2005. Our industry provided temporary facilities (often donated) for medical, police and fire personnel to help in the immediate aftermath. The locals were grateful for the assistance, and it was one of the highlights of my career.
But the permanent rebuilding efforts in places like New Orleans’ Lower Ninth Ward have been less than stellar. In fact, twenty years later, while some homes have been rebuilt, many properties remain vacant or abandoned, and the pace of rebuilding has been painfully slow. Today, the Lower Ninth Ward has a population of just 5,000 — two-thirds less populous than it was in 2005 (Source: April 26, 2025 article by Jason Berry at TheGuardian.com).
As a knee-jerk reaction to Katrina, FEMA purchased and stockpiled over 10,000 mobile homes and stored them in Hope, Arkansas thinking this might be the solution for future disasters. However, no one factored in the 90+ degree temperatures and 90% humidity in the region, which caused extensive mold damage and rendered most of the units uninhabitable.
Had the Stafford Act not limited FEMA’s response, a more permanent solution would have not only been available, but also could have been rapidly built and quickly deployed.
Photo courtesy of: Modular Building Institute
Advocating for Change
For several years following Katrina, FEMA continued to order thousands of temporary units from the manufactured housing industry, sometimes deploying them following disasters, sometimes not. And what happens after the 18-months of government relief? FEMA sells the units for pennies on the dollar on the secondary market and acquires new ones, each for $100,000+.
In 2018, FEMA contracted with MIT to assess how modular construction could play a larger role in long-term disaster relief. Many in our industry, including Ken Semler, Harris Woodward and myself, participated in this task force. (See “Advocating for Offsite-Built Disaster Housing” at OffsiteBuilder.com.)
The resultant report encouraged state and federal agencies to take steps to increase the use of offsite-built modular homes, including the adoption of the ICC/MBI industry standards. But, to date, FEMA has taken few concrete steps to implement the recommendations in the study.
Recent disasters in Southern California and North Carolina have highlighted the need for more rapid and more permanent rebuilding efforts and, perhaps, the need to address the 18-month limitation has caught the attention of lawmakers.
For our part, the Modular Building Institute (MBI) and the Modular Home Builders Association (MHBA) are working with members of Congress not only to remove the 18-month rule, but also to encourage the adoption of the ICC/MBI standards. In addition, we are working to develop a catalogue of prototypical structures that offer longer-term solutions, but can be quickly manufactured and rapidly deployed following disasters.
Given the past track record of FEMA, however, and its uncertain future under the current administration, the modular industry may continue to be relegated to providing temporary relief only. Meanwhile, thousands of victims in Maui, Los Angeles and North Carolina are still without homes. We can do better!
As FEMA undergoes further organizational scrutiny and possible realignment, we need to urge our Congressional representatives to revisit the 18-month limit within the Stafford Act and adopt industry standards to help improve upon future disaster relief efforts.
Tom Hardiman is Executive Director of the Modular Home Builders Association (MHBA) and the Modular Building Institute (MBI).
