Growing Adaptability Among Undocumented Communities During Climate-Induced Disasters: An Analysis of the Role of Migrant-Serving Organizations

Adaptive Governance in Changing Environments

Research on MSOs during disasters has shown that these groups often fill the gaps left by government agencies by providing and distributing aid, offering translation services, and advocating on behalf of immigrant and Indigenous communities (Vilá et al. 2023; Méndez 2022; Roth and Grace 2018; Guhlincozzi 2023). While this work demonstrates that MSOs are critical to disaster response and recovery, it rarely examines how these organizations govern themselves or how they adapt their roles within broader systems of governance shaped by immigration policy and climate change. Few scholars have analyzed how MSOs make decisions, learn from collaboration, or restructure their missions when disasters expose systemic inequities (Cravero et al. 2024; Wurtz et al. 2024; Hobbs et al. 2024; Cuervo et al. 2017). This article addresses these gaps by applying an adaptive governance framework to analyze how MSOs in California have evolved in response to climate-induced disasters and how their work has expanded from service provision to community-based forms of governance for undocumented migrants. Adaptive governance has emerged as an alternative to top-down, traditional governance, which often fails to address the complexity of socio-environmental issues—problems arising from the dynamic interaction of individuals, social elements, institutional processes, and nature (McGinnis and Ostrom 2014; Nikkanen et al. 2024; Palmer 2022). As rapid environmental and social shifts, like those presented by climate change, place new demands on governance systems, polycentric and flexible models—involving collaboration among actors at various levels to achieve a common goal—are more successful (Stephan et al. 2019). In this sense, we use a conventional definition of adaptive governance: “the evolution of the rules and norms that promote the satisfaction of underlying human needs and preferences given changes in understanding, objectives, and the social, economic and environmental context” (Hatfield-Dodds et al. 2007, 4).² Attention to justice and inequality has increased support for more flexible approaches to disaster governance that incorporate the lived experiences of diverse stakeholders (Parthasarathy 2018).

Disasters introduce new sources of stress, adding to the uncertainty and vulnerability of susceptible groups like undocumented migrants (Parthasarathy 2018). In adaptive governance, collaboration and networking are key to diversifying knowledge, reducing risks, and promoting innovation; knowledge generation evolves dynamically as new actors become involved (Berkes 2009; Pahl-Wostl and Hare 2004). A study of Finland’s disaster management protocol, for instance, highlights collaboration’s role in helping municipal authorities create plans and response templates for different scenarios (Nikkanen et al. 2024). Since a broad spectrum of actors (including community groups and civil society organizations) participated in these exercises, practitioners gained a more comprehensive understanding of regional preparedness. The resulting networks encouraged nestedness and polycentricity by fostering cross-sector collaboration at multiple levels. Draft disaster preparedness plans were then tailored to local needs and various crises (Djalante et al. 2011; Pahl-Wostl and Hare 2004; Termeer et al. 2010).

Other aspects of adaptive governance promote more inventive and equitable results (Parthasarathy 2018). Among them is the willingness to experiment with policy approaches, embrace flexible outcomes, and adjust plans in light of unforeseen challenges (Huitema et al. 2009; Lach et al. 2005; Pahl-Wostl et al. 2007). For example, during the 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami, municipal officials exemplified adaptability by mobilizing volunteer and nongovernmental workers from different parts of the country to remedy area staff shortages. Through arrangements with stakeholders including nonprofits and businesses, the government used strategies like tailored matching, which deployed personnel in response to demand for certain skills and adjusted as needed. Responsibilities were shifted to other actors in the nonprofit and private sectors if they were able to complete tasks more quickly than the central government (Aoki 2016).

These approaches are not limited to formal governing institutions (Folke et al. 2005) but can occur within nonprofits aiming to enhance their capacities, anticipate varying pressures, and empower efforts to adapt to changing environments (Cutter 2016; van Assche et al. 2021). Literature has shown that prior to disasters, MSOs serve as mediating structures (particularly during heightened anti-immigrant sentiments), offering specialized resources that critically support migrants’ social and economic integration (Martinez-Damilia et al. 2024). Mediating structures “provide unique contexts” that can shape “how individuals engage with social problems, and often serve as the practical bridges between individuals and society” (Todd and Allen 2010, 222). When state-led responses to disasters fail to support the most vulnerable, nonstate actors like these move swiftly to provide relief (Méndez 2022). Their ability to garner resources, creatively distribute aid, and adjust plans warrants analysis. A better understanding is needed of the factors that drive MSOs to adapt their missions and the services they provide to local communities (Parthasarathy 2015).

Previous research has found that the circumstances around disasters push nonprofits—including those whose missions do not involve disaster management—into response and recovery work (Flatt and Stys 2013; Simo and Bies 2007; Mathias et al. 2022). For example, a study on direct service providers in South Carolina identified structural barriers that limited migrants’ access to these organizations’ resources, which ranged from cash assistance to legal services (Roth and Grace 2018). Their top challenge was in-person engagement, since migrants lived outside their geographic service areas. They exhibited adaptive behavior by recognizing this limitation and making the collective decision to offer mobile services. Further, by consistently communicating a commitment to the well-being of Latino/a immigrants, these service providers established rapport and trust (Roth and Grace 2018).

Another study on community-based organizations in Chicago determined that lack of transportation, absence of childcare, and inflexible work schedules reduced Latina migrants’ access to health care, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic (Guhlincozzi 2023). These organizations adapted by tailoring services to address these barriers and pandemic-related considerations in mind. Organizations distributing supplies adopted linguistically and culturally appropriate outreach strategies as well as a drive-thru model to avoid in-person contact. They also switched to telehealth (video conferencing) or phone appointments to answer questions about the virus and other medical concerns, successfully disseminating information and directing migrants to services for which they were eligible (Guhlincozzi 2023).

Similarly, the MSOs in our study are complex actors that evolve to support their communities, particularly in the wake of climate-induced disasters, even when this work was outside their missions’ scope. By situating this research in California, which has the largest undocumented migrant population in the United States, we can extensively examine the disparate impacts of climate-induced disasters, the importance of MSOs, and the ongoing gaps in protecting these vulnerable communities (Méndez et al. 2020; Passel and Krogstad 2024).

Background: The California UndocuFund Summit

On September 18, 2022, thirty-two MSOs attended the California UndocuFund Summit (the Summit). The first convening of its kind in the nation, the Summit outlined the experiences of undocumented Californians during disasters and an advocacy path forward (Sanchez De Alba 2022; Deutschman 2023). Its purpose was to boost capacity to meet disaster-related needs, mutually support MSOs’ efforts, and expand their influence on state policy. Participants discussed the political and public policy landscapes, programs to support disaster mitigation and recovery efforts, and ways to collaborate. The attending MSOs—including the Central Coast Alliance United for a Sustainable Economy (Ventura County), North Bay Jobs with Justice (Sonoma County), and Comunidades Indígenas en Liderazgo (Los Angeles County)—are trusted in their respective communities. Their services and advocacy have been crucial during the COVID-19 pandemic and recent wildfires, drought, heatwaves, and extreme storms.

Taken together, the attending MSOs are national leaders in adapting to support undocumented migrants affected by climate-induced disasters (Deutschman 2023; Kime et al. 2024). Between 2017 and 2022, after the Northern California Tubbs and Nuns fires, nonprofits in the affected region provided services for over 60,000 people and distributed nearly $114 million in direct financial aid, including for COVID-19 assistance (Deutschman 2023). These MSOs were also critical in advocating for expanded safety-net programs throughout California. Such programs would provide state unemployment benefits and medical services to undocumented workers and families ineligible for federal unemployment insurance or state-sponsored low-income health care (Kuang and Foy 2023; Vargas Bustamante et al. 2023). The Summit provided a space to congregate, celebrate accomplishments, and coordinate new policy strategies.

Participant Observation and Semi-Structured Interviews

The research presented in this article forms part of a case study of the grassroots MSOs that attended the Summit. Our team served as academic advisors and breakout-group facilitators during the event. We supported organizers by helping them prepare presentation materials and administering online surveys before and after, to quantify these nonprofits’ collective impact. Attending the event allowed research team members to establish working relationships with practitioners and build mutual trust, reciprocity, and greater study access (Christopher et al. 2008).

The data were collected from twenty-one semi-structured interviews with practitioners from twenty MSOs, supplemented by participant observation at the Summit and pre-Summit surveys. Online appendix tables A.1 and A.2 summarize the characteristics of each nonprofit and list a sample of the open-ended questions asked in the pre-Summit survey, the results of which informed our interview guide.³ To ensure interviewees’ anonymity, specifics are concealed. The MSOs studied vary in size, location, and focus area; all had been involved in disaster preparedness and recovery for undocumented migrants since 2017.

MSO practitioners were contacted by email to request participation; interviews were conducted between October 2022 and February 2023. The video conference platform Zoom was used for twenty of the interviews, and one was conducted over the phone. Interview length ranged from thirty to ninety minutes. The bilingual research team conducted interviews primarily in English, with some alternating between English and Spanish and one interview conducted entirely in Spanish.

The interview guide included nine open-ended questions regarding the organization’s and practitioner’s backgrounds, how the organization had responded to climate-induced disasters, and how the practitioner had seen climate change affecting undocumented migrants. The guide also included questions about “secondary trauma,” alternatively called compassion fatigue. Interview data were supplemented by detailed notes taken by the research team during Summit breakout groups. Attendees were placed in these groups to discuss topics including the political landscape, legislation and policies, and opportunities for collaboration. Groups summarized their responses on notepads and shared them with everyone at the Summit. The research team collected these responses and took notes when groups shared perspectives. These data provided insights into the adaptations and innovations MSOs have developed to support undocumented communities during climate-related crises.

To ensure technical accuracy, the authors convened a disaster policy workshop in May 2024 that brought together nearly fifty stakeholders (five of whom were interviewed for this study) from community-based organizations, philanthropic foundations, academic institutions, and federal, state, and local policymaking entities (Kime et al. 2024). Held at the Beckman Center of the National Academy of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, the workshop provided an opportunity to refine our data and obtain feedback on study findings.

Data Analysis

This study follows an inductive qualitative design that draws from grounded theory principles. Rather than beginning with preset hypotheses, we allowed patterns and themes to emerge directly from the interview transcripts and participant observation notes through review and comparison (Glaser and Strauss 1999; Suddaby 2006). This approach is appropriate given how each motivating factor to engage in disaster management is tied to a particular context, including the unique experiences and observations of each practitioner and their respective organization that inform the decision to expand their operations. There is currently limited research studying how MSOs respond to the overlapping pressures of climate change and immigration. By grounding our analysis in the lived experiences of practitioners, we aimed to generate new theoretical insights about how these organizations govern and adapt during disasters. All interviews were transcribed and coded using NVivo Qualitative Data Analysis Software.

The first author of this article developed a preliminary codebook with themes derived from the first interview set. As other research team members reviewed the data, this codebook was adjusted to increase coding consistency. During the process, we began identifying connections and differences among the data to elucidate challenges and opportunities encountered by stakeholders. Inter-rater reliability was established throughout via comparison across each researcher’s interpretation. Differences were discussed and redressed, with no major conflicts emerging (Armstrong et al. 1997; Saldaña 2014).

Through the practitioner interviews, we also sought to understand how their perceptions, biases, and experiences of disaster management for undocumented migrants translated into actions to improve outcomes. This approach is supported by social science literature focused on feedback between social groups, governments, and the landscape to better inform inclusive strategies for reducing vulnerability to disasters (Yanow and Schwartz-Shea 2014). Furthermore, the data helped us gain insights into the lived experiences and intersectional identities of undocumented migrants and MSO practitioners, and how these influenced outcomes in times of disaster (Carroll et al. 2006; Paveglio et al. 2018; Crenshaw 1989). These findings are particularly important since few studies have analyzed these groups’ perspectives in this context.

Conditions Shaping Vulnerability of Undocumented Immigrants

Undocumented migrants are uniquely vulnerable to disasters given overlapping sources of risk produced by environmental, economic, and political factors. Disasters also intersect with issues related to legality, housing precarity, and labor exploitation that further produce conditions that make preparation, response, and recovery especially difficult for this population. Climate-induced disasters have forced MSOs to address the intersecting effects of climate change on the populations they serve (Méndez et al. 2024). Participants at the Summit argued that health conditions were exacerbated by a surge in labor violations during disasters, further exploiting undocumented workers. During extreme wildfires compounded with heatwaves, undocumented workers were often denied water, rest breaks, and protective equipment while harvesting crops or cleaning up toxic debris. Workers hesitated to report violations because of their limited job opportunities, the immediate need to support their families, and fear of retaliation or deportation (Flynn et al. 2015; Méndez et al. 2024).

Overlapping with these events in 2020 and 2021, the COVID-19 pandemic increased concerns about unsafe working and living conditions. Many undocumented people reside in overcrowded, substandard housing, making the risk of contagion high. One participant shared: “For example, with COVID-19, farmworkers had to get out to harvest crops but then come back home—knowing that they have elders in their family or children who are not eligible for the vaccine and just living with that stress of, ‘Where do I go to make sure that I keep them safe?’ I have to work” (Respondent 11). Climate change decreases housing access by displacing people, destroying homes, and prompting surges in rent (DeGenaro 2015; Fan et al. 2018; Nanda 2024). Many undocumented people found themselves relocating in search of more affordable housing options, lengthening their commutes.

Continuous disasters also disrupt the public transportation networks on which many undocumented workers rely. Severed roads made cities like Santa Barbara, which provide tourism jobs, difficult to reach after the Thomas fire. Many employment hubs were damaged and closed. These cascading impacts reveal the precarity of housing and employment for undocumented migrants. As one practitioner stated, it is common to compartmentalize, but the “reality is that addressing one issue requires considering its relationship with others” (Respondent 15). For MSOs, recognizing that interconnectedness is imperative because of the multifaceted impacts of climate change. In response to these intersecting issues, MSOs became increasingly involved in discussions around housing security and eviction protections during wildfires and floods. With longer commutes and related costs for workers, MSOs also had to address affordable transportation access—an acknowledgment of the correlations among housing, infrastructure, and climate change (Méndez et al. 2020).

Other intersectional approaches that are starting to be acknowledged by MSOs involve the heightened vulnerability of Indigenous and women migrants during disasters, due to inequities that shape their socioeconomic status and autonomy. Research shows that during disasters, women face increased economic hardship, barriers to sexual and reproductive health care, and greater childcare responsibilities (Crenshaw 1989; Trentin et al. 2023). Gender-based violence also tends to rise during and after disasters. Yet, because of limited capacity and resources, MSOs have not fully developed methods to address these issues (Kime et al. 2024; FEMA 2024).

The US legal system’s lack of a clear pathway to citizenship prevents undocumented migrants from accessing post-disaster aid and resources, perpetuating their marginalized status (Horton 2012; Méndez 2022). As Respondent 13 mentions, “Immigrant workers, through a cruel and inhumane immigration system that labels people undocumented [or illegal], are expected to continue working, often without protection or care for their safety. If they choose not to work, they have no safety net to protect their families.” Mainstream disaster relief agencies, such as the American Red Cross, largely lacked a strategy to serve special-needs and hard-to-reach populations, such as undocumented migrants. For example, the Northern California chapter had no Latino/a and Spanish-speaking outreach coordinator until 2017. A year later, the national Red Cross developed the first draft of its Latino Engagement Program (Rivera 2020). According to Respondent 16, while the Red Cross has increased its presence in their local area, “it has a major capacity issue, and they have had difficulty in attracting and retaining bilingual, Spanish-speaking staff.” Respondent 9 also stated that during the 2017 fires in Ventura and Santa Barbara Counties, the Red Cross was visible at evacuation shelters but relied on MSOs for Spanish interpretation, further straining their limited resources.

At the federal level, disaster-aid programs are administered within departments historically distrusted by undocumented migrants. This is particularly true for households whose members have different immigration statuses in which at least one, but not all, of the members has legal status. These households can access certain types of disaster aid from FEMA, but many refuse assistance because FEMA and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) are both part of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and may share information across agencies (US Department of Homeland Security 2017; US Immigration and Customs Enforcement 2016; US Immigration and Customs Enforcement 2022; Kime et al. 2024; Elkin 2022). Respondents further stated that during mandatory evacuations from areas threatened by wildfire in 2017, many undocumented migrants stayed home for fear of immigration checks at emergency shelters, despite county direction barring federal immigration officials from these locations. Due to this confusion and “to escape raging fires, and choking smoke, hundreds of migrants decided to shelter for days at local beaches” (Respondents 15 and 16). These fears continue today, as immigration agents have ramped up targeted enforcement arrests at worksites, gas stations, and traffic stops throughout California (Franco and Huh 2025). These repeated experiences of fear, avoidance, and exclusion from official aid create patterns of exclusion, where undocumented and mixed-status households are systematically left out of formal disaster systems and forced to depend on informal or unsafe options. In this context, exclusion is not only about lack of access to resources but also about being positioned outside the boundaries of who is seen as a legitimate disaster survivor. Labor insecurity reinforces these dynamics, as undocumented migrants continue working through disasters to avoid income loss, often at personal risk.

Our study’s MSOs also expressed the need for unemployment insurance, hazard pay, disaster assistance for lost belongings, health care, financial support for funerals, and housing to protect undocumented migrants’ health and well-being (Rivera-Batiz 1999; Smith et al. 2003). Undocumented migrants cannot forgo employment because many live paycheck to paycheck. Respondent 3 recalled a story from the 2019 Kincade Fire: “I remember two gentlemen shared that they were going to jump onto a bus to go back to the vineyard to continue picking grapes in mandatory evacuation zones because their boss had come and said: ‘There’s a fire and you need to finish picking before it’s all lost.’ For these individuals, you can talk about having a choice, but at the same time, it’s like you don’t really have one, right?” This interview underscores why a social safety net is needed to help migrants withstand and recover from disasters. Another respondent noted that they keenly understood the economic links between completing the harvest and wineries’ ability to stay in business and pay salaries. At the same time, they stressed that wildfire creates dangerous conditions in which profits are prioritized over the lives of farmworkers. For Respondent 21, it is important to acknowledge that migrants “deserve basic human rights and [more] protections,” as their labor sustains certain industries at the cost of their health.

In pushing for more labor protections during extreme weather events, MSOs have similarly supported jobs in the informal economy. Respondent 14, whose organization advocates for street vendors, commented on inconsistent policies regarding access to shade structures (including tree canopies) and vendor sites. These policies are also often inconsistently enforced, making it difficult for vendors to comply with regulations and protect themselves from the elements in intensifying heatwaves and storms (Rosales 2020). MSOs have campaigned to challenge existing laws and create resources that safeguard the well-being of undocumented workers.

In response to socioeconomic structures that limit access to aid and expose migrants to dangerous working conditions, nonprofits have been found to adopt the role of mutual-aid provider (Vilá et al. 2023). MSOs in this study exhibited similar behavior by distributing cash after disasters, regardless of recipients’ legal status. Recognizing that undocumented migrants are reluctant to share personal details, MSOs avoided the extensive questionnaires that are often involved in disaster assistance. They also distributed funds directly, capitalizing on established trust and the knowledge that the people they served felt most comfortable collecting aid at their offices. Taken together, these findings reveal how climate exposure, labor exploitation, and exclusion from aid systems intersect to create chronic vulnerability for undocumented migrants. The overlapping pressures of work insecurity, housing instability, and fear of enforcement make disasters not isolated events but extensions of everyday hardship. These conditions, in turn, compelled MSOs to expand their missions and take on new responsibilities to protect their communities.

The Evolving Role of Migrant-Serving Organizations

Many interviewees’ organizations had not initially focused on disaster response but were compelled to expand their roles as their communities faced the multifaceted impacts of climate-induced disasters. For instance, an MSO that primarily worked on labor rights, advocating for wage protection and workplace safety, found itself petitioning for hazard pay and enforcing protection against employer retaliation during wildfire evacuations. Similarly, groups dedicated to Indigenous language justice, which had historically provided interpretation services in legal and medical settings, began translating emergency warnings and evacuation orders to ensure language accessibility for Indigenous migrants. Over time, these adaptations reshaped the missions of MSOs, expanding their advocacy to include climate-related policy interventions. These shifts reflect adaptive governance, as MSOs not only responded to immediate crises but also reconfigured their long-term strategies to meet the evolving needs of their communities.

Collaboration and Social Learning

Collaboration and continuous learning emerged as central strategies in how MSOs strengthened their capacity to act. The evolving nature of MSOs can be attributed to learning from their collaborations—a key feature of adaptive governance (Pahl-Wostl and Hare 2004). Through these engagements, MSOs identified internal gaps and adapted to develop new services, expertise, and political strategies. They also recognized their strengths and how to use them to support allies. Respondents 1 and 2 recalled instances during the COVID-19 pandemic and wildfires when their organizations—which had Spanish- and Mixteco-speaking staff—aided other nonprofits by translating information about financial and housing assistance. Unlike large national nonprofits, such as the Red Cross, MSOs are embedded within the communities they serve. This proximity enables them to build trust and address specific needs, uniquely positioning them as agile, contextual providers who fill systemic gaps left by larger, less flexible organizations. Engaging their diverse networks, moreover, expands MSOs’ understanding of the intersecting implications of climate change for undocumented migrants (Crenshaw 1989; Trentin et al. 2023). The 805 UndocuFund provides an example: “We originally started as a collaborative between three organizations that have worked in our region for almost thirty years with immigrant communities and advocacy. It’s just interesting because these three organizations are from the environmental justice, civic engagement, farmworker, and Indigenous perspectives,” one respondent stated. Collaboration is also needed to secure funding for disaster-related services. MSOs like the 805 UndocuFund rely on their partnerships with community groups and philanthropic organizations, further underscoring the importance of resource sharing and collective problem-solving.

MSOs leverage their deep-rooted community connections to effectively respond to disasters. Many MSOs employ staff who were raised in the community they serve and who often speak the same languages as other residents, for instance, Spanish, Mixtec, Chatino, and Maya. Drawing from experience, staff members offer valuable insights into organizing strategies and community needs. In contrast, government disaster-aid workers and mainstream mutual-aid providers often come from other regions or states, without an understanding of the local context or cultural and linguistic competency. MSO staff with roots in affected areas show a deep sense of commitment and often hold themselves to a higher level of accountability to local residents. This can further propel an MSO to engage in adaptive governance during crises to maintain credibility and responsiveness to their communities, close friends, and family (Folke et al. 2003). Through direct engagement and local lived experience, moreover, MSOs have established trust: “When a disaster hits, we don’t always know who it’s going to affect [or] where the immediate impact [will be]. It’s essential for us to listen, to [create] those spaces and [understand] what is needed in terms of community resources and support” (Respondent 3). Through these collaborative processes, MSOs positioned themselves as adaptive institutions, capable of shaping more equitable disaster governance from the ground up.

Mental Health and the Limits of Adaptation

Adaptive governance and local collaborations enable MSOs to be trusted providers in communities that are frequently apprehensive and difficult to reach during disasters. This essential role brings an increased workload, including the delivery of mental health resources and assistance to undocumented communities—an area in which MSOs’ capacities are often limited. In California, 73 percent of undocumented migrants have unmet mental health-care needs (Padilla-Frausto et al. 2023). During a policy workshop held by our author team in May 2024, psychologist Ángela Gutiérrez described a severe mental health crisis among undocumented migrants, amplified by rising anti-immigrant rhetoric and exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic and climate-induced disasters. Her research highlighted a 71 percent increase in severe psychological distress between 2015 and 2021. She called for expanding access to affordable, culturally and linguistically appropriate mental health care and leveraging the cultural wealth of communities to reduce associated barriers and social stigma (Kime et al. 2024; Padilla-Frausto et al. 2023).

The psychological impacts of climate change (Bourque and Cunsolo Willox 2014; Trombley et al. 2017) include distress, anxiety, depression, and an increased incidence of suicide, especially among farming communities experiencing prolonged drought (Hanigan et al. 2012; Padhy et al. 2015). The San Joaquin Valley, with its widespread economic reliance on agriculture—increasingly affected by heat, flooding, and drought—has one of the highest rates of mental illness in California (Ganesh and Smith 2018). Migrant communities are exposed to these conditions on a regular basis, and research has shown that they also face higher rates of anxiety, depression, and PTSD after a disaster, compared to the general public (Dadson et al. 2025). Cultural factors likely contribute to these outcomes. For instance, Asian migrants’ underutilization of mental health care following the September 11 terrorist attacks in New York City was attributed to social stigmas around seeking psychological support and a tendency to convey psychological distress primarily through physical symptoms (Kung et al. 2018). Migrants may forgo government assistance for mental health issues due to uncertainty regarding their eligibility or apprehension about the potential consequences of stringent immigration policies. This situation was exacerbated by the Trump administration’s “public charge” rule. It instilled fears that using public benefits could endanger migrants’ applications for green cards and citizenship, or worse, make them targets for deportation (Calvo and Waters 2023). All these compounding challenges place additional stressors on MSOs, especially staff working on the frontlines of disasters—a situation that is largely unexamined within disaster studies. To our knowledge, research on mental health implications has primarily addressed direct traumas affecting individuals and communities (Chen et al. 2020). Our findings diversify this research by spotlighting MSO practitioners.

Include MSOs in Disaster Planning at Local and State Levels

While FEMA’s local hazard mitigation guide requires engagement with communities and stakeholders, local agencies often purposely exclude migrants, and federal agencies explicitly omit undocumented households from their programs. Due to the shifting nature of national emergency management, local emergency managers should ensure substantive engagement with MSOs before a disaster strikes (Mathias et al. 2022). California MSOs have successfully worked with decision-makers to pass inclusive disaster-related policies, a recent example being Senate Bill 1105 (Office of Senator Steve Padilla 2024), which requires employers to allow agricultural workers to utilize their sick days when local or state authorities have declared an emergency due to smoke, extreme heat, or flooding. This legislation was partially informed by the author team’s previously published research. This law will enable farmworkers to remain indoors, safeguarding their health during adverse conditions, and will protect them from retaliation. Similarly, hazard pay could be provided to farmworkers laboring in dangerous climatic conditions. Governments at all levels should also provide appropriate funding to MSOs for community training, disaster response drills, early warning systems, and community-based vulnerability mapping projects (Gero et al. 2011).

Provide Mental-Health Resources to Nonprofit Practitioners and Migrant Communities

Responding to climate-induced disasters exacts a toll on practitioners’ mental health, reducing their capacity to adapt and support migrant communities (Norris et al. 2002). Mental health and post-traumatic resources, such as those provided by Assembly Bill 1116 (State of California 2019)—including peer counseling support for emergency personnel—should be extended to these practitioners (California Professional Firefighters 2019). The impetus for AB 1116 was a survey conducted by the California Professional Firefighters Association and NBC Bay Area News, which revealed that almost one in six firefighters has contemplated suicide. Our research shows that MSO practitioners may experience similar mental stress or trauma (Marchand 2019, 6). We further recommend that MSOs partner with the Green Cross Academy of Traumatology (GCAT) to receive support from licensed mental health professionals trained to help victims and responders following traumatic events (Green Cross Academy of Traumatology 2024). Similar resources should be provided to migrants; for instance, expanding access to affordable, culturally and linguistically appropriate mental health services (including programs to address GBV); and leveraging community-based and cultural approaches to break down the associated barriers and stigma (Kime et al. 2024).

Require UndocuAlly Training for Emergency Responders

State and local government emergency agencies should be required to receive linguistic and cultural competency training to inform their interactions with undocumented communities. This program could be modeled after UndocuAlly trainings, which are primarily conducted in higher education to increase awareness, competency, and self-efficacy among university personnel (Southern 2016). These trainings are demonstrably effective for teaching the unique challenges faced by undocumented students (Jach and Carvajal 2023). Government agencies should collaborate with MSOs to develop similar modules for emergency managers and staff.