Transportation Security Administration
Actions and Plans to Build a Results-Oriented Culture Gao ID: GAO-03-190 January 17, 2003Never has a results-oriented focus been more critical than today, when the security of America's citizens depends on the outcomes of many federal programs. In response to the September 11 terrorist attacks, the Congress passed the Aviation and Transportation Security Act (ATSA) that created the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) and made it responsible for transportation security. ATSA requires TSA to implement specific practices that are intended to make it a results-oriented organization.
In its first year, TSA has simultaneously started to build the infrastructure of a large organization as it focused primarily on meeting its aviation security deadlines. As TSA begins to take responsibility for security in the maritime and surface modes of transportation, its current and future challenge is to continue to build, sustain, and institutionalize the organizational capacity to help it achieve its current and future goals. In this regard, TSA has made an impressive start in implementing practices that can create a results-oriented culture. These practices--leadership commitment, strategic planning, performance management, collaboration and communication, and public reporting and customer service--are shown below. Such practices are especially important when TSA moves into the newly created Department of Homeland Security.
RecommendationsOur recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director: Team: Phone:GAO-03-190, Transportation Security Administration: Actions and Plans to Build a Results-Oriented Culture
This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-03-190
entitled 'Transportation Security Administration: Actions and Plans to
Build a Results-Oriented Culture' which was released on February 19,
2003.
This text file was formatted by the U.S. General Accounting Office
(GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as part of a
longer term project to improve GAO products‘ accessibility. Every
attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data integrity of
the original printed product. Accessibility features, such as text
descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes placed at the
end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, are provided
but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format of the printed
version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an exact electronic
replica of the printed version. We welcome your feedback. Please E-mail
your comments regarding the contents or accessibility features of this
document to Webmaster@gao.gov.
Report to Congressional Requesters:
January 2003:
TRANSPORTATION SECURITY ADMINISTRATION:
Actions and Plans to Build a Results-Oriented Culture:
GAO-03-190:
GAO Highlights: Highlights of GAO-03-190, a report to Congressional
Requesters
Why GAO Did This Study:
Never has a results-oriented focus been more critical than today, when
the security of America‘s citizens depends on the outcomes of many
federal programs. In response to the September 11 terrorist attacks,
the Congress passed the Aviation and Transportation Security Act (ATSA)
that created the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) and made
it
responsible for transportation security. ATSA requires TSA to
implement
specific practices that are intended to make it a results-oriented
organization.
What GAO Found:
In its first year, TSA has simultaneously started to build the
infrastructure of a large organization as it focused primarily on
meeting its aviation security deadlines. As TSA begins to take
responsibility for security in the maritime and surface modes of
transportation, its current and future challenge is to continue to
build,
sustain, and institutionalize the organizational capacity to help
it achieve
its current and future goals. In this regard, TSA has made an
impressive
start in implementing practices that can create a results-oriented
culture.
These practices”leadership commitment, strategic planning,
performance
management, collaboration and communication, and public reporting
and
customer service”are shown below. Such practices are especially
important
when TSA moves into the newly created Department of Homeland
Security.
[See PDF for image]
[End of figure]
What GAO Recommends:
GAO makes specific recommendations to the Secretary of
Transportation
and the Under Secretary of Transportation for Security to
continue and
augment TSA‘s progress in implementing ATSA‘s results-oriented
practices.
The adjacent table shows selected recommended next steps for
TSA. We provided
drafts of this report to officials from the Department of
Transportation (DOT),
including TSA, for their review and comment. TSA‘s Director
of Strategic
Management and Analysis provided oral comments on behalf of
DOT and TSA
generally agreeing with the contents, findings, and
recommendations of the
draft report.
www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-03-190.
To view the full report, including the scope
and methodology, click on the link above.
For more information, contact J. Christopher Mihm,
202-512-6086,
mihmj@gao.gov.
Letter:
Results in Brief:
Background:
TSA Actions and Plans to Implement Selected Results-Oriented Practices:
Concluding Observations:
Recommendations for Executive Action:
Agency Comments:
Appendix:
Appendix I: Objective, Scope, and Methodology:
Related GAO Products:
Tables:
Table 1: Summary of ATSA Requirements, TSA Actions and Plans, and
Recommended Next Steps, by Results-Oriented Practice:
Table 2: Summary of Opportunities to Help Ensure Useful Annual Plans
and
Applied Practices:
Figures:
Figure 1: Standardized Performance Agreement for TSA Executives:
Figure 2: DOT and TSA Goal Alignment for Aviation Security:
Figure 3: TSA‘s Interim Performance Management System:
ATSA: Aviation and Transportation Security Act:
CSI: customer satisfaction index:
DHS: Department of Homeland Security:
DOT: Department of Transportation:
GPRA: Government Performance and Results Act:
PBO: performance-based organization:
Letter January 17, 2003:
The Honorable Ernest F. Hollings
United States Senate:
The Honorable Kay Bailey Hutchison
United States Senate:
The Honorable John McCain
United States Senate:
The Honorable John D. Rockefeller, IV
United States Senate:
Over a year has passed since the terrorist attacks of September 11,
2001, turned commercial aircraft into missiles, killing thousands of
people, destroying billions of dollars‘ worth of property, and
realigning our national priorities. These attacks tragically underscore
the forces that are likely to shape American society, the United
States‘ place in the world, and the role of the federal government. The
federal government is engaged in a comprehensive review, reassessment,
reprioritization, and as appropriate reengineering of what the
government does, how it does business, and in some cases, who does the
government‘s business. Leading public and private organizations in the
United States and abroad have found that for organizations to
successfully transform themselves they must often fundamentally change
their cultures so they are more results oriented, customer focused, and
collaborative in nature.[Footnote 1] Ultimately, federal agencies will
need to transform their cultures to meet the realities of a post-
September 11 environment and the challenges of the 21st century.
In response to the September 11 terrorist attacks, the Congress passed
the Aviation and Transportation Security Act (ATSA) in November 2001,
which created the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) as a new
organization in the Department of Transportation (DOT). According to
ATSA, TSA is responsible for security in aviation and other modes of
transportation. In addition, ATSA requires TSA to implement specific
practices that are intended to make it a results-oriented organization.
Also in response to the September 11 terrorist attacks, the Congress
created the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to better coordinate
the United States‘ efforts to combat terrorism. The creation of this
department moves TSA and its responsibilities for security of all modes
of transportation out of DOT and into the newly created DHS.
A key factor to help organizations achieve their missions and program
results is to implement a positive control environment. A positive
control environment provides discipline and structure as well as the
climate that influences the quality of internal control. In essence, a
positive control environment requires management and employees to
establish a supportive attitude toward internal control and
conscientious management. As such, effective internal control includes
strategic planning, budget formulation and execution, organizational
alignment and control, performance measurement, human capital,
financial management, information technology, and acquisition.
At your request, this report describes TSA‘s actions and plans for
implementing the results-oriented practices required in ATSA and
recommends next steps for TSA to take to build a results-oriented
organizational culture and to establish a positive control environment.
To address the objective of this report, we reviewed our models,
guides, reports, and other products on strategic planning and
performance measurement, strategic human capital management,
transformation efforts, and other related areas to identify results-
oriented practices and recommend next steps for TSA. We next analyzed
ATSA in relation to our products to identify any results-oriented
practices that were statutorily required in the legislation. We
interviewed officials from various TSA offices responsible for
strategic planning, human capital, training, budget, public affairs,
and policy, among others and reviewed TSA and DOT missions, performance
goals and measures, performance agreements, policies and procedures,
and organizational charts and other relevant documentation. For
additional information on our scope and methodology, see appendix I.
This report addresses a part of your larger request for GAO to provide
information on the extent to which TSA‘s policies, procedures, and
organizational structure are likely to ensure the adequate oversight of
its workforce of air marshals, airline passenger and baggage screeners,
and other security personnel, as well as other matters. We have
testified before your committee and issued reports on TSA and aviation
security that address issues included in your larger request. In an
ongoing effort to provide real-time, constructive assistance to TSA, we
provided TSA with our guides and reports on strategic planning and
strategic human capital management. See related GAO products listed at
the end of this report for a list of GAO reports, testimonies, guides,
and other products related to TSA, transportation security, and
results-oriented practices.
Results in Brief:
TSA has faced immense challenges in its first year of existence. In its
first year, TSA has simultaneously started to build the infrastructure
of a large organization as it focused primarily on meeting its aviation
security deadlines. TSA reports that it met two of its most significant
mandated deadlines--to deploy federal passenger screeners at airports
across the nation by November 19, 2002 and to screen every piece of
checked baggage for explosives by December 31, 2002.[Footnote 2] To
date, TSA has recruited, hired, trained, and deployed over 44,000
federal screeners to meet these deadlines. As TSA begins to take
responsibility for security in the maritime and surface modes of
transportation, its current and future challenge is to continue to
build, sustain, and institutionalize the organizational capacity to
help it achieve its current and future goals. In this regard, TSA has
made an impressive start in implementing practices in:
* leadership commitment to creating a high-performing organization,
* strategic planning to establish results-oriented goals and measures,
* performance management to promote accountability for results,
* collaboration and communication to achieve national outcomes, and:
* public reporting and customer service to build citizen confidence.
These practices establish the foundation of a results-oriented culture
that will remain critically important when TSA moves into the new DHS.
Specifically, TSA has begun taking actions required in ATSA and used by
leading organizations when they emphasize a focus on results. These
actions lay the groundwork for ’recommended next steps“ that TSA can
take to help reinforce a results-oriented culture. ATSA‘s requirements,
TSA‘s actions and plans to implement them, and recommended next steps
for each results-oriented practice are shown in table 1. We provided
drafts of this report to officials from DOT, including TSA, for their
review and comment. TSA‘s Director of Strategic Management and Analysis
provided oral comments on behalf of DOT and TSA generally agreeing with
the contents, findings, and recommendations of the draft report. In
addition to making minor technical clarifications, we made changes
where appropriate to reflect progress TSA has made in the results-
oriented practices since the completion of our audit work.
Table 1: Summary of ATSA Requirements, TSA Actions and Plans, and
Recommended Next Steps, by Results-Oriented Practice:
ATSA requirements: Leadership commitment to creating a high-performing
organization: * Requires performance agreements between the Secretary
of DOT and the Under Secretary of Transportation for Security and
between the Under Secretary and TSA executives.; TSA actions and plans:
Leadership commitment to creating a high-performing organization: *
Stated leadership commitment to creating a results-oriented culture in
its 180-day action plan.; * Expressed plans to use the Baldrige
performance excellence criteria as a management tool to promote quality
and performance.; * Established standardized performance agreements for
TSA executives.; Recommended next steps: Leadership commitment to
creating a high-performing organization: * Establish a performance
agreement for the Under Secretary of Transportation for Security that
articulates how bonuses will be tied to performance.; * Add
expectations in performance agreements for top leadership to foster the
culture of a high-performing organization..
ATSA requirements: Leadership commitment to creating a high-performing
organization: * Requires a 5-year performance plan and annual
performance report consistent with the principles of the Government
Performance and Results Act.; TSA actions and plans: Leadership
commitment to creating a high-performing organization: * Articulated
vision, mission, values, strategic goal, and performance goals and
measures.; * Developed automated system to collect performance data to
demonstrate progress in meeting goals.; * Aligned aviation security
performance goals and measures with DOT goals.; * Reported it submitted
its first annual performance report.; Recommended next steps:
Leadership commitment to creating a high-performing organization: *
Establish security performance goals and measures for all modes of
transportation as part of a strategic planning process that involves
stakeholders.; * Apply practices that have been shown to provide useful
information in agency performance plans..
ATSA requirements: Leadership commitment to creating a high-performing
organization: * Requires a performance management system.; * Requires
performance agreements for all employees that include organizational
and individual goals.; TSA actions and plans: Leadership commitment to
creating a high-performing organization: * Established an interim
performance management system.; * Created standardized performance
agreements for groups of employees that include organizational and
individual goals and standards of performance.; Recommended next steps:
Leadership commitment to creating a high-performing organization: *
Build on the current performance agreements to achieve additional
benefits.; * Ensure the permanent performance management system makes
meaningful distinctions in performance.; * Involve employees in
developing its permanent performance management system..
ATSA requirements: Leadership commitment to creating a high-performing
organization: * Requires TSA to work within and outside the government
to accomplish its mission.; * Establishes a Transportation Security
Oversight Board to facilitate collaboration and communication.; TSA
actions and plans: Leadership commitment to creating a high-performing
organization: * Established Offices of Security Regulation and Policy,
Communications and Public Information, Law Enforcement and Security
Liaison, and Legislative Affairs to collaborate and communicate with
stakeholders.; * Convened the Oversight Board, which has met twice.; *
Stated plans to use memorandums of understanding and memorandums of
agreement to formalize roles and responsibilities of TSA and other
agencies in transportation security.; Recommended next steps:
Leadership commitment to creating a high-performing organization: *
Define more clearly the collaboration and communication roles and
responsibilities of TSA‘s various offices.; * Formalize roles and
responsibilities among governmental entities for transportation
security..
ATSA requirements: Leadership commitment to creating a high-performing
organization: * Requires a 180-day action plan and two progress reports
within 6 months of enactment.; TSA actions and plans: Leadership
commitment to creating a high-performing organization: * Submitted 180-
day action plan and both progress reports within established time
frames.; * Maintains a Web site to provide information to the public.;
* Created ombudsman position to serve customers.; * Developed measures
to track customer satisfaction.; * Reviewed and eliminated security
procedures that do not enhance security or customer service.; * Stated
plans to develop a customer satisfaction index to analyze customer
opinions to improve performance.; Recommended next steps: Leadership
commitment to creating a high-performing organization: * Fill the
ombudsman position to facilitate responsiveness of TSA to the public.;
* Continue to develop and implement mechanisms, such as the customer
satisfaction index, to gauge customer satisfaction and improve customer
service..
[End of table]
Source: GAO analysis.
Background:
Unlike other federal organizations that must transform their existing
cultures, TSA has the opportunity to create a culture that fosters high
performance from the outset. For TSA, this means creating a culture
that focuses on:
* results rather than processes;
* matrixes rather than stovepipes;
* an external (citizen, customer, and stakeholder) perspective rather
than an inward perspective;
* employee empowerment rather than micromanagement;
* risk management rather than risk avoidance; and:
* knowledge sharing rather than knowledge hoarding.
TSA is an organization facing immense challenges to simultaneously
build the infrastructure of a large government agency responsible for
security in all modes of transportation and meet unprecedented
deadlines required in ATSA to federalize aviation security. Two of the
most significant deadlines require TSA to:
* deploy federal passenger screeners at security checkpoints at 429
airports across the nation by November 19, 2002, and:
* install explosives detection systems to screen every piece of checked
baggage for explosives no later than December 31, 2002.
In July 2002, we testified before your committee on the progress TSA
has made in enhancing aviation security and in meeting the deadlines to
deploy federal screeners at security checkpoints and to install
explosives detection systems.[Footnote 3] At that time, we reported
that while TSA‘s efforts were well underway to hire and train thousands
of key security personnel, including federal screeners and security
directors, TSA had experienced unexpected delays in finding and hiring
security screener personnel who met the requirements of ATSA.[Footnote
4] We also reported that while TSA had made progress in checking all
bags for explosives and planning for the purchase and installation of
explosives detection equipment, TSA had not kept pace with planned
milestones to meet congressional deadlines for using explosives
detection systems to screen 100 percent of checked baggage. In
addition, we reported that TSA had not fully implemented the
responsibilities required in ATSA such as the security of other modes
of transportation, cargo security, and general aviation security.
Finally, we also observed that the move of TSA from DOT to a DHS poses
further challenges that may delay progress on meeting mandated
deadlines and addressing other security vulnerabilities in the nation‘s
transportation system.
TSA and DOT leadership have also testified before the Congress at
several hearings on challenges TSA was facing as it tried to meet its
deadlines and other transportation security responsibilities while
establishing itself as a federal organization.[Footnote 5] Leadership
stated that one of TSA‘s challenges is to build a large organization
from the ground up. Specifically, in January 2002, TSA only had
approximately 15 employees of the more than 60,000 it reported it would
need by the end of 2002. In addition, the Under Secretary of
Transportation for Security testified that at that time the
congressionally mandated cap on the number of employees it can employ
of 45,000 would limit its ability to meet the deadlines. TSA also
testified on the need for additional funding to meet its security
responsibilities and the delays it experienced in receiving this
funding. According to TSA and DOT, delays in funding and restrictions
on the use of the additional funding at that time had undermined TSA‘s
ability to meet the deadlines. DOT leadership stated that TSA is
especially disadvantaged by operating under a continuing resolution
because it does not have money from previous years to help bridge the
gaps between programmatic needs and the funding it receives under the
continuing resolution.
When the Congress created TSA, it required practices consistent with
other government initiatives to restructure their agencies in order to
instill results-oriented organizational cultures. In the United States
and abroad, governments have restructured their agencies to improve the
delivery of government services and clarify accountability for results.
During the 1980s and 1990s, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation
and Development reported that its member countries increased efforts to
restructure their public sector organizations for results.[Footnote 6]
Among member countries, restructured organizations represent about 50
percent, sometimes as high as 75 percent, of public expenditure and
public servants.
In 1988, the United Kingdom started to restructure its government
agencies to increase their focus on accountability and improve customer
service. Called ’executive agencies,“ these restructured agencies are
still the predominant form of service delivery in the United Kingdom.
As of December 2001, there were over 130 executive agencies covering
more than three-quarters of the British civil service. In July 2002,
the Prime Minister‘s Office of Public Services Reform reviewed the
performance of these executive agencies and set out to identify
management principles that may have contributed to their
success.[Footnote 7] The Prime Minister‘s Office concluded that the
restructured executive agency model has been a success and the
management principles underlying the restructured agencies continue to
be highly relevant. These principles are: (1) a clear focus on
delivering specified goals within a framework of accountability, (2)
responsibility for performance resting clearly with the chief executive
and agency staff, and (3) an agency focus that is outward rather than
inward.
In the 1990s, the Congress recognized the need to restructure federal
agencies and to hold them accountable for achieving program
results.[Footnote 8] To this end, the Congress established performance-
based organizations (PBOs), modeled after the United Kingdom‘s
executive agencies: the Office of Student Financial Assistance, United
States Patent and Trademark Office, and Air Traffic Organization.
Designed in statute, PBOs were to commit to clear management objectives
and specific targets for improved performance. These clearly defined
performance goals, coupled with direct ties between the achievement of
performance goals and the pay and tenure of the head of the PBO and
other senior managers, were intended to lead to improved performance.
Specifically, the head of the PBO is appointed for a set term, subject
to annual performance agreements, and eligible for bonuses for improved
organizational performance.
Similarly for TSA, the Congress required an Under Secretary to be
appointed for a 5-year term to manage TSA who is entitled to a bonus
based on performance; measurable goals to be outlined in a 5-year
performance plan and reported annually; a performance management system
to include individual and organizational goals for managers and
employees; an annual performance agreement for the Under Secretary,
senior managers, and staff; an oversight board to facilitate
communication and collaboration; and public reporting requirements to
build citizen confidence.
TSA will be 1 of over 20 originating agencies or their components with
differing missions, cultures, systems, and procedures that are to move
into DHS. The newly created DHS is the most recent manifestation of the
continuing consideration of how best to restructure government to
respond to the challenges of the 21ST century. At a GAO-sponsored forum
on mergers and transformation, participants observed that people and
cultural issues are at the center of successful mergers and
transformations.[Footnote 9] The importance of these issues should not
be avoided, but aggressively addressed at the outset and throughout the
process.
TSA Actions and Plans to Implement Selected Results-Oriented Practices:
Within its first year of existence, TSA has made an impressive start in
implementing practices that can create a results-oriented
organizational culture and help TSA as it begins to take responsibility
for the security of the maritime and surface modes of transportation.
These practices include:
* leadership commitment to creating a high-performing organization,
* strategic planning to establish results-oriented goals and measures,
* performance management to promote accountability for results,
* collaboration and communication to achieve national outcomes, and:
* public reporting and customer service to build citizen confidence.
TSA‘s actions and plans to implement the results-oriented practices
required in ATSA and recommended next steps that can help TSA build a
results-oriented culture are described on the following pages.
Leadership Commitment to Creating a High-Performing Organization:
A critical element and the foundation of TSA‘s successful
implementation of results-oriented practices will be the demonstrated
and sustained commitment of its top leaders. Ultimately, successful
organizations understand that they must often change their culture to
successfully transform themselves, and that such a change starts with
top leadership. Top leadership involvement is essential to overcoming
an organization‘s natural resistance to change, marshalling the
resources needed in many cases to improve management, and building and
maintaining the organizationwide commitment to new ways of doing
business. At a recent GAO-sponsored roundtable, we reported on the
necessity to elevate attention, integrate various efforts, and
institutionalize accountability to lead efforts to fundamentally
transform an agency and address key management functions at the highest
appropriate level in the organization.[Footnote 10] At TSA, the
leadership faces a daunting challenge to create this results-oriented
culture. From the outset, this challenge was exacerbated by the change
in TSA‘s head position, the Under Secretary of Transportation for
Security, just 8 months after the organization was established. TSA has
continually stated its commitment to becoming a high-performing
organization, and has reinforced that commitment in its performance
agreements for TSA executives.
TSA leadership has expressed its commitment to creating a results-
oriented organizational culture. Specifically, in its 180-day action
plan report to the Congress outlining goals and milestones for defining
acceptable levels of performance in aviation security, TSA stated that
it is committed to ’being a leading-edge, performance-based
organization--an organization whose operative culture establishes
performance expectations that support the mission, drives those
expectations into organizational and individual performance plans, and
collects objective data to assess its performance.“:
TSA leadership also plans to use the Baldrige performance excellence
criteria as a management tool to promote an awareness of quality and
performance in TSA.[Footnote 11] These criteria are: leadership,
strategic planning, customer and market focus, information and
analysis, human resource focus, process management, and business
results. TSA leadership hired a former Baldrige award application
examiner to be TSA‘s Chief Quality Officer and to head the Office of
Quality Performance. According to TSA officials, the Office of Quality
Performance will serve as internal consultants to TSA management to
help them use the Baldrige criteria as a tool to create a culture
focused on performance.
To hold TSA‘s leadership accountable for achieving results, ATSA
requires TSA to establish a performance agreement between the Under
Secretary and the Secretary of DOT that includes organizational and
individual performance goals. A TSA official told us that as of
November 2002, no performance agreement had been finalized for the
Under Secretary since the current Under Secretary has been acting in
the position.[Footnote 12] During times of transition, high-performing
organizations recognize that performance agreements can reinforce
accountability for organizational goals.[Footnote 13] To this end, when
TSA moves into its new parent department, DHS, TSA can use performance
agreements to maintain a consistent focus on its goals. ATSA also
allows for the Under Secretary to receive a bonus for any calendar year
up to 30 percent of the annual rate of pay, based on a performance
evaluation. However, TSA‘s interim performance management system does
not specifically address performance bonuses for the head of TSA.
In addition, ATSA requires TSA to establish performance agreements
between TSA‘s Under Secretary and his or her executives that set
organizational and individual performance goals. TSA has created a
standardized performance agreement for TSA executives as a part of its
interim performance management system. TSA‘s executive agreements
include both organizational and individual goals, as shown in figure 1.
For example, each executive performance agreement includes an
organizational goal such as to maintain the nation‘s air security and
ensure an emphasis on customer satisfaction. The agreement also
includes individual goals, such as to meet or exceed requirements for
satisfactory performance and to demonstrate commitment to civil rights.
In addition, the agreement includes competencies, such as to provide
leadership in setting the workforce‘s expected performance levels and
ensure that the executive‘s work unit contributes to the accomplishment
of TSA‘s mission. TSA can strengthen these performance agreements by
setting explicit targets that are directly linked to organizational
goals.
Figure 1: Standardized Performance Agreement for TSA Executives:
[See PDF for image]
[End of figure]
Source: TSA.
Governmentwide, to help hold senior executives accountable for
organizational results, federal agencies are to establish performance
management systems that (1) hold senior executives accountable for
their individual and organizational performance by linking performance
management with the results-oriented goals of the Government
Performance and Results Act (GPRA); (2) evaluate senior executive
performance using measures that balance organizational results with
customer satisfaction, employee perspectives, and any other measures
agencies decide are appropriate; and (3) use performance results as a
basis for pay, awards, and other personnel decisions. We have found
that progress is needed in explicitly linking senior executive
expectations for performance to results-oriented organizational goals
and greater emphasis should be placed in fostering the necessary
collaboration both within and across organizational boundaries to
achieve results.[Footnote 14] Furthermore, a specific performance
expectation to lead and facilitate change could be a critical element
as agencies transform themselves to succeed in an environment that is
more results oriented, less hierarchical, and more integrated.
Recommended Next Steps:
Establish a performance agreement for the Under Secretary of
Transportation for Security that articulates how bonuses will be tied
to performance. To hold the Under Secretary accountable for achieving
results, DOT, or the new parent department DHS, should create a
performance agreement for the Under Secretary that includes
organizational and individual goals and also articulates how bonuses
for the Under Secretary will be tied to his performance in achieving
the goals in the performance agreement.
Add expectations in performance agreements for top leadership to foster
the culture of a high-performing organization. Successful organizations
understand that top leadership performance and accountability are
critical to their success and to the success of the federal
government‘s transformation. TSA can strengthen its current performance
agreements for top leadership, including the Under Secretary and senior
executives, by adding performance expectations that:
* establish explicit targets directly linked to organizational goals,
* foster the necessary collaboration within and across organizational
boundaries to achieve results, and:
* demonstrate commitment to lead and facilitate change.
Strategic Planning to Establish Results-Oriented Goals and Measures:
Strategic planning is a continuous, dynamic, and inclusive process that
provides the foundation for the fundamental results the organization
seeks to achieve. ATSA‘s requirements for TSA are consistent with the
results-oriented planning and reporting principles embodied in GPRA.
GPRA provides a strategic planning and management framework intended to
improve federal performance and hold agencies accountable for achieving
results. Effective implementation of this framework requires agencies
to clearly establish results-oriented performance goals in strategic
and annual performance plans for which they will be held accountable,
measure progress towards those goals, determine the strategies and
resources to effectively accomplish the goals, use performance
information to make the programmatic decisions necessary to improve
performance, and formally communicate results in performance reports.
Specifically, ATSA requires TSA to submit to the Congress a 5-year
performance plan and an annual performance report, but does not specify
when these documents are to be submitted to the Congress.
TSA has taken the first steps to establishing the performance planning
and reporting framework consistent with GPRA. The starting point for
the framework envisioned under GPRA is the strategic plan that
describes an organization‘s mission, outcome-oriented strategic goals,
strategies to achieve these goals, and key factors beyond the agency‘s
control that could impact the goals‘ achievement, among other things.
According to TSA officials, TSA is currently developing its strategic
plan. TSA has, however, made components of its plan public. TSA has
articulated its mission, vision, and values. TSA‘s mission is to
protect the nation‘s transportation systems to ensure freedom of
movement for people and commerce. TSA‘s vision is to continuously set
the standard for excellence in transportation security through people,
processes, and technologies and its values are integrity, innovation,
courtesy and respect, competence, customer focus, dedication,
diversity, and teamwork. In addition, TSA has set an overall strategic
goal: to prevent intentional harm or disruption to the transportation
system by terrorists or other persons intending to cause harm. To
support this strategic goal, TSA has defined three performance goals:
* meeting the ATSA mandates to federalize transportation security,
* maintaining and improving aviation security, and:
* servicing TSA customers.
To demonstrate its progress toward meeting its performance goals, TSA
established an initial set of 32 performance measures. For example,
TSA‘s primary performance measures for its performance goal to maintain
and improve aviation security are the percentage of bags screened by
explosives detection systems and the percentage of trained screeners.
Other measures to complement these primary measures include the
percentage of explosives detection systems deployed, the percentage of
screeners with 60 hours of on-the-job training completed, and the
percentage of screeners compliant with training standards. TSA plans to
develop more outcome-oriented goals and measures in fiscal year 2003
and is in the process of finalizing strategies to achieve its goals.
To report on its progress in meeting its performance goals and
measures, TSA has begun to build the capacity to gather and use
organizational performance information. TSA has installed an automated
performance management information system, which became operational in
April 2002 and is designed to collect and report data on TSA‘s
performance measures. Data will be collected from federal security
directors, security screener supervisors, and headquarters officials
and reported through Web-based reports designed for internal decision
making and external reporting. According to TSA officials, the system
will be expanded to include goals and measures related to all modes of
transportation in upcoming fiscal years. As required by ATSA, TSA
reported on November 19, 2002, that it submitted its first annual
performance report.
TSA has linked its aviation security performance goals to those of its
parent department, DOT, to provide a clear, direct understanding of how
the achievement of its performance goals will lead to the achievement
of DOT‘s strategic goal for homeland security, as shown in figure 2.
Specifically, TSA‘s performance goals to federalize and maintain and
improve aviation security are intended to contribute to DOT‘s
performance goal to ’reduce vulnerability to crime and terrorism and
promote regional stability“ and its strategic goal on homeland
security, to ’ensure the security of the transportation system for the
movement of people and goods and support the National Security
Strategy.“ As TSA establishes its performance goals for other modes of
transportation, it should continue to align its goals with DOT‘s goals.
When TSA moves to DHS, it will be necessary to maintain goal alignment
with its new parent department.
Figure 2: DOT and TSA Goal Alignment for Aviation Security:
[See PDF for image] - graphic text:
[End of figure] - graphic text:
GPRA requires agencies to consult with the Congress and solicit the
views of other stakeholders as they develop their strategic
plans.[Footnote 15] However, TSA has stated few plans to involve
stakeholders in its strategic planning process. Such consultations
provide an important opportunity for TSA and the Congress to work
together to ensure that agency missions are focused, goal are specific
and results oriented, and strategies and funding expectations are
appropriate and reasonable. Results-oriented organizations also
recognize that it is important to broaden stakeholder involvement to
create a basic understanding among stakeholders of competing goals. As
TSA works to meet its goals, it will continue to face ongoing
challenges to balance aviation security against customer service. While
TSA needs to screen passengers and baggage carefully to meet its goal
to maintain the security of the aviation system, it must efficiently
move customers and their baggage through the aviation system to
minimize passenger inconvenience to encourage them to continue using
air transportation.
Recommended Next Steps:
Establish security performance goals and measures for all modes of
transportation as part of a strategic planning process that involves
stakeholders. Stakeholder involvement, and specifically congressional
consultation, is particularly important for TSA in its strategic
planning process given the importance of its mission and the necessity
to establish additional goals to address other modes of transportation.
In addition, TSA operates in a complex political environment where
there will be the ongoing need to balance the sometimes conflicting
goals of security and customer service.
We identified approaches that can enhance the usefulness of
consultations between TSA and the Congress that can also apply to
consultations with external stakeholders.[Footnote 16] Among the
approaches are the following.
* Engage the right people. Including people who are knowledgeable about
the topic at hand, such as TSA officials who are knowledgeable about
particular transportation modes and specific programs, is important
when consulting with the Congress and other stakeholders.
* Address differing views. Stakeholders may have differing views on
what they believe the level of detail discussed during consultation
meetings should be. For example, participants may want to engage in
discussion that goes beyond TSA‘s mission to the appropriate balance
between enforcing security and servicing passengers.
* Establish a consultation process that is iterative. All parties
involved in transportation security recognize that the consultation
process should be continuous and they should meet as many times as both
sides feel are necessary to reach a reasonable consensus on TSA‘s
strategic and performance goals to address transportation security.
Apply practices that have been shown to provide useful information in
agency performance plans. Results-oriented organizations focus on the
process of performance planning rather than the planning documents
themselves. GPRA was intended, in part, to improve congressional
decision making by giving the Congress comprehensive and reliable
information on the extent to which federal programs are fulfilling
their statutory intent. We have identified practices that TSA can apply
to ensure the usefulness of its required 5-year performance plan to TSA
managers, the Congress, and other decision makers and interested
parties.[Footnote 17] Table 2 outlines these practices.
Table 2: Summary of Opportunities to Help Ensure Useful Annual Plans
and Applied Practices:
Opportunities to help ensure useful annual plans: Articulate a results
orientation.; Applied practices: 1. Create a set of performance goals
and measures that addresses important dimensions of program performance
and balances competing priorities.; 2. Use intermediate goals and
measures to show progress or contribution to intended results.; 3.
Include explanatory information on the goals and measures.; 4. Develop
performance goals to address mission-critical management problems.; 5.
Show baseline and trend data for past performance.; 6. Identify
projected target levels of performance for multiyear goals.; 7. Link
the goals of component organizations to departmental strategic goals..
Opportunities to help ensure useful annual plans: Coordinate cross-
cutting programs.; Applied practices: 8. Identify programs that
contribute to the same or similar results.; 9. Set complementary
performance goals to show how differing program strategies are mutually
reinforcing and establish common or complementary performance measures,
as appropriate.; 10. Describe--briefly or refer to a separate document-
-planned coordination strategies..
Opportunities to help ensure useful annual plans: Show how strategies
will be used to achieve goals.; Applied practices: 11. Link strategies
and programs to specific performance goals and describe how they will
contribute to the achievement of those goals.; 12. Describe strategies
to leverage or mitigate the effects of external factors on the
accomplishment of performance goals.; 13. Discuss strategies to resolve
mission-critical management problems.; 14. Discuss--briefly or refer to
a separate document--plans to ensure that mission-critical processes
and information systems function properly and are secure..
Opportunities to help ensure useful annual plans: Show performance
consequences of budget and other resource decisions.; Applied
practices: 15. Show how budgetary resources relate to the achievement
of performance goals.; 16. Discuss--briefly and refer to the agency
capital plan--how proposed capital assets (specifically information
technology investments) will contribute to achieving performance
goals.; 17. Discuss--briefly or refer to a separate plan--how the
agency will use its human capital..
Opportunities to help ensure useful annual plans: Build the capacity to
gather and use performance information.; Applied practices: 18.
Identify internal and external sources for data.; 19. Describe efforts
to verify and validate performance data.; 20. Identity actions to
compensate for unavailable or low-quality data.; 21. Discuss
implications of data limitations for assessing performance..
[End of table]
Source: GAO/GGD/AIMD-99-69.
Performance Management to Promote Accountability for Results:
TSA has an opportunity to use its individual performance management
system as a strategic tool to drive internal change and achieve
external results. TSA, as a new organization, has a critical challenge
in
(1) integrating potentially more than 60,000 employees into a new
organization, (2) creating a common culture, and (3) achieving its
security, customer satisfaction, and related performance goals in an
effective, efficient, and economical manner. The individual performance
management system can be an essential tool in meeting all three of the
above. To help agency leaders manage their people and integrate human
capital considerations into daily decision making and the program
results they seek to achieve, we developed a strategic human capital
model.[Footnote 18] The model highlights the kinds of thinking that
agencies should apply, as well as some of the steps they can take, to
make progress in managing human capital strategically. In our model, we
identify two critical success factors that can assist organizations in
creating results-oriented cultures: (1) a ’line of sight“ showing how
unit and individual performance link to organizational goals and (2)
the inclusiveness of employees. TSA can apply these factors to its
performance management system to help create a results-oriented
culture.
ATSA requires TSA to establish a performance management system that is
to strengthen the organization‘s effectiveness by providing for the
establishment of goals for managers, employees, and the organization
that are consistent with the agency‘s performance plan. TSA used the
Federal Aviation Administration‘s system until it established its own
system in July 2002, when TSA leadership approved an interim employee
performance management system. The interim system is to remain in place
until a permanent system is created and implemented. As of November
2002, TSA had not established a time frame for implementing its
permanent performance management system.
TSA‘s interim system provides specific requirements for planning
individual performance, monitoring that performance, determining
employee development needs, appraising performance, and recognizing and
rewarding performance, as shown in figure 3. For example, at the
beginning of the appraisal cycle, employees‘ expectations are to be
established using a performance agreement; throughout the cycle
supervisors are to monitor performance; halfway through the performance
cycle supervisors are to provide feedback to employees and identify
employee development needs; and at the end of the cycle, supervisors
are to appraise performance at two levels: fully satisfactory and
unacceptable. Employees may then receive a bonus or other incentive if
their performance is at the fully satisfactory level. TSA‘s first
appraisal cycle ended November 15, 2002.
Figure 3: TSA‘s Interim Performance Management System:
[See PDF for image] - graphic text:
[End of figure] - graphic text:
In addition, ATSA requires that TSA‘s performance agreements for its
employees include individual and organizational goals. These
performance agreements can help TSA align individual and organizational
goals and establish the line of sight that helps create a results-
oriented culture. TSA has created standardized performance agreements
for groups of employees including transportation security screeners,
supervisory transportation security screeners, supervisors, and
executives. These performance agreements include a consistent set of
organizational goals, individual goals, and standards for satisfactory
performance. Supervisors may customize performance agreements for the
individual job by adding additional organizational and individual goals
and standards of performance. For example, the standardized performance
agreement for security screeners includes two organizational goals: (1)
to improve and maintain the security of American air travel by
effectively deterring or preventing successful terrorist (or other)
incidents on aircraft and at airports, with minimal disruption to
transportation and complete service to travelers and (2) to ensure an
emphasis on customer satisfaction while maintaining the nation‘s air
security. In addition, the standardized performance agreement for
security screeners includes an individual goal to consistently meet or
exceed the basic proficiency requirements by:
* vigilantly carrying out duties with utmost attention to tasks that
will prevent security threats,
* demonstrating the highest levels of courtesy to travelers and working
to maximize their levels of satisfaction with TSA services,
* working as an effective team member at assigned post to ensure that
security violations do not get past the team,
* contributing to the accomplishment of TSA‘s mission and vision,
* behaving in a way that supports TSA‘s values, and:
* demonstrating the highest level of concern for the civil rights of
coworkers and the traveling public.
Finally, the agreement includes standards for satisfactory performance
for security screeners. Standards include (1) completing all required
training successfully and as scheduled, performing satisfactorily on
required proficiency reviews, and passing operational testing
satisfactorily and
(2) performing security functions in an effective and timely manner in
accordance with TSA prescribed guidelines.
As described in our strategic human capital model, in addition to and
concurrent with the first critical success factor of creating a line of
sight showing how unit and individual performance link to
organizational goals, successful organizations involve employees to
build results-oriented cultures. This critical success factor is
especially timely for TSA as it transitions from its interim
performance management system and finalizes its permanent system.
Particularly when developing a new results-oriented performance
management system, leading organizations have found that actively
involving employees can build confidence and belief in the system. We
reported that when reforming their performance management systems,
agencies in other countries consulted a wide range of stakeholders
early in the process, obtained feedback directly from employees, and
engaged employee unions or associations.[Footnote 19]
Recommended Next Steps:
Build on the current performance agreements to achieve additional
benefits. Successful organizations design and implement performance
management systems that align individual employee performance
expectations with agency goals so that individuals understand the
connections between their daily activities and their organization‘s
success. While TSA has created standardized performance agreements for
groups of employees as a part of its interim performance management
system, it can also use its performance agreements to achieve benefits
by doing the following.[Footnote 20]
* Strengthen alignment of results-oriented goals with daily operations.
Performance agreements can define accountability for specific goals and
help align daily operations with agencies‘ results-oriented
programmatic goals. As TSA continues to develop and gain experience
with performance agreements, TSA should ensure an explicit link exists
between individual performance expectations and organizational goals
for all employees. For example, while TSA lists certain competencies
for individuals that are related to organizational goals such as
demonstrating the highest level of courtesy to travelers, the next step
is to set individual targets to meet the organizational goals.
* Foster collaboration across organizational boundaries. Performance
agreements can encourage employees to work across traditional
organizational boundaries or ’silos“ by focusing on the achievement of
organizationwide goals. For example, as TSA continues to assume
responsibility for security in all modes of transportation, TSA can use
employee performance agreements to set expectations that encourage
employees to work collaboratively to achieve cross-cutting
transportation security goals.
* Enhance opportunities to discuss and routinely use performance
information to make program improvements. Performance agreements can
facilitate communication about organizational performance and pinpoint
opportunities to improve performance. TSA‘s performance management
process offers several opportunities to discuss an individual‘s
performance and how that individual can contribute to TSA‘s goals when
meeting to set performance expectations, reviewing midyear progress,
and assessing performance at year-end. These formal expectation,
feedback, and assessment sessions are important to clarify
responsibility and accountability. As a next step, TSA can ensure that
it uses its performance agreements as a critical component of its
performance management process to have on-going, two-way consultations
between employees and their supervisors. In other words, strategic
performance management--a performance management system that is tied to
organizational goals--is not just a once-or twice-a-year formal
occurrence, but rather is ongoing and routine.
* Provide a results-oriented basis for individual accountability.
Performance agreements can serve as the basis for performance
evaluations. An assessment of performance against the performance
agreement can provide TSA and its employees the data needed to better
achieve organizational goals.
* Maintain continuity of program goals during transitions. Performance
agreements help to maintain a consistent focus on a set of broad
programmatic priorities during changes in leadership and organization.
TSA can use its process for developing performance agreements as a tool
to communicate priorities and instill those priorities throughout the
organization during periods of transition.
Ensure the permanent performance management system makes meaningful
distinctions in performance. In addition to providing candid and
constructive feedback to help individual employees maximize their
potential in understanding and realizing goals and objectives of the
agency, an effective performance management system provides management
with the objective and fact-based information it needs to reward top
performers and the necessary information and documentation to deal with
poor performers. Under TSA‘s interim performance management system,
employee performance is appraised at only two levels--fully
satisfactory and unacceptable. We have observed that such a pass/fail
system does not provide enough meaningful information and dispersion in
ratings to recognize and reward top performers, help everyone attain
their maximum potential, and deal with poor performers.[Footnote 21] As
a next step, TSA should consider appraisal systems with more than two
standards of performance. By using its performance agreements as the
basis in making distinctions in performance, TSA can have objective and
fact-based information and the documentation necessary to have an
effective performance management system.
Involve employees in developing its permanent performance management
system. TSA has the opportunity to create a culture that values the
importance of employees to help TSA achieve its goals. Employee
involvement improves the quality of the system by providing a front
line perspective and helping to create organizationwide understanding
and ownership. In addition, even after TSA develops its permanent
performance management system, involving employees in the process can
help employees perceive that the system is fair.
We have identified practices that organizations can apply to further
involve employees.[Footnote 22] The practices TSA can adopt to promote
inclusiveness and encourage employee ownership for the permanent
performance management system include the following.
* Seek employee input. Leading organizations not only provide
information to employees but also commonly seek their employees‘ input
on a periodic basis and explicitly address and use that input to adjust
their human capital practices. As TSA matures as an organization it can
collect feedback using employee satisfaction surveys, focus groups,
employee advisory councils, and/or employee task forces.
* Involve employees in planning and sharing performance information.
Involving employees in the planning process to develop agency goals
helps to increase employees‘ understanding and acceptance of them and
improve motivation and morale. For TSA, employees‘ understanding and
acceptance of its goals is particularly important because they are to
be held accountable for achieving the goals set out in their
performance agreements.
Collaboration and Communication to Achieve National Outcomes:
Virtually all of the results that the federal government strives to
achieve require the concerted and coordinated efforts of two or more
agencies. Thus, similar to virtually all federal agencies, TSA must
collaborate and communicate with stakeholders within and outside the
government to achieve meaningful results, and participate in matrixed
relationships--or networks of governmental, private sector, and
nongovernmental organizations working together--to achieve its goals.
This collaboration and communication will be even more important given
the complex nature of national security-related goals.
ATSA requires TSA to collaborate and communicate with organizations
across the government and in the private sector to accomplish its
mission. For example, ATSA requires TSA to do the following.
* Work with the Federal Aviation Administration to establish procedures
for notifying its Administrator and others of the identity of
individuals known to pose, or suspected of posing, a risk of air piracy
or terrorism or a threat to airline or passenger safety.
* Enter into memorandums of understanding with federal agencies or
other entities to share or otherwise cross-check data on individuals
identified on federal agency databases who may pose a risk to
transportation or national security.
* Coordinate with federal agencies and air carriers to require air
carriers to use information from government agencies to identify
individuals on passenger lists who may be a threat to civil aviation or
national security; and if such an individual is identified, notify
appropriate law enforcement agencies, prevent the individual from
boarding an aircraft, or take other appropriate action with respect to
that individual.
TSA has established a number of offices to collaborate and communicate
with external stakeholders.
* The Office of Security Regulation and Policy is to coordinate with
TSA‘s offices and stakeholders on policy, rulemaking, and customer
service issues.
* The Office of Communications and Public Information is to serve as an
advisor to senior leadership on the public impacts of major policy
decisions, internal audience concerns, and community reaction to and
civilian news media interest in TSA missions and functions.
* The Office of Law Enforcement and Security Liaison is to serve as the
national level liaison with federal, state, and local law enforcement
and the international community and is to administer TSA‘s Freedom of
Information Act requirement, which allows the public to request
information about TSA policies, procedures, operations, and decisions,
among other things and TSA‘s Privacy Act requirement, which allows the
public to request any records that the government has about the
individual making the request.
* The Office of Legislative Affairs is to be responsible for working
and communicating with the Congress.
TSA has experienced some challenges with collaboration and
communication. According to TSA officials, TSA is still defining and
clarifying the specific roles and responsibilities of the offices that
are to communicate with stakeholders. As of December 2002, TSA did not
have written guidance to provide information about TSA communication
roles and responsibilities to other TSA employees or to external
stakeholders. In addition, the Under Secretary testified that there
were some problems with reaching stakeholders in the past, specifically
the airlines and airports.[Footnote 23] The Under Secretary recognized
that collaboration with these and other stakeholders is important to
ensure aviation security and made a personal commitment that TSA will
make a concerted effort to communicate better with stakeholders. In
September 2002, we briefed the staff of the Committee on Transportation
and Infrastructure, U.S. House of Representatives, that some officials
at selected airports told us that they had not received clear and
comprehensive guidance from TSA on issues concerning the feasibility of
meeting the baggage screening deadline.
TSA officials that we spoke to are aware of the importance of
collaboration and communication across the government. According to TSA
officials, the primary tools TSA will use to formally collaborate with
governmental entities are memorandums of agreement and memorandums of
understanding. They are developing memorandums of agreement with the
other modal administrations within DOT. TSA officials told us that they
also plan to develop memorandums of agreement and memorandums of
understanding with local law enforcement agencies, the Department of
Defense, the Department of State, the Federal Bureau of Investigation,
the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the Federal Emergency Management
Agency, and the Customs Service, among others. They told us that the
purposes of the memorandums are to delineate clear lines of authority
and responsibility between parties; improve services to DOT‘s modal
administrations, other federal, state, and local agencies,
nongovernmental stakeholders, and the American public; and achieve
national performance security goals, among other purposes. TSA plans to
complete the memorandums no later than March 1, 2003.
As an additional mechanism to facilitate collaboration and
communication, ATSA established the Transportation Security Oversight
Board. According to ATSA, the Board, which must meet at least every 3
months, should consist of cabinet heads; directors; high-ranking
officials and/or their designees from DOT, the Department of Defense,
the Department of Justice, the Department of the Treasury, and the
Central Intelligence Agency; and presidentially appointed
representatives from the National Security Council and the Office of
Homeland Security. The Secretary of Transportation is to be the
chairperson of the Board.[Footnote 24] The Board‘s responsibilities
include, among other things, reviewing transportation plans;
facilitating the coordination of intelligence, security, and law
enforcement activities affecting transportation; and facilitating the
sharing of intelligence, security, and law enforcement information
affecting transportation. The Board, established within DOT, met twice
in 2002. TSA officials noted that the Board is an excellent mechanism
to share information with national security agencies across government
and has helped focus the national security community on the threats to
the transportation system, which TSA believes is a critical element of
meeting the mandates in ATSA.
Recommended Next Steps:
Define more clearly the collaboration and communication roles and
responsibilities of TSA‘s various offices. To help ensure collaboration
and communication with stakeholders are consistent and mutually
reinforcing, TSA should more fully define and clarify the collaboration
and communication responsibilities of the many offices that interact
with its stakeholders. TSA should ensure both internal TSA staff and
external stakeholders can identify who is responsible for collaboration
and communication at TSA.
Formalize roles and responsibilities among governmental entities for
transportation security. Finalizing memorandums of agreement and
memorandums of understanding with the other modal administrations
within DOT as well as other government agencies as appropriate can help
TSA successfully manage the necessary matrixed relationships to achieve
security in all modes of transportation. For example, agreements
between TSA and the modal administrations can address such issues as
separating responsibilities for standards and regulations, funding,
coordinating with customers, and implementing future security
initiatives. Although the memorandums may change when TSA moves to DHS,
TSA should continue to make progress to formalize its roles and
responsibilities until the transition takes place.
Public Reporting and Customer Service to Build Citizen Confidence:
Federal agencies can promote greater transparency of government by
publicizing what they intend to achieve and by being held accountable
for achieving those results. Such transparency can improve the
confidence of the American people in the capabilities of the federal
government. Improving public confidence is especially critical for TSA
as it works to achieve its goals of improving transportation security.
ATSA required TSA to issue specific reports to the Congress on its
activities and progress in establishing and meeting its goals.
Specifically, ATSA required TSA to provide to the Congress, within 180
days of enactment of the legislation, an action plan with goals and
milestones that was to outline how acceptable levels of performance for
aviation security will be achieved. In accordance with the time frames
outlined in ATSA, TSA submitted the action plan to the Congress on May
19, 2002, and has made this report available to the public on its Web
site. The action plan, entitled ’Performance Targets and Action Plan,
180 Day Report to Congress,“ made public TSA‘s strategic and
performance goals, TSA‘s performance measures, and the performance
measurement information system.
ATSA also required two progress reports within 6 months of the
enactment of the legislation. TSA released these reports within the
established time frame. The first progress report was to describe TSA‘s
progress to date on the evaluation and implementation of actions listed
in the legislation. TSA submitted this progress report, entitled
’Report to Congress on Enhanced Security Measures,“ on May 19, 2002,
and made the report available to the public on its Web site. Some of
the actions TSA reported it was evaluating include the following.
* Establish a uniform system of identification for all state and local
law enforcement personnel for use in obtaining permission to carry
weapons in aircraft cabins and in obtaining access to a secured area of
an airport.
* Establish requirements to implement trusted passenger programs and
use available technologies to expedite the security screening of
passengers who participate in such programs.
* Provide for the use of technologies to enable the private and secure
communication of threats to aid in the screening of passengers and
other individuals on airport property who are identified on any state
or federal security-related database for the purpose of having an
integrated response of various authorized airport security forces.
The second progress report was to describe the deployment of passenger
and baggage screening systems. TSA submitted this report on May 18,
2002, and has made nonsensitive portions of the report available on its
Web site. The report, entitled ’Deployment of Screening Systems
Strategy & Progress,“ provided the Congress with TSA‘s progress on and
strategy for meeting the mandated deadlines to deploy federal screeners
at security checkpoints at 429 airports and to have systems in place
for screening every piece of checked baggage for explosives. For
example, TSA reported that at that time it had identified security
screener standards; selected private contractors to recruit, assess,
and train security screeners; developed a preliminary plan for
deploying federal screeners to the airports; developed an initial
screening checkpoint design; and reviewed available and emerging
explosives detection technology. The report did not include all of the
information required in ATSA. For example, ATSA required specific
information such as the dates of installation of each system to screen
all checked baggage for explosives and the date each system is
operational.
Since TSA has issued the statutorily required action plan and progress
reports, it has continued to publicly report on its progress.
Specifically, TSA created a Web site that provides information for
customers and the public, including updates on its progress toward
meeting the deadlines in ATSA; speeches, statements, and testimonies by
TSA and DOT leadership; information on aviation security technology
such as explosives detection systems; fact sheets on TSA contractors;
frequently asked questions related to TSA‘s policies and procedures;
information for the traveling public; and information on employment
opportunities with TSA. For example, a private citizen could find out
when TSA would be hiring security screeners at her or his local
airport, how to apply for a position with TSA, and what objects are
prohibited and permitted to be carried onto an airplane.[Footnote 25]
In addition, TSA created an Office of Communications and Public
Information. The purpose of this office is to provide information to
the general public concerning TSA, its people, programs, policies, and
events. To facilitate this mission, the Office of Communications and
Public Information maintains a call center to receive and respond to
inquiries from the public. This office also performs a variety of other
functions. For example, the office develops statements, position
papers, policy releases, media alerts, and marketing plans to inform
and educate the public.
TSA has taken several actions that are intended to focus on customer
satisfaction and be responsive to customer concerns in delivering
critical and sensitive services. TSA established an ombudsman position
to, among other things, serve external customers. Specifically, TSA‘s
ombudsman is responsible for recommending and influencing systemic
change where necessary to improve TSA operations and customer service.
As of November 2002, TSA is recruiting to fill this position. We have
reported that through the impartial and independent investigation of
citizens‘ complaints, federal ombudsmen help agencies be more
responsive to the public, including people who believe their concerns
have not been dealt with fairly or fully through normal
channels.[Footnote 26] Ombudsmen may recommend ways to resolve
individual complaints or more systematic problems, and may help to
informally resolve disagreements between the agency and the public.
In addition, TSA is tracking performance on its customer service. For
example, TSA‘s primary performance measure for customer satisfaction is
the average wait time and percentage of passenger complaints per 1,000
passengers.[Footnote 27] Other measures to gauge customer satisfaction
include the percentage of flights delayed due to security issues, the
percentage of incidents/interventions per 1,000 passengers, the number
of weapons seized per 1,000 passengers, and the number of seats delayed
due to security issues, among others.
As part of its ongoing challenge to balance security against customer
service, TSA is reviewing existing security procedures in order to
eliminate those that do not enhance security or customer service. For
example, the Under Secretary testified that TSA has recently eliminated
two procedures to reduce customers‘ ’hassle factor“ at airports. In
August 2002, TSA allowed passengers to carry beverages in paper or foam
polystyrene containers through walk-through metal detectors and
prohibited screeners from asking passengers to drink or eat from any
containers of food or liquid as a security clearance procedure. TSA
also eliminated the requirement for the airlines to ask a series of
security-related questions to customers at check-in. In addition, TSA
recently lifted the existing rule that prohibits parking within 300
feet of airport terminals. TSA has replaced this rule with parking
security measures specific to each airport and linked to the national
threat level.
Lastly, TSA is also planning to create a customer satisfaction index
(CSI) for aviation operations, which includes collecting customer
information from national polls, passenger surveys at airports, the TSA
call center, and customer feedback at airports. TSA intends to use data
from the CSI to improve performance. As a first step, TSA conducted 12
focus groups with air travelers to help it understand the aspects of
customer experiences that influence satisfaction with and confidence in
aviation security. TSA learned from the focus groups that:
* the federalization of aviation security significantly increased the
confidence of passengers;
* key attributes that drive increased satisfaction and confidence
include attentiveness of screeners, thoroughness of the screening
process, professionalism of the workforce, and consistency of the
process across airports;
* wait time was not a significant driver of satisfaction, and
participants said they would be willing to wait longer if they thought
it would make them more secure;
* the lack of checked baggage screening reduces confidence; and:
* secondary screening processes are a significant driver of reduced
satisfaction.
The results of the focus groups will help TSA develop the passenger
surveys to be used to collect data for the CSI. TSA intends to
implement the CSI for aviation operations in 2003 and to expand the CSI
to include other stakeholders, such as airport operators, air carriers,
and customers of other modes of transportation.
Recommended Next Steps:
Fill the ombudsman position to facilitate responsiveness of TSA to the
public. To ensure TSA is as responsive to the public as possible and is
able to identify and resolve individual complaints and systematic
problems, TSA should fill its ombudsman position as soon as high
quality candidates can be identified.
Continue to develop and implement mechanisms, such as the CSI, to gauge
customer satisfaction and improve customer service. TSA has identified
customer satisfaction as one of its three annual performance goals. By
combining data on its service delivery from a number of sources, such
as the CSI, TSA will be able obtain a robust picture of customer
satisfaction, which can be used to improve performance. TSA should
complete the planning and developing of the CSI and begin its
implementation.
Concluding Observations:
Never has a results-oriented focus been more critical than today, when
the security of America‘s citizens depends so directly and immediately
on the results of many federal programs. TSA has faced immense
challenges in its first year of existence to build the infrastructure
of a large organization and meet mandated deadlines to federalize
aviation security. As TSA begins to take responsibility for security in
the maritime and surface modes of transportation, its current and
future challenge is to build, sustain, and institutionalize the
organizational capacity to help it achieve its current and future
goals. As TSA moves into the newly created DHS, TSA has an opportunity
to continue to foster a results-oriented culture. In this regard, TSA
has started to put in place the foundation of this results-oriented
culture through:
* leadership commitment to creating a high-performing organization,
* strategic planning to establish results-oriented goals and measures,
* performance management to promote accountability for results,
* collaboration and communication to achieve national outcomes, and:
* public reporting and customer service to build citizen confidence.
This foundation can serve TSA well in DHS and help TSA to focus on and
achieve its mission to protect the nation‘s transportation systems to
ensure freedom of movement for people and commerce.
Recommendations for Executive Action:
We recommend that the Secretary of Transportation, in conjunction with
the Under Secretary of Transportation for Security, continue TSA‘s
leadership commitment to creating a high-performing organization that
includes next steps to establish a performance agreement for the Under
Secretary that articulates how bonuses will be tied to performance and
to add expectations in performance agreements for top leadership to
foster the culture of a high-performing organization.
We recommend that the Under Secretary of Transportation for Security
take the next steps to continue to implement the following results-
oriented practices.
* Strategic planning to establish results-oriented goals and measures
that includes next steps to establish security performance goals and
measures for all modes of transportation as part of a strategic
planning process that involves stakeholders and to apply practices that
have been shown to provide useful information in agency performance
plans.
* Performance management to promote accountability for results that
includes next steps to build on the current performance agreements to
achieve additional benefits, to ensure the permanent performance
management system makes meaningful distinctions in performance, and to
involve employees in developing its performance management system.
* Collaboration and communication to achieve national outcomes that
includes next steps to define more clearly the collaboration and
communication roles and responsibilities of TSA‘s various offices and
to formalize roles and responsibilities among governmental entities for
transportation security.
* Public reporting and customer service to build citizen confidence
that includes next steps to fill the ombudsman position to facilitate
responsiveness of TSA to the public and to continue to develop and
implement mechanisms, such as the CSI, to gauge customer satisfaction
and improve customer service.
Agency Comments:
We provided drafts of this report in December 2002 to officials from
DOT, including TSA, for their review and comment. TSA‘s Director of
Strategic Management and Analysis provided oral comments on behalf of
DOT and TSA generally agreeing with the contents, findings, and
recommendations of the draft report. TSA‘s Director of Strategic
Management and Analysis provided minor technical clarifications and we
made those changes where appropriate. In addition, she provided updated
information on TSA‘s progress in its strategic planning, collaboration
and communication, and customer service since the completion of our
audit work. We added that information where appropriate.
As agreed with your office, unless you publicly announce its contents
earlier, we plan no further distribution of this report for 30 days
from the date of this letter. At that time, we will provide copies of
this report to the Secretary of Transportation, the Under Secretary of
Transportation for Security, the Director of the Office of Homeland
Security, the Director of the Office of Personnel Management, and the
Director of the Office of Management and Budget. We will also make
copies available to others upon request. In addition, the report will
be available at no charge on the GAO Web site at http://www.gao.gov.
Signed by:
If you have any questions concerning this report, please contact me or
Lisa Shames on (202) 512-6806. Marti Tracy was a key contributor to
this report.
J. Christopher Mihm
Director, Strategic Issues:
Signed by J. Christopher Mihm
[End of section]
Appendixes:
[End of section]
Appendix I: Objective, Scope, and Methodology:
The objective of our review was to describe the Transportation Security
Administration‘s (TSA) actions and plans for implementing the results-
oriented practices required in the Aviation and Transportation Security
Act (ATSA) and recommend next steps for TSA to build a results-oriented
organizational culture and to establish a positive control environment.
To identify results-oriented practices and recommend next steps, we
reviewed our models, guides, reports, and other products on strategic
planning and performance measurement, strategic human capital
management, transformation efforts, and other related areas. See
related GAO products listed at the end of this report for a list of our
products in these areas. We next analyzed ATSA in relation to our
products to identify any results-oriented practices that were
statutorily required in the legislation. In addition, we reviewed TSA
and Department of Transportation missions, performance goals and
measures, performance agreements, policies and procedures, and
organizational charts and other relevant documentation. To describe
TSA‘s status in implementing these results-oriented practices, we
interviewed 25 officials from various TSA offices including strategic
planning, human capital, training, budget, public affairs, and policy,
among others. We also visited Baltimore-Washington International
airport after it was transitioned to federal control to talk to front-
line managers about their responsibilities and specifically their role
in providing performance data to headquarters. We developed the
recommended next steps by referring to our models, guides, reports, and
other products on results-oriented practices and identifying additional
practices that were associated with and would further complement or
support current TSA efforts. We performed our work from May through
September 2002 in accordance with generally accepted government
auditing standards.
[End of section]
Related GAO Products:
[End of section]
The following list provides information on recent GAO products related
to the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), transportation
security, and the results-oriented practices discussed in this report.
These and other GAO products can be found at www.gao.gov.
TSA and Transportation Security:
Mass Transit: Federal Action Could Help Transit Agencies Address
Security Challenges. GAO-03-263. Washington, D.C.: December 13, 2002.
Port Security: Nation Faces Formidable Challenges in Making New
Initiatives Successful. GAO-02-993T. Washington, D.C.: August 5, 2002.
Aviation Security: Transportation Security Administration Faces
Immediate and Long-Term Challenges. GAO-02-971T. Washington, D.C.: July
25, 2002.
Aviation Security: Information Concerning the Arming of Commercial
Pilots. GAO-02-822R. Washington, D.C.: June 28, 2002.
Aviation Security: Deployment and Capabilities of Explosive Detection
Equipment. GAO-02-713C. Washington, D.C.: June 20, 2002. (CLASSIFIED):
Leadership Commitment to Creating a High-Performing Organization:
Highlights of a GAO Forum: Mergers and Transformation: Lessons Learned
for a Department of Homeland Security and Other Federal Agencies. GAO-
03-293SP. Washington, D.C.: November 14, 2002.
Highlights of a GAO Roundtable: The Chief Operating Officer Concept: A
Potential Strategy to Address Federal Governance Challenges. GAO-03-
192SP. Washington, D.C.: October 4, 2002. :
Managing for Results: Using Strategic Human Capital Management to Drive
Transformational Change. GAO-02-940T. Washington, D.C.: July 15,
2002. :
Managing for Results: Federal Managers‘ Views Show Need for Ensuring
Top Leadership Skills. GAO-01-127. Washington, D.C.: October 20, 2000.
Management Reform: Elements of Successful Improvement Initiatives. GAO/
T-GGD-00-26. Washington, D.C.: October 15, 1999.
Strategic Planning to Establish Results-Oriented Goals and Measures:
Performance Reporting: Few Agencies Reported on the Completeness and
Reliability of Performance Data. GAO-02-372. Washington, D.C.: April
26, 2002.
Agency Performance Plans: Examples of Practices That Can Improve
Usefulness to Decisionmakers. GAO/GGD/AIMD-99-69. Washington, D.C.:
February 26, 1999.
Agencies‘ Annual Performance Plans Under the Results Act: An Assessment
Guide to Facilitate Congressional Decisionmaking. GAO/GGD/AIMD-
10.1.18. Washington, D.C.: February 1998.
Managing For Results: Enhancing the Usefulness of GPRA Consultations
Between the Executive Branch and Congress. GAO/T-GGD-97-56. Washington,
D.C.: March 10, 1997. :
Agencies‘ Strategic Plans Under GPRA: Key Questions to Facilitate
Congressional Review. GAO/GGD-10.1.16. Washington, D.C.: May 1997. :
Executive Guide: Effectively Implementing the Government Performance
and Results Act. GAO/GGD-96-118. Washington, D.C.: June 1996.
Performance Management to Promote Accountability for Results:
Results-Oriented Cultures: Using Balanced Expectations to Manage Senior
Executive Performance. GAO-02-966. Washington, D.C.:
September 27, 2002.
Results-Oriented Cultures: Insights for U.S. Agencies from Other
Countries‘ Performance Management Initiatives. GAO-02-862. Washington,
D.C.: August 2, 2002.
A Model of Strategic Human Capital Management. GAO-02-373SP.
Washington, D.C.: March 15, 2002.
Human Capital: Practices That Empowered and Involved Employees. GAO-01-
1070. Washington, D.C.: September 14, 2001.
Managing for Results: Emerging Benefits From Selected Agencies‘ Use of
Performance Agreements. GAO-01-115. Washington, D.C.: October 30, 2000.
Human Capital: Using Incentives to Motivate and Reward High
Performance. GAO/T-GGD-00-118. Washington, D.C.: May 2, 2000.
Collaboration and Communication to Achieve National Outcomes:
Homeland Security: Effective Intergovernmental Coordination Is Key to
Success. GAO-02-1011T. Washington, D.C: August 20, 2002.
Homeland Security: Intergovernmental Coordination and Partnership Will
Be Critical to Success. GAO-02-900T. Washington, D.C.: July 2, 2002.
Managing for Results: Barriers to Interagency Coordination. GAO/GGD-00-
106. Washington, D.C.: March 29, 2000.
Managing For Results: Using the Results Act to Address Mission
Fragmentation and Program Overlap. GAO/AIMD-97-146. Washington, D.C.:
August 29, 1997. :
Public Reporting and Customer Service to Build Citizen Confidence:
Managing for Results: Using GPRA to Assist Oversight and
Decisionmaking. GAO-01-872T. Washington, D.C.: June 19, 2001.
Human Capital: The Role of Ombudsmen in Dispute Resolution.
GAO-01-466. Washington, D.C.: April 13, 2001.
Managing for Results: The Statutory Framework for Performance-Based
Management and Accountability. GAO/GGD/AIMD-98-52. Washington, D.C.:
January 28, 1998.
(450146):
FOOTNOTES
[1] U.S. General Accounting Office, Highlights of a GAO Forum: Mergers
and Transformation: Lessons Learned for a Department of Homeland
Security and Other Federal Agencies, GAO-03-293SP (Washington, D.C.:
Nov. 14, 2002).
[2] The Homeland Security Act of 2002, Public Law 107-296, Nov. 25,
2002, the legislation that created DHS, amends this requirement.
According to the legislation, if, in his discretion or at the request
of an airport, the Under Secretary of Transportation for Security
determines that TSA is not able to deploy explosives detection systems
required in ATSA by December 31, 2002, then for each airport for which
the Under Secretary makes this determination, the Under Secretary shall
submit to specific congressional committees a detailed plan for the
deployment of the number of explosives detection systems at that
airport necessary to meet the requirement as soon as practicable at
that airport but no later than December 31, 2003. Also, the Under
Secretary shall take all necessary action to ensure that alternative
means of screening all checked baggage are implemented until the
requirements have been met. TSA reports that as of December 31, 2002,
about 90 percent of all checked baggage will be screened using
explosives detection systems or explosives trace detection equipment
and the remaining checked baggage will be screened using alternative
means.
[3] U.S. General Accounting Office, Aviation Security: Transportation
Security Administration Faces Immediate and Long-Term Challenges, GAO-
02-971T (Washington, D.C.: July 25, 2002).
[4] ATSA requires that federal security screener personnel have a
satisfactory or better score on a federal security screening personnel
selection examination; be a U.S. citizen; possess a high school
diploma, general equivalency diploma, or experience that the Under
Secretary has determined to be sufficient for the individuals to
perform the duties of the position; have basic aptitudes and physical
abilities, including color perception, visual and aural acuity,
physical coordination, and motor skills; have English proficiency to
include reading, speaking, and writing in English; have the ability to
demonstrate daily a fitness for duty without impairment due to illegal
drugs, sleep deprivation, medication, or alcohol; successfully pass an
employment investigation background check (including a criminal history
record check); not pose a national security risk or threat; and
satisfactorily complete all initial, recurrent, and appropriate
specialized training required by the security program. The requirement
for U.S. citizenship was subsequently changed by Public Law 107-296,
Nov. 25, 2002, to include legal residents of the United States.
[5] Statement of Admiral James Loy, Acting Under Secretary of
Transportation for Security before the Commerce, Science, and
Transportation Committee, U.S. Senate on
September 10, 2002; Statement of Stephen J. McHale, Deputy Under
Secretary of Transportation for Management and Policy, Transportation
Security Administration, before the Committee on Government Reform,
U.S. House of Representatives in Atlanta, Georgia on August 7, 2002;
Statement of the Honorable Norman Y. Mineta, Secretary of
Transportation before the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation,
U.S. Senate on July 25, 2002; Statement of the Honorable Norman Y.
Mineta, Secretary of Transportation before the Subcommittee on
Aviation, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, U.S. House of
Representatives on July 23, 2002.
[6] Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Distributed
Public Governance: Agencies Authorities And Other Autonomous Bodies,
Preliminary Draft (Nov. 14, 2001).
[7] The Prime Minister‘s Office of Public Services Reform, Better
Government Services: Executive Agencies in the 21ST Century (London:
2002).
[8] U.S. General Accounting Office, Federal Student Aid: Additional
Management Improvements Would Clarify Strategic Direction and Enhance
Accountability, GAO-02-255 (Washington, D.C.: Apr. 30, 2002);
Performance-Based Organizations: Lessons Learned From the British Next
Steps Initiative, GAO/T-GGD-97-151 (Washington, D.C: July 8, 1997); and
Performance-Based Organizations: Issues for the Saint Lawrence Seaway
Development Corporation Proposal, GAO/GGD-97-74 (Washington, D.C: May
15, 1997).
[9] GAO-03-293SP.
[10] U.S. General Accounting Office, Highlights of a GAO Roundtable:
The Chief Operating Officer Concept: A Potential Strategy To Address
Federal Governance Challenges, GAO-03-192SP (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 4,
2002).
[11] The Baldrige performance excellence criteria are used as the basis
of the Baldrige Award, which is given by the President of the United
States to organizations that are judged to be outstanding in seven
criteria. The Congress established the award program to recognize
organizations for their achievements in quality and performance and to
raise awareness about the importance of quality and performance as a
competitive edge.
[12] The acting Under Secretary of Transportation for Security was
sworn in on November 25, 2002.
[13] U.S. General Accounting Office, Managing for Results: Emerging
Benefits From Selected Agencies‘ Use of Performance Agreements, GAO-01-
115 (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 30, 2000).
[14] U.S. General Accounting Office, Results-Oriented Cultures: Using
Balanced Expectations to Manage Senior Executive Performance, GAO-02-
966 (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 27, 2002).
[15] U.S. General Accounting Office, Agencies‘ Strategic Plans Under
GPRA: Key Questions to Facilitate Congressional Review, GAO/GGD-10.1.16
(Washington, D.C.: May 1997).
[16] U.S. General Accounting Office, Managing for Results: Enhancing
the Usefulness of GPRA Consultations Between the Executive Branch and
Congress, GAO/T-GGD-97-56 (Washington, D.C.: Mar. 10, 1997).
[17] U.S. General Accounting Office, Agency Performance Plans: Examples
of Practices That Can Improve Usefulness to Decisionmakers, GAO/GGD/
AIMD-99-69 (Washington, D.C.: Feb. 26, 1999) and Agencies‘ Annual
Performance Plans Under the Results Act: An Assessment Guide to
Facilitate Congressional Decisionmaking, GAO/GGD/AIMD-10.1.18
(Washington, D.C.: February 1998).
[18] U.S. General Accounting Office, A Model of Strategic Human Capital
Management, GAO-02-373SP (Washington, D.C.: Mar. 15, 2002).
[19] U.S. General Accounting Office, Results-Oriented Cultures:
Insights for U.S. Agencies from Other Countries‘ Performance Management
Initiatives, GAO-02-862 (Washington, D.C.: Aug. 2, 2002).
[20] GAO-01-115.
[21] U.S. General Accounting Office, FBI Reorganization: Initial Steps
Encouraging but Broad Transformation Needed, GAO-02-865T (Washington,
D.C.: June 21, 2002).
[22] U.S. General Accounting Office, Human Capital: Practices That
Empowered and Involved Employees, GAO-01-1070 (Washington D.C.: Sept.
14, 2001).
[23] Testimony of Admiral James Loy, Acting Under Secretary of
Transportation for Security before the Commerce, Science, and
Transportation Committee, U.S. Senate on July 25, 2002.
[24] The Homeland Security Act of 2002 reestablishes the Board within
DHS, replaces the representative from the Office of Homeland Security
with the Secretary of Homeland Security or the Secretary‘s designee,
and designates the chairperson of the Board as the Secretary of
Homeland Security.
[25] See www.tsa.gov.
[26] U.S. General Accounting Office, Environmental Protection: Issues
for Consideration in the Reorganization of EPA‘s Ombudsman Function,
GAO-02-859T (Washington, D.C.:
June 25, 2002).
[27] TSA reports that, at airports where data are available, it met
DOT‘s performance goal that 95 percent of passengers wait less than 10
minutes to pass through airport checkpoints through October 2002.
GAO‘s Mission:
The General Accounting Office, the investigative arm of Congress,
exists to support Congress in meeting its constitutional
responsibilities and to help improve the performance and accountability
of the federal government for the American people. GAO examines the use
of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; and provides
analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help Congress make
informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO‘s commitment to
good government is reflected in its core values of accountability,
integrity, and reliability.
Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony:
The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no
cost is through the Internet. GAO‘s Web site ( www.gao.gov ) contains
abstracts and full-text files of current reports and testimony and an
expanding archive of older products. The Web site features a search
engine to help you locate documents using key words and phrases. You
can print these documents in their entirety, including charts and other
graphics.
Each day, GAO issues a list of newly released reports, testimony, and
correspondence. GAO posts this list, known as ’Today‘s Reports,“ on its
Web site daily. The list contains links to the full-text document
files. To have GAO e-mail this list to you every afternoon, go to
www.gao.gov and select ’Subscribe to daily E-mail alert for newly
released products“ under the GAO Reports heading.
Order by Mail or Phone:
The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2
each. A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent
of Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or
more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent.
Orders should be sent to:
U.S. General Accounting Office
441 G Street NW,
Room LM Washington,
D.C. 20548:
To order by Phone:
Voice: (202) 512-6000:
TDD: (202) 512-2537:
Fax: (202) 512-6061:
To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs:
Contact:
Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov
Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470:
Public Affairs:
Jeff Nelligan, managing director, NelliganJ@gao.gov (202) 512-4800 U.S.
General Accounting Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 Washington, D.C.
20548:
