Project SAFECOM
Key Cross-Agency Emergency Communications Effort Requires Stronger Collaboration Gao ID: GAO-04-494 April 16, 2004One of the five priorities in the President's Management Agenda is the expansion of electronic government (e-government)--the use of Internet applications to enhance access to and delivery of government information and services. Project SAFECOM is one of the 25 initiatives sponsored by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to implement this agenda. Managed by the Department of Homeland Security, the project's goal is to achieve interoperability among emergencyresponse communications at all levels of government, while at the same time realizing cost savings. GAO assessed the government's progress in implementing Project SAFECOM.
While its overall objective of achieving communications interoperability among emergency response entities at all levels of government is a challenging task that will take many years to fully accomplish, Project SAFECOM, in its 2-year history, has made very limited progress in addressing this objective. OMB's e-government objectives of improving operating efficiency and achieving budgetary savings within federal programs have also been largely stymied. Two major factors have contributed to the project's limited progress: (1) lack of consistent executive commitment and support, and (2) an inadequate level of interagency collaboration. In its 2 1/2-year history, Project SAFECOM has had four different management teams in three different agencies. In recent months, the current project team has pursued various near-term activities that are intended to lay the groundwork for future interoperability, including establishing a governance structure that emphasizes collaboration with stakeholders and developing guidance for making grants that can be used to encourage public safety agencies to plan for interoperability. However, it has not yet reached written agreements with several of its major stakeholders on their roles in the project or established a stable funding mechanism. Until these shortcomings are addressed, the ability of Project SAFECOM to deliver on its promise of improved interoperability and better response to emergencies will remain in doubt.
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-04-494, Project SAFECOM: Key Cross-Agency Emergency Communications Effort Requires Stronger Collaboration
This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-04-494
entitled 'Project SAFECOM: Key Cross-Agency Emergency Communications
Effort Requires Stronger Collaboration' which was released on April 16,
2004.
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.
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed
in its entirety without further permission from GAO. Because this work
may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this
material separately.
Report to Congressional Requesters:
April 2004:
PROJECT SAFECOM:
Key Cross-Agency Emergency Communications Effort Requires Stronger
Collaboration:
[Hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-04-494]:
GAO Highlights:
Highlights of GAO-04-494, a report to congressional requesters
Why GAO Did This Study:
One of the five priorities in the President‘s Management Agenda is the
expansion of electronic government (e–government)”the use of Internet
applications to enhance access to and delivery of government
information and services. Project SAFECOM is one of the 25 initiatives
sponsored by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to implement
this agenda. Managed by the Department of Homeland Security, the
project‘s goal is to achieve interoperability among emergency-response
communications at all levels of government, while at the same time
realizing cost savings. GAO assessed the government‘s progress in
implementing Project SAFECOM.
What GAO Found:
While its overall objective of achieving communications
interoperability among emergency response entities at all levels of
government is a challenging task that will take many years to fully
accomplish, Project SAFECOM, in its 2-year history, has made very
limited progress in addressing this objective. OMB‘s e–government
objectives of improving operating efficiency and achieving budgetary
savings within federal programs have also been largely stymied.
Two major factors have contributed to the project‘s limited progress:
(1) lack of consistent executive commitment and support, and (2) an
inadequate level of interagency collaboration. In its 2 1/2-year
history, Project SAFECOM has had four different management teams in
three different agencies (see figure). In recent months, the current
project team has pursued various near-term activities that are intended
to lay the groundwork for future interoperability, including
establishing a governance structure that emphasizes collaboration with
stakeholders and developing guidance for making grants that can be used
to encourage public safety agencies to plan for interoperability.
However, it has not yet reached written agreements with several of its
major stakeholders on their roles in the project or established a
stable funding mechanism. Until these shortcomings are addressed, the
ability of Project SAFECOM to deliver on its promise of improved
interoperability and better response to emergencies will remain in
doubt.
Time Line of Major Project SAFECOM Management Changes
[See PDF for image]
[End of figure]
What GAO Recommends:
To enhance the ability of Project SAFECOM to improve communications
among first responders at all levels of government, GAO recommends that
the Secretary of Homeland Security direct the Under Secretary for
Science and Technology to complete agreements with the project‘s
federal and nonfederal stakeholders that define how they will
contribute to SAFECOM and measure program progress. Commenting on a
draft of this report, the department provided information about the
project‘s recent activities and noted that draft agreements had been
sent to all of the project‘s federal funding partners.
[End of section]
Contents:
Letter:
Results in Brief:
Background:
Leadership Changes and Shortcomings in Collaboration Have Hampered
SAFECOM's Progress:
Conclusions:
Recommendation for Executive Action:
Agency Comments and Our Evaluation:
Appendix:
Appendix I: Comments from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security:
Table:
Table 1: Status of Agreements Reached between Federal Agencies and
Project SAFECOM in Fiscal Years 2003 and 2004:
Figures:
Figure 1: Achieving Seamlessly Interoperable Communications among
Emergency Response Officials Is Challenging:
Figure 2: Time Line of Major Project SAFECOM Management Changes:
Abbreviations:
AGILE: Advanced Generation of Interoperability for Law Enforcement:
DHS: Department of Homeland Security:
FEMA: Federal Emergency Management Agency:
GAO: General Accounting Office:
OMB: Office of Management and Budget:
PSWN: Public Safety Wireless Network:
Letter April 16, 2004:
The Honorable Tom Davis:
Chairman, Committee on Government Reform:
House of Representatives:
The Honorable Adam H. Putnam:
Chairman, Subcommittee on Technology, Information Policy,
Intergovernmental Relations and the Census:
Committee on Government Reform:
House of Representatives:
The Honorable Christopher Shays:
Chairman, Subcommittee on National Security, Emerging Threats and
International Relations:
Committee on Government Reform:
House of Representatives:
As you know, the President has identified the expansion of e-
government[Footnote 1] as one of five priorities in his management
agenda; accordingly, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has
sponsored 25 initiatives to implement this agenda. This report
specifically reviews the progress made to date on one of these
initiatives, Project SAFECOM, which has an overall objective of
achieving national wireless communications interoperability[Footnote
2] among first responders and public safety systems at all levels of
government. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is currently the
federal managing partner for this project.
The 25 e-government initiatives sponsored by OMB, including Project
SAFECOM, were originally chosen on the basis of their (1) likelihood of
being deployed within 18 to 24 months, (2) value to citizens, and (3)
potential to improve federal agency efficiency. By achieving
interoperable public safety communications systems at all levels of
government, Project SAFECOM was intended to not only improve public
services in emergencies but also to realize cost savings.
Achieving communications interoperability among emergency personnel is
a complex and challenging task involving many different governmental
and nongovernmental entities and a range of inter-related technical
issues, such as how the communications spectrum is managed and how
local governments buy and upgrade equipment.[Footnote 3] Given the
importance of addressing this challenge, you requested that we assess
the progress of the federal government in implementing Project SAFECOM.
To achieve this objective, we reviewed documents outlining the
program's goals, plans, and achievements; its management structure and
objectives; its collaboration and funding strategy; and its selection
as one of the 25 OMB-sponsored electronic government initiatives. We
identified documented activities and achievements directly associated
with Project SAFECOM and assessed the extent to which they contributed
to fulfillment of the project's original objectives. We also discussed
the program's management with current and former program managers. Our
work was conducted at DHS in Washington, D.C., from December 2003
through March 2004, in accordance with generally accepted government
auditing standards.
Results in Brief:
After more than 2 years, Project SAFECOM has made very limited progress
in addressing its overall objective of achieving communications
interoperability among entities at all levels of government. In
addition, although the project was originally expected to realize
billions of dollars in federal budgetary savings by improving agency
efficiency, program officials no longer expect it to produce such
savings.
Two major factors have contributed to the project's limited progress.
First, Project SAFECOM has not received consistent executive commitment
and support, as evidenced by the fact that it has been assigned to
three different agencies and has had four management teams in its 2 1/
2-year history. Second, the project has not achieved the level of
collaboration necessary for a complex cross-government initiative of
this type. In recent months, the current project team has pursued
various near-term activities that are intended to lay the groundwork
for future interoperability, including establishing a governance
structure that emphasizes collaboration with stakeholders and
developing grant guidance for use with awards to public safety agencies
that encourage planning for interoperability. However, it has not yet
reached written agreements with several of its major stakeholders on
their roles in the project or established a stable funding mechanism.
Until these shortcomings are addressed, the ability of Project SAFECOM
to deliver on its promise of improved interoperability and better
response to emergencies will remain in question.
To enhance the ability of DHS to effectively collaborate with other
agencies involved with SAFECOM, and to better ensure that the project
receives stable funding, we are recommending that the Secretary of
Homeland Security take steps to complete written participation and
funding agreements with organizations representing all of the project's
stakeholders. Commenting on a draft of this report, DHS's GAO liaison
provided additional information about SAFECOM's activities since May
2003. The DHS official also noted activities under way that could
partially address our recommendation. However, until DHS reaches
agreements with all of SAFECOM's stakeholders, including nonfunding
federal partners and state and local partners, its ability to achieve
its objectives will continue to be hampered.
Background:
One of the key provisions of the President's Management Agenda,
released in 2001, is the expansion of electronic government. To
implement this provision, OMB sought to identify potential projects
that could be implemented to address the issue of multiple federal
agencies' performing similar tasks that could be consolidated through
e-government processes and technology. To accomplish this, OMB
established a team called the E-Government Task Force, which analyzed
the federal bureaucracy and identified areas of significant overlap and
redundancy in how federal agencies provide services to the public. The
task force noted that multiple agencies were conducting redundant
operations within 30 major functions and business lines in the
executive branch. For example, the task force found that 10 of the 30
federal agencies it studied had ongoing activities in the National
Security and Defense line of business, while 13 of the 30 agencies had
ongoing activities related to Disaster Preparation and Response
Management.
To address such redundancies, the task force evaluated a variety of
potential projects, focusing on collaborative opportunities to
integrate IT operations and simplify processes within lines of business
across agencies and around citizen needs. Twenty-five projects were
selected to lead the federal government's drive toward e-government
transformation and enhanced service delivery.[Footnote 4] In its e-
government strategy, published in February 2002,[Footnote 5] OMB
established a portfolio management structure to help oversee and guide
the selected initiatives. The five portfolios in this structure are
"government to citizen," "government to business," "government to
government," "internal efficiency and effectiveness," and "cross-
cutting." For each initiative, OMB designated a specific agency as the
managing partner responsible for leading the initiative, and also
assigned other federal agencies as partners in carrying out the
initiative.[Footnote 6] OMB initially approved Project SAFECOM as an e-
government initiative in October 2001. SAFECOM falls within the
government-to-government portfolio, due to its focus on accelerating
the implementation of interoperable public safety communications at all
levels of government.
As described in its 2002 e-government report, OMB planned for SAFECOM
to address critical shortcomings in efforts by public safety agencies
to achieve interoperability and eliminate redundant wireless
communications networks. OMB also stated that the project was expected
to save lives and lead to better-managed disaster response, as well as
result in billions of dollars in budget savings from "right-sized"
federal communications networks and links to state networks.[Footnote
7]
Lack of Interoperable Communications Hampers Emergency Response:
In order to effectively carry out their normal duties and respond to
extraordinary events such as natural disasters and domestic terrorism,
public safety agencies need the ability to communicate with those from
other disciplines and jurisdictions. However, the wireless
communications used today by many police officers, firefighters,
emergency medical personnel, and other public safety agencies do not
provide such capability, which hinders their ability to respond. For
example, emergency agencies responding to events such as the bombing of
the federal building in Oklahoma City and the attacks of September 11,
2001, experienced difficulties while trying to communicate with each
other.[Footnote 8]
Historically, the ability of first responders to communicate with those
from other disciplines and jurisdictions has been significantly
hampered because they often use different and incompatible radio
systems operating on different frequencies of the radio spectrum. In
February 2003, the National Task Force on Interoperability[Footnote 9]
estimated the number of emergency response officials in the United
States--also called first-responders--at about 2.5 million, working for
50,000 different agencies, such as law enforcement organizations, fire
departments, and emergency medical services. Response to an emergency
may involve any or all of these disciplines, as well as may additional
personnel from the transportation, natural resources, or public utility
sectors.
A complex array of challenges affects the government's ability to
address the emergency communications interoperability problem. In
addition to the vast number of distinct governmental entities involved,
the National Task Force on Interoperability identified a variety of
additional barriers, including the fragmentation and limited
availability of radio communications spectrum for dedicated use by
emergency personnel, incompatible and aging communications equipment,
limited equipment standards within the public safety community, and the
lack of appropriate life-cycle funding strategies.[Footnote 10] These
barriers have been long-standing, and fully overcoming them will not be
accomplished easily or quickly. Figure 1 summarizes the challenge of
achieving seamlessly interoperable communications among the many
personnel and organizations responding to an emergency.
Figure 1: Achieving Seamlessly Interoperable Communications among
Emergency Response Officials Is Challenging:
[See PDF for image]
[End of figure]
In some cases, first responders have resorted to stopgap measures to
overcome communications problems. For example, some may swap radios
with another agency at the scene of an emergency, others may relay
messages through a common communications center, and still others may
employ messengers to physically carry information from one group of
responders to another. However, these measures have not always been
adequate. The National Task Force on Interoperability identified
several cases where the inability to communicate across agencies and
jurisdictions in emergency situations was a factor in the loss of lives
or delayed emergency response.
Over the last decade, several federal programs have been established to
address various aspects of public safety communications and
interoperability. Among these was the Public Safety Wireless Network
(PSWN) program--originally developed as a joint undertaking of the
departments of Justice and the Treasury. PSWN's focus was to promote
state and local interoperability by establishing a technical resource
center, collecting and analyzing data related to the operational
environment of public safety communications, and initiating pilot
projects to test and refine interoperable technology. Another similar
initiative is the Advanced Generation of Interoperability for Law
Enforcement (AGILE) program, which is run by the Department of
Justice's National Institute of Justice. AGILE was created to
coordinate interoperability research within the Department of Justice
and with other agencies and levels of government. AGILE has four main
activities: (1) supporting research and development, (2) testing and
evaluating pilot technologies, (3) developing standards, and (4)
educating end users and policymakers.[Footnote 11]
With roughly 100 agencies that use radio communications in law
enforcement activities, the federal government also has a need for
interoperable communications, both internally among its own departments
and agencies and with state and local entities. This need has grown
since the attacks of September 11, 2001, which blurred the distinctions
between public safety and national security, and has placed federal
entities such as the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the U.S. Secret
Service, and the U.S. Coast Guard into broader public safety roles. As
a result, federal public safety personnel have an increased need to be
able to communicate directly with one another and with their state and
local counterparts.
Leadership Changes and Shortcomings in Collaboration Have Hampered
SAFECOM's Progress:
After more than 2 years, Project SAFECOM has made very limited progress
in addressing its overall objective of achieving communications
interoperability among entities at all levels of government. SAFECOM's
lack of progress has prevented it from achieving the benefits that were
expected of it as one of the 25 OMB-sponsored e-government initiatives,
including improving government efficiency and realizing budgetary
savings. Two factors have contributed significantly to the project's
limited results. First, there has been a lack of sustained executive
leadership, as evidenced by multiple shifts in program responsibility
and management staff. Second, the project has not achieved the level of
collaboration necessary for a complex cross-government initiative of
this type. In recent months, the current project team has pursued
various near-term activities that are intended to lay the groundwork
for future interoperability, including establishing a governance
structure that emphasizes collaboration with stakeholders and
developing grant guidance for use with awards to public safety agencies
that encourage planning for interoperability. However, it has not yet
reached written agreements with several of its major stakeholders on
their roles in the project or established a stable funding mechanism.
Until these weaknesses are addressed, SAFECOM's ability to achieve its
ultimate goal of improving interoperable communications will remain in
doubt.
SAFECOM Has Fulfilled Neither Its Program Goals nor the Overall E-
Government Objectives:
When the e-government initiative was launched in 2002, OMB identified
achieving public safety interoperability and reducing redundant
wireless communications infrastructures as the goal for Project
SAFECOM. Specifically, SAFECOM was to:
* achieve federal-to-federal interoperability throughout the nation,
* achieve federal-to-state/local interoperability throughout the
nation, and:
* achieve state/local interoperability throughout the nation.
As of March 2004, Project SAFECOM has made very limited progress in
addressing its overall objective of achieving communications
interoperability among entities at all levels of government.
Specifically, project officials could provide no specific examples of
cases where interoperability had been achieved as a direct result of
SAFECOM activities. Furthermore, program officials now estimate that a
minimum level of interoperability will not occur until 2008, and full
interoperability will not occur until 15 years later, in 2023.
OMB expected SAFECOM's value to citizens to include saved lives and
better managed disaster response; however, because of the program's
limited progress, these benefits have not yet been achieved. OMB also
forecasted that a reduction in the number of communications devices and
their associated maintenance and training would result in cost savings,
including "billions" in federal savings. Project officials are
currently conducting a study to estimate potential federal savings,
such as savings from reducing equipment purchases. However, according
to the program manager, federal savings in the billions of dollars are
not likely. He added, however, that state and local agencies could
realize significant savings if they could rely on Project SAFECOM to
conduct consolidated testing of equipment for compliance with
interoperability standards. Finally, on the issue of federal agency
efficiency, the project has achieved mixed results. Although SAFECOM
absorbed the projects and functions of PSWN, it has not consolidated
the functions of Project AGILE, despite the similarities between the
two programs' activities. According to SAFECOM's manager, the project
lacks the authority to consolidate additional programs.
Lack of Sustained Leadership Has Hampered SAFECOM's Progress:
As we have identified in previous work, successful organizations foster
a committed leadership team and plan for smooth staff
transitions.[Footnote 12] The transition to modern management requires
sustained, committed leadership on the part of agency executives and
managers. As in the case with well-run commercial entities, strong
leadership and sound management are central to the effective
implementation of public-sector policies or programs, especially
transformational programs such as the OMB-sponsored e-government
initiatives.
Instead of sustained management attention, SAFECOM has experienced
frequent changes in management, which have hampered its progress. OMB
originally designated the Department of the Treasury, which was already
involved in overseeing PSWN, as the project's managing partner. As
originally conceived, SAFECOM would build on PSWN's efforts to achieve
interoperability among state and local agencies by building an
interoperable federal communications network. However, in May 2002, the
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), which had an emergency-
response mission more closely aligned with SAFECOM's goals, was
designated managing partner. At that time, project staff focused their
efforts on securing funding and beginning outreach to stakeholders such
as the AGILE program and associations representing local emergency
agencies. By September 2002, the Federal Emergency Management Agency
had replaced its SAFECOM management team and shifted its implementation
strategy to focus on helping first responders make short-term
improvements in interoperability using vehicles such as demonstration
projects and research. At that time, development of an interoperable
federal first-responder communications system was seen as a long-term
goal.
Following the establishment of DHS,[Footnote 13] in May 2003, the
project was taken out of the Federal Emergency Management Agency and
assigned to the department's new Science and Technology Directorate
because of a perceived need to incorporate more technical expertise. At
that time, the project was assigned to a fourth management team. Figure
2 summarizes the major management changes that have occurred throughout
Project SAFECOM's history.
Figure 2: Time Line of Major Project SAFECOM Management Changes:
[See PDF for image]
[End of figure]
This lack of sustained, committed executive leadership hampered
SAFECOM's ability to produce results tied to its overall objective. The
changing of project teams approximately every 6 to 9 months has meant
that much of the effort spent on the project has been made repeatedly
to establish administrative structures, develop program plans, and
obtain stakeholder input and support. Additionally, according to the
project manager of PSWN, the changes in leadership have led to
skepticism among some of the project's stakeholders that the project's
goals can be met.
Inadequate Collaboration Has Also Hampered Progress, Although Recent
Actions May Promote Success in the Future:
The ability of Project SAFECOM to meet its overall objective has also
been hampered by inadequate collaboration with the project's
stakeholders. As an umbrella program meant to coordinate efforts by
various federal, state, and local agencies to achieve interoperability,
SAFECOM's success relies on cross-agency collaboration. As we have
previously reported, cross-organizational initiatives such as this
require several conditions to be successful, including: (1) a
collaborative management structure; (2) clear agreements among
participants on purpose, outcomes, and performance measures; (3) shared
contribution of resources; and (4) a common set of operating
standards.[Footnote 14]
While the project's current management team has made progress in
developing a collaborative management structure, SAFECOM does not yet
have other necessary structures or agreements in place. Its previous
management teams worked on creating a collaborative management
structure by, for example, seeking input from stakeholders and drafting
a memorandum of understanding among the departments of Homeland
Security, Justice, and the Treasury, but these activities were not
completed at the time of the transition to DHS.
Since taking control of the project in May 2003, Project SAFECOM has
pursued a number of activities that stress collaboration and are
intended to lay the groundwork for future interoperability, according
to its current manager. Specifically, DHS established a governance
structure for the project in November 2003 that includes executive and
advisory committees to formalize collaboration with stakeholders and
provides a forum for significant input on goals and priorities by
federal agencies and state and local representatives. The department
has also conducted several planning conferences meant to identify
project stakeholders to reach agreements with them on the program's
purpose and intended outcomes. One such conference, in December 2003,
provided an opportunity for stakeholders to modify program goals and
the tasks planned to address them. The program manager also cited a
statement of support by several organizations representing local first
responders as evidence that the current structure is achieving
effective collaboration. In addition, project officials are working
with the Commerce Department to catalog all existing federal agencies
that use public safety communications systems and networks.
Further, program officials noted that the SAFECOM project developed
grant guidance that promotes interoperability by requiring public
safety agencies to describe specific plans for achieving improved
interoperability when applying for grants that fund communications
equipment. This guidance represents a positive step, but it does not
provide public safety agencies with complete specifications for
achieving interoperability. Specifically, the guidance strongly
encourages applicants to ensure that purchased equipment complies with
a technical standard for interoperable communications equipment that
has not yet been finalized and that, according to program officials,
addresses only part of the interoperability problem. This guidance has
already been incorporated into grants awarded by the Department of
Justice's Office of Community Oriented Policing Services and the
Federal Emergency Management Agency.
However, Project SAFECOM has not yet fulfilled other conditions
necessary for successful cross-government collaboration. First,
project officials have not signed memorandums of agreement with all of
the project's stakeholders. As shown in table 1, agreements were
completed on funding or program participation with five agencies in
fiscal year 2003.[Footnote 15] However, DHS did not reach a 2003
agreement with the Department of the Interior or the Department of
Justice, both agencies designated as funding partners. According to the
SAFECOM program manager, the Department of the Interior has not fully
determined the extent of its expected participation in the program, and
the Department of Justice had to delay its agreement until it received
approval to reprogram the necessary funds. Justice has reached an
agreement with DHS for fiscal year 2004, but as of March 2004, none of
the other funding partners have signed agreements covering the current
year. In addition, although other federal agencies and the
organizations representing state and local stakeholders are represented
in SAFECOM's governing structure and some have expressed support for
the program, none has reached an agreement with DHS that commits it to
provide nonfinancial assistance to the project. Finally, those
agreements that were in place did not address key program parameters,
such as specific program outcomes or performance measures. While the
program's stakeholders agreed to a broad set of goals and expected
outcomes at the December planning meeting, as of March 2004, there was
no agreement on performance measures for them. According to the program
manager, new performance measures were under development.
Table 1: Status of Agreements Reached between Federal Agencies and
Project SAFECOM in Fiscal Years 2003 and 2004:
Agency: Department of Agriculture;
Type of agreement: Funding and program participation;
Period of agreement: Fiscal year 2003.
Agency: Department of Defense;
Type of agreement: Funding and program participation;
Period of agreement: Fiscal year 2003.
Agency: Department of Energy;
Type of agreement: Funding only;
Period of agreement: Fiscal year 2003.
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services;
Type of agreement: Funding and program participation;
Period of agreement: Fiscal year 2003.
Agency: Department of Justice;
Type of agreement: Funding and program participation;
Period of agreement: Fiscal year 2004.
Agency: Department of the Interior;
Type of agreement: None completed;
Period of agreement: [Empty].
Agency: Department of the Treasury;
Type of agreement: Funding only;
Period of agreement: Fiscal year 2003.
Source: DHS.
[End of table]
Second, while effective collaboration requires the sharing of
resources, DHS had not received all of the funding it planned to
receive from its federal partners. During fiscal year 2003, SAFECOM
received only about $17 million of the $34.9 million in funding OMB
allocated to it from these funding partners. About $1.4 million of that
$17 million was not received until late September 2003, when only a
week remained in the fiscal year. According to program officials, these
funding shortfalls and delays resulted in the program's having to delay
some of the tasks it had intended to complete, such as identifying the
project's major milestones.
Finally, although DHS has not yet developed a common set of operating
standards for SAFECOM, efforts to identify technical standards are
underway, according to program officials. For example, program
officials from SAFECOM and AGILE plan to accelerate the development of
an incomplete standard for interoperable communications equipment that
is cited in SAFECOM's grants guidance. Program officials are also
developing a document describing the requirements for public safety
communications interoperability, which is intended to form the basis
for future technical development efforts. SAFECOM also is supporting
several demonstration projects and vendor presentations to publicize
currently available interoperable systems.
The absence of many aspects of successful collaboration could hamper
SAFECOM officials' ability to achieve the program's goals. For example,
the lack of written agreements with some stakeholders raises concerns
about the extent to which those agencies are willing to contribute to
the program's success. Also, until performance measures and technical
standards are finalized and implemented, it will be difficult to
determine the extent of any progress. Should such difficulties continue
to hamper the program's progress in fulfilling its overall goals,
solutions to the problems of public safety interoperability will be
further delayed.
Conclusions:
While the lack of rapid progress in improving interoperable
communications among first responders may be understandable,
considering the complexity of the issues and the number of entities
involved, federal efforts to address the issue as an e-government
initiative have been unnecessarily delayed by management instability
and weaknesses in collaboration. Since taking over management of the
project in May 2003, DHS has shown greater executive commitment to the
project than had previously been demonstrated. The agency has
determined that a long-term, intergovernmental effort will be needed to
achieve the program's overall goal of improving emergency response
through broadly interoperable first-responder communications systems,
and it has taken steps to lay the groundwork for this by creating a
governance structure allowing for significant stakeholder input on
program management. However, DHS has made less progress in establishing
written agreements with other government agencies on responsibilities
and resource commitments. The DHS effort could experience difficulties
if it does not reach such agreements, which have proven essential to
the success of other similarly complex, cross-agency programs.
Recommendation for Executive Action:
To enhance the ability of Project SAFECOM to improve communications
among emergency personnel from federal, state, local, and tribal
agencies, we recommend that the Secretary of Homeland Security direct
the Under Secretary for Science and Technology to complete written
agreements with the project's identified stakeholders, including
federal agencies and organizations representing state and local
governments. These agreements should define the responsibilities and
resource commitments that each of those organizations will assume and
include specific provisions that measure program performance.
Agency Comments and Our Evaluation:
In written comments on a draft of this report, which are reprinted in
appendix I, the Department of Homeland Security's GAO liaison agreed
that the lack of interoperable communications hampers emergency
response. The official also provided additional information about
activities undertaken by the current program management team since May
2003, including the implementation of a management structure that
includes state and local stakeholders, the ongoing development of
technical standards, and development of a database to track federal
interoperability efforts. We discuss these activities in our report.
Regarding our draft recommendation, this official indicated that DHS
has provided draft agreements to SAFECOM's federal funding partners,
and added that DHS supports the need for further delineation of
responsibilities and funding in future MOUs. Until DHS reaches specific
agreements with all of SAFECOM's stakeholders, including nonfunding
federal partners and state and local partners, its ability to achieve
its objectives will continue to be hindered.
The official also stated that DHS agrees that performance measures are
essential for adequate program management, and added that SAFECOM had
developed a strategic performance management tool. However, DHS did not
provide any evidence that SAFECOM had determined the specific
performance measures that will be used to assess progress against its
goals, or the process for applying them. Until such measures are
implemented, program managers will be unable to determine the impact of
their efforts. We also made technical corrections, as appropriate, in
response to DHS's comments.
We plan to send copies to this report to the Ranking Minority Member,
House Committee on Government Reform; the Ranking Minority Member,
Subcommittee on Technology, Information Policy, Intergovernmental
Relations and the Census; and the Ranking Minority Member, Subcommittee
on National Security, Emerging Threats and International Relations. In
addition, we will provide copies to the Secretary of Homeland Security
and the Director of OMB. Copies will also be available without charge
on GAO's Web site at [Hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov].
Signed by:
Should you have any questions concerning this report, please call me at
(202) 512-6240 or John de Ferrari, Assistant Director, at (202) 512-
6335. We can also be reached by e-mail at [Hyperlink, koontzl@gao.gov]
and [Hyperlink, deferrarij@gao.gov], respectively. Other key
contributors to this report were Felipe Colón, Jr., Neil Doherty,
Michael P. Fruitman, Jamie Pressman, and James R. Sweetman, Jr.
Signed by:
Linda D. Koontz:
Director, Information Management Issues:
[End of section]
Appendixes:
Appendix I: Comments from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security:
U.S. Department of Homeland Security:
April 2, 2004:
Norman J. Rabkin:
Managing Director, Homeland Security and Justice Issues:
U.S. General Accounting Office:
441 G Street, NW
Washington DC 20548:
Re: GAO Draft Report: Key Cross-Agency Emergency Communications Effort
Requires Stronger Collaboration, GAO-04-494 (310398):
Dear Mr. Rabkin, et al:
On March 19, 2004, the General Accounting Office (GAO) presented the
Department of Homeland Security with its draft report, Key Cross Agency
Emergency Communications Effort Requires Stronger Collaboration, GAO-
04-494. As described in the report, GAO was asked to assess the
progress made by Project SAFECOM in accomplishing its goals and the
barriers to future progress.
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) fully agrees with GAO's
statement that a lack of interoperable communications hampers emergency
response. Inadequate and unreliable wireless communications have been
issues plaguing public safety organizations for decades. In many cases,
agencies have been unable to perform their mission critical duties
because they were unable to share vital voice or data information via
radio with other jurisdictions in day-to-day operations and in
emergency response to incidents including acts of terrorism and natural
disasters. SAFECOM is the first national initiative created
specifically to address this problem.
The SAFECOM Program works with existing federal communications
initiatives and key public safety stakeholders to coordinate the
development of better technologies and create processes to support the
cross jurisdictional and cross-disciplinary coordination of existing
systems and future networks. SAFECOM was established as the umbrella
program within the federal government to help local, tribal, state, and
federal public safety agencies improve public safety response through
more effective and efficient interoperable wireless communications,
which SAFECOM defines as the ability of public safety agencies to talk
across disciplines and jurisdictions via radio communications systems,
exchanging voice and/or data with one another on demand, in real time,
when needed and as authorized.[NOTE 1]
Unlike many other e-Government (e-Gov) initiatives, the solution to the
problems of public safety communications and communications
interoperability-short of a major overhaul of how spectrum is allocated
and managed in this country, technology is implemented, and agency
budget cycles are coordinated-is not a single nor even a clear set of
discrete tasks. There are no simple solutions. Instead, the
identification and orchestration of many programs over time is required
- coordination being provided for the nation for the first time by the
SAFECOM program.
SAFECOM has taken a systematic approach towards addressing the problem,
beginning in May 2003 when the program was transferred to the
Directorate for Science and Technology (S&T) at DHS.
* Identify the problem, recognizing that it is a simple problem with
many complex elements. SAFECOM recognizes that before interoperability
can occur, reliable, mission-critical, agency-specific communications
are first necessary for public
safety agencies. SAFECOM subsequently is addressing the intricately
related issues of public safety communications and communications
interoperability. SAFECOM also recognizes that more than ninety percent
of the public safety communications infrastructure is owned and
operated at the local and state level. Addressing the problems of
communications interoperability will hence require focus on the local
and state public safety and government communities. In response to this
revised focus of the current management team that took over the program
nine months ago, SAFECOM realized the need to earn the trust and
participation of the national associations representing local and state
public safety and government officials. A governance structure was
hence developed and implemented by SAFECOM to incorporate these local
and state stakeholders. This governance structure also includes federal
emergency response providers, and SAFECOM continues to support the
Federal Partnership for Interoperable Communications (FPIC)[NOTE 2] as
a means of addressing the unique issues related to federal
interoperability. Evidence of the success of this strategy can be seen
by the recent letter of support developed by ten of the major local and
state public safety associations.
* Work with the leadership of the public safety community to gather
comprehensive needs and requirements in order to develop appropriate
approaches to solutions, referred to as work packages. SAFECOM is about
to release the first ever comprehensive Public Safety Communications
Statement of Requirements (SoR) outlining what public safety needs to
effectively communicate in their response to emergencies. This SoR was
developed in full partnership with the National Public Safety
Telecommunications Council (NPSTC) and the Department of Justice's
AGILE Program [NOTE 3] and is the first nationally recognized statement
of what first responders need to fix interoperability.
* In partnership with the leadership of the public safety community,
develop a process by which to systematically attach the problems and
needs to programmatic solutions. SAFECOM s currently drafting a plan
for a technical
architectural framework for public safety communications. The strategy
for the plan is centered on the development of an architectural
framework that satisfies the real-world requirements of public safety
responders. The framework outlines WHAT the overall structured approach
is for facilitating interoperability. Functional standards then define
the details of the structure, and indicate HOW the architecture (and
its components) will operate.
* Identify current initiatives addressing this problem and develop a
coordination strategy to leverage existing work while decreasing
unnecessary duplication of efforts. Beginning at the National Summit on
Public Safety Communications and Interoperability in June 2003,
SAFECOM, in partnership with the National Institute of Standards and
Technology and the AGILE Program, developed an extensive database - the
first ever - on federal programs and national organization efforts
aimed at improving public safety communications at all levels of
government. The resulting survey, assessment, and database allow
SAFECOM to effectively identify and coordinate relevant programs.
* Implement the solutions strategy to develop short-and long-term
projects to address public safety communications and communications
interoperability needs. In December 2003, SAFECOM hosted its first
complete stakeholder strategy meeting in San Diego, California. The
resulting strategy outlined short-and long-term projects that the
stakeholders felt were absolutely necessary for SAFECOM to pursue in
order to improve interoperability. SAFECOM has since obligated
resources for each of these projects in its budget, but is still
waiting to receive funding from its federal funding partners.
These accomplishments are just a few examples of the successful steps
SAFECOM has taken over the course of the last nine months. In addition,
SAFECOM has reduced unnecessary duplication of effort across federal
programs through the establishment of the Federal Interagency
Coordination Council (FICC) for Public Safety Communications
Interoperability. The FICC specifically addresses standards, technical
assistance, and funding consistency across programs that support public
safety communications issues. An example of FICC success can be seen in
its promulgation of consensus grant guidance. In an effort to
coordinate the way in which federally appropriated grant funding for
public safety communications is allocated while maximizing the prospect
for interoperable communications, SAFECOM developed general grant
criteria with input from the public safety community in FY2003. In
partnership with the Department of Justice Office of Community Oriented
Policing Services and the Federal Emergency Management Agency, this
grant guidance outlined eligibility for grants, the purposes for
which grants could be used, and guidelines for implementing a wireless
communication system. The consolidated criteria helped to maximize the
efficiency with which public safety communications related grant
dollars were allocated and spent. FICC-revised grant guidance will
again be included in the grant allocation process in FY04, continuing
to prevent the type of stove-piped communications that have
historically plagued public safety communications systems.
GAO's Recommendation for Executive Action:
To enhance the ability of Project SAFECOM to improve communications
among emergency personnel from federal, state, local and tribal
agencies, we recommend that the Secretary of Homeland Security direct,
the Under Secretary for Science and Technology to complete written
agreements with the project's identified stakeholders, including
federal agencies and organizations representing state and local
governments. These agreements should define the responsibilities and
resource commitments that each of those organizations will assume and
include specific provisions measuring program performance. [NOTE 4]
Specific DHS Corrective Action to GAO Recommendations:
Written agreements in the form of Memorandums of Understanding (MOUs)
have been developed and provided to all of SAFECOM's federal funding
partner agencies. Specifically, the GAO Report questioned the status of
an agreement between DHS and the Department of Defense, commenting that
"DHS officials stated such an agreement was in lace for fiscal year
2003 but were unable to locate a copy of the agreement." Since the
drafting of the GAO report, the signed Memorandum of Agreement between
the Departments of Homeland Security and Defense for fiscal year 203
has been located. A copy has been provided to GAO.
2. Although these MOUs already define the responsibilities and resource
commitments that the programs share, DHS supports the recommendation
for further delineation of responsibilities and funding amounts in
future MOUs.
SAFECOM, through the establishment of a Federal Funding Partners
working group that meets quarterly, has developed MOU templates
outlining specifics that all agencies - not just funding partners -
need to address. SAFECOM has provided FY 2004 MOUs to all of its
funding partners and is currently awaiting responses.
3. DHS also agrees that the development of metrics to track SAFECOM's
progress and successes is essential for adequate program management. To
this end, SAFECOM has already developed a Balanced Scorecard to serve
as the program's
strategic performance management tool. By establishing objectives
across four perspectives and linking measures to these objectives, the
Balanced Scorecard will be the instrument by which the program measures
its success and maintains accountability. Quarterly Strategic Review
sessions will be held to evaluate the program's progress and to provide
recommendations based on the measure outcomes. A copy of the Balanced
Scorecard has been provided to GAO.
Conclusion:
SAFECOM will continue to reach out to its stakeholders to ensure their
support and dedication to the program. In the past nine months, SAFECOM
has proven that its stakeholder relationships are key to keeping the
program focused on the priority issues for promoting increased public
safety communications and interoperability. Its accomplishments to date
are a testament to SAFECOM's dedication to its mission and capabilities
for success. With adequate and consistent resources, DHS believes that
SAFECOM will continue to be an effective program in addressing
interoperability while reducing the unnecessary duplication of federal
efforts and resource expenditure.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this report and for your
continued support of the Department and its critical mission. If you
have any questions regarding this matter, I am available to meet or
discuss with you or your staff.
Sincerely,
Signed for:
Anna F. Dixon
DHS GAO Liaison:
[End of section]
NOTES:
[1] This definition of public safety communications interoperability
differs from that listed in footnote 2 of the GAO report, "Project
SAFECOM Key Cross-Agency Emergency Communications Effort Requires
Stronger Collaboration.":
[2] FPIC was formerly known as the Federal Law Enforcement Wireless
Users Group (FLEWUG), and represents the federal communications user
community.
[3] The SoR is set to be released on March 22, 2004. It was tentatively
approved by NPSTC on March 10, 2004, pending additional review by the
Regional Planning Committees. The SoR is considered to be a
`living document,' that will require additional review as new user
groups are identified and as technology progresses. The current
document is version 1.0.
[4] As stated on page 18 of the GAO report.
[5] AS STATED ON PAGE 15 OF THE GAO REPORT.
(310398):
FOOTNOTES
[1] E-government (electronic government) refers to the use of
information technology (IT), particularly Web-based Internet
applications, to enhance the access to and delivery of government
information and service to citizens, business partners, and employees
and among agencies at all levels of government.
[2] Interoperability is the ability of two or more systems or
components to exchange information and to use the information that has
been exchanged.
[3] For a more detailed discussion of the challenges in achieving
communications interoperability, see U.S. General Accounting Office,
Homeland Security: Challenges in Achieving Interoperable
Communications for First Responders, GAO-04-231T (Washington, D.C.:
Nov. 6, 2003).
[4] For a detailed assessment of the selection process, see U.S.
General Accounting Office, Electronic Government: Selection and
Implementation of the Office of Management and Budget's 24 Initiatives,
GAO-03-229 (Washington, D.C.: Nov. 22, 2002). In 2002, a decision was
made to separate one initiative into two individual projects, resulting
in the current count of 25 projects.
[5] Office of Management and Budget, E-Government Strategy (Washington,
D.C.: Feb. 27, 2002).
[6] Federal agencies that OMB assigned as partners in the Project
SAFECOM initiative include the Departments of Agriculture, Defense,
Energy, Health and Human Services, Interior, Justice, and the Treasury.
[7] For an assessment of the overall management and oversight of the
initiatives, see U.S. General Accounting Office, Electronic Government:
Success of the Office of Management and Budget's 25 Initiatives Depends
on Effective Management and Oversight, GAO-03-495T (Washington, D.C.:
Mar. 13, 2003).
[8] See, for example, the testimony presented at a joint hearing of two
Subcommittees of the House Committee on Government Reform (National
Security, Emerging Threats and International Relations and Technology,
Information Policy, Intergovernmental Relations and the Census) held on
November 6, 2003.
[9] The National Task Force on Interoperability--made up of state and
local officials, public safety officials, and members from 18 national
associations--met several times in 2002 to discuss emergency
communications interoperability.
[10] The findings of the National Task Force on Interoperability are
summarized in Department of Homeland Security, Current Status of
Government's Response to Interoperability Efforts and SAFECOM Program:
A Report to the Committee on Appropriations of the United States House
of Representatives (Washington, D.C.: February 2004).
[11] In August 2003, PSWN was merged into the SAFECOM project. AGILE
continues to operate as a program of the Department of Justice.
[12] See U.S. General Accounting Office, Electronic Government:
Potential Exists for Enhancing Collaboration on Four Initiatives, GAO-
04-6 (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 10, 2003).
[13] The Federal Emergency Management Agency became part of the
Department of Homeland Security in March 2003.
[14] GAO-04-6.
[15] Participation agreements between DHS and the funding partners
describe the responsibilities of each party. For example, the funding
partners agreed to attend meetings, provide funding, and coordinate
SAFECOM activities with their component agencies, while DHS agreed to
provide periodic reports and exchange information with OMB.
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 e-mail alerts" under the "Order
GAO Products" 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:
