Homeland Security: The Status of Strategic Planning in the
National Capital Region (29-MAR-06, GAO-06-559T).
Congress asked GAO to provide comments on the National Capital
Region's (NCR) strategic plan. GAO reported on NCR strategic
planning, among other issues, in May 2004 and September 2004,
testified before the House Committee on Government Reform in June
2004, and testified before the Subcommittee on Oversight of
Government Management, the Federal Workforce, and the District of
Columbia in July 2005. In this testimony, we addressed completion
of the NCR strategic plan, national and regional priorities, and
strengthening any plan that is developed.
-------------------------Indexing Terms-------------------------
REPORTNUM: GAO-06-559T
ACCNO: A50337
TITLE: Homeland Security: The Status of Strategic Planning in
the National Capital Region
DATE: 03/29/2006
SUBJECT: Emergency preparedness
Homeland security
Performance measures
Strategic planning
District of Columbia
Maryland
National Capital Regions
Virginia
******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a **
** GAO Product. **
** **
** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
** figure captions are reproduced. Tables are included, but **
** may not resemble those in the printed version. **
** **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed **
** document's contents. **
** **
******************************************************************
GAO-06-559T
* Summary
* Background
* NCR Has Not Produced a Strategic Plan
* NCR Strategic Planning Should Reflect Both National and Regi
* A Completed NCR Strategic Plan Could be Strengthened in Seve
* Initiative Development to Match Goal Objectives
* Performance Measure and Target Improvements
* Timeframes
* Resources and Investments
* Organizational Contributions and Integration and Implementat
* Concluding Observations
* Contacts and Acknowledgments
* GAO's Mission
* Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony
* Order by Mail or Phone
* To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs
* Congressional Relations
* Public Affairs
United States Government Accountability Office
Testimony
GAO
Before the Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, the Federal
Workforce, and the District of Columbia; Committee on Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs, U.S. Senate
For Release on Delivery Expected at 2:30 p.m. EST Wednesday, March 29,
2006
HOMELAND SECURITY
The Status of Strategic Planning in the National Capital Region
Statement of William O. Jenkins, Jr. Director, Homeland Security and Justice
Issues
GAO-06-559T
HOMELAND SECURITY
The Status of Strategic Planning in the National Capital Region
What GAO Found
Among its other statutory responsibilities, the Office of National Capital
Region Coordination is charged with coordinating with NCR agencies and
other entities to ensure adequate planning, information sharing, training,
and execution of domestic preparedness activities among these agencies and
entities. In May 2004 and again in July 2005, we recommended that the
ONCRC complete a regional strategic plan to establish goals and priorities
for enhancing first responder capacities that could be used to guide the
effective use of federal funds.
Although work has continued on a NCR strategic plan for the past 2 years,
a completed plan is not yet available. According to NCR officials,
completion of the plan requires integrating information and analyses from
other documents completed or nearly completed, and a plan may not be
available before September or October of 2006.
The NCR's strategic planning should reflect both national and regional
priorities and needs. The majority of the individual documents ONCRC
provided to us as representing components for its strategic plan were
developed in response to Department of Homeland Security fiscal year 2006
grant guidance to support the NCR's fiscal year 2006 grant application. It
is appropriate and necessary that the NCR address national priorities, but
the NCR's strategic plan should not be primarily driven by these
requirements. It should integrate national and regional priorities and
needs.
A well-defined, comprehensive strategic plan for the NCR is essential for
assuring that the region is prepared for the risks it faces. A November
18, 2005, NCR PowerPoint presentation describes the NCR's vision, mission,
goals, objectives, and priority initiatives. That presentation includes
some elements of a good strategic plan, including some performance
measures, target dates, and cost estimates. A completed NCR strategic plan
should build on the current elements that the NCR has developed and
strengthen others based on the desirable characteristics of a national
strategy that may also be useful for a regional approach to homeland
security strategic planning. As it completes its strategic plan, the NCR
could focus on strengthening (1) initiatives that will accomplish
objectives under the NCR strategic goals, (2) performance measures and
targets that indicate how the initiatives will accomplish identified
strategic goals, (3) milestones or timeframes for initiative
accomplishment, (4) information on the resources and investments for each
initiative, and (5) organizational roles, responsibilities, and
coordination, and integration and implementation plans.
United States Government Accountability Office
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee:
I appreciate the opportunity to be here today to discuss the National
Capital Region's (NRC) strategic planning. The NCR is an area comprising
the District of Columbia and surrounding counties and cities in the states
of Maryland and Virginia. The NCR is the only area in the nation that has
a statutorily designated regional coordinator-the Office of the National
Capital Region Coordination (ONCRC) under the Department of Homeland
Security (DHS).
One ONCRC mandate is to coordinate with NCR agencies and other entities to
ensure adequate planning, information sharing, training, and execution of
domestic preparedness activities among these agencies and entities. We
reported on NCR strategic planning, among other issues, in May 2004 and
September 2004, testified before the House Committee on Government Reform
in June 2004, and testified before your committee in July 2005. 1 In our
previous work, we provided recommendations regarding NCR strategic
planning and the preparation of a strategic plan.
My statement today provides our preliminary observations on documents
provided by ONCRC that describe current NCR strategic planning efforts.
Specifically, I will comment on completion of the strategic plan, the
impact of federal homeland security grant program requirements on NCR
strategic planning, and observations on strengthening any plan that is
developed.
We have only recently received new documentation related to the NCR's
strategic plan and its development from the ONCRC and have not had an
opportunity to review them fully. Consequently, my remarks are necessarily
preliminary and are based on our limited review and analysis of the
documents. We did our work in accordance with generally accepted
government auditing standards.
GAO, Homeland Security: Management of First Responder Grants in the
National Capital Region Reflects the Need for Coordinated Planning and
Performance Goals, GAO-04-433 ( Washington, D.C.: May 28, 2004); Homeland
Security: Coordinated Planning and Standards Needed to Better Manage First
Responder Grants in the National Capital Region, GAO-04-904T ( Washington,
D.C.: June 24, 2004); Homeland Security: Effective Regional Coordination
Can Enhance Emergency Preparedness, GAO-04-1009 (Washington, D.C.:
September 15, 2004); Homeland Security: Managing First Responder Grants to
Enhance Emergency Preparedness in the National Capital Region, GAO-05-889T
( Washington, D.C.: July 14, 2005).
Summary
In May 2004 and again in July 2005 we recommended that the Secretary of
Department of Homeland Security work with the NCR jurisdictions to develop
a coordinated strategic plan to establish goals and priorities to enhance
first responder capacities that can be used to guide the use of federal
emergency preparedness funds-a recommendation that the department agreed
to implement. Although work has continued on a NCR strategic plan for the
past 2 years, a completed plan is not yet available to guide decision
making such as assessment of NCR's strategic priorities and funding needs
and aid for NCR jurisdictions in ascertaining how the NCR strategic plan
complements their individual or combined efforts. ONCRC officials have
explained that integration of additional information such as from an
Emergency Management Accreditation Program (EMAP) assessment has delayed
completion of a strategic plan. 2 ONCRC officials provided us several
individual documents that they stated constituted the basic elements of
the NCR's strategic plan. According to the ONCRC, one of the documents, a
November 18, 2005, NCR Plenary Session PowerPoint presentation (updated
from a November 15 document), contains the core elements of the NCR's
strategic plan-the mission, vision, guiding principles, long-term goals,
and objectives. According to ONCRC officials, an initial strategic plan
will not be available until at least September or October 2006.
NCR strategic planning should reflect both national and regional
priorities and needs. The November 18 PowerPoint presentation presents the
NCR's goals, objectives, and initiatives, including those considered
priorities. If the NCR's homeland security grant program funding documents
prepared for DHS are used extensively in NCR strategic planning, a NCR
strategic plan might primarily reflect DHS priorities and grant
funding-national priorities-and not regionally developed strategic goals
and priorities. The majority of the individual documents ONCRC represented
as the basic elements of the NCR's strategic plan were developed in
response to DHS homeland security grant program funding. Under the DHS
funding guidance, the homeland security strategy of applicants for funding
must incorporate DHS's National Preparedness Goal and related target
2
The Emergency Management Accreditation Program is a voluntary assessment
and accreditation process for state/territorial, tribal, and local
government emergency management programs. Among other things, EMAP is
intended to provide a structure for identifying areas in need of
improvement and a methodology for strategic planning and justification of
resources. EMAP uses national emergency management standards along with
peer assessment teams to evaluate a program's activities. These standards
are based on the National Fire Protection Association 1600 standard
covering functional areas such as program management and hazard
identification and risk assessment.
Page 2 GAO-06-559T
Background
capabilities. According to DHS, the strategy is to provide a strategic
plan for the use of related federal, state, local, and private resources
within a state and/or urban area before, during, and after threatened or
actual domestic terrorist attacks, major disasters, and other emergencies.
NCR initiatives developed to implement NCR's strategic goals and
objectives presented in ONCRC documents are not all addressed in the DHS
grant program funding documents and would require implementation and
funding by NCR jurisdictions acting individually or in combination with
others. Our preliminary work did not include an assessment of
jurisdictional efforts to implement the NCR initiatives.
A complete NCR strategic plan based on the November 18 PowerPoint
presentation should build on current elements and strengthen others based
on our six characteristics for a national strategy that may be useful for
a regional approach to homeland security strategic planning. These include
characteristics such as goals, objectives, activities, and performance
measures; resources, investments, and risk management; and organizational
roles, responsibilities, and coordination. Our limited review indicates
that as the ONCRC fleshes out the November 18 PowerPoint presentation that
contains the core elements of the NCR's strategic plan, such strengthening
could address: (1) initiatives that will accomplish objectives under the
strategic goals, (2) performance measures and targets that indicate how
the initiatives will accomplish identified strategic goals,
(3) milestones or time frames for initiative accomplishment, (4)
information on the resources and investment for each initiative, and (5)
organizational roles, responsibilities, and coordination, and integration
and implementation plans.
Strategic plans developed by regional organizations can be effective tools
to focus resources and efforts to address problems. Effective plans often
contain such features as goals and objectives that are measurable and
quantifiable. These goals and objectives allow problems and planned steps
to be defined specifically and progress to be measured. By specifying
goals and objectives, plans can also give planners and decision makers a
structure for allocating funding to those goals and objectives. A
welldefined, comprehensive strategic plan for the NCR is essential for
assuring that the region is prepared for the risks it faces.
The Homeland Security Act established the Office of National Capital
Region Coordination within the Department of Homeland Security. 3 The
ONCRC is responsible for overseeing and coordinating federal programs for
and relationships with state, local, and regional authorities in the NCR
and for assessing, and advocating for, the resources needed by state,
local and regional authorities in the NCR to implement efforts to secure
the homeland. One of the ONCRC mandates is to coordinate with federal,
state, local, and regional agencies and the private sector in NCR on
terrorism preparedness to ensure adequate planning, information sharing,
training, and execution of domestic preparedness activities among these
agencies and entities.
In our earlier work, we reported that ONCRC and the NCR faced three
interrelated challenges in managing federal funds in a way that maximizes
the increase in first responder capacities and preparedness while
minimizing inefficiency and unnecessary duplication of expenditures. These
challenges included the lack of
o a set of accepted benchmarks (best practices) and performance goals
that could be used to identify desired goals and determine whether
first responders have the ability to respond to threats and
emergencies with well-planned, well-coordinated, and effective efforts
that involve police, fire, emergency medical, public health, and other
personnel from multiple jurisdictions;
o a coordinated regionwide plan for establishing first responder
performance goals, needs, and priorities, and assessing the benefits
of expenditures in enhancing first responder capabilities; and
o a readily available, reliable source of data on the funds available to
first responders in the NCR and their use.
Without the standards, a regionwide plan, and data on spending, we
observed it would be extremely difficult to determine whether NCR first
responders were prepared to effectively respond to threats and
emergencies. Regional coordination means the use of governmental resources
in a complementary way toward goals and objectives that are mutually
agreed upon by various stakeholders in a region. 4 Regional coordination
can also help to overcome the fragmented nature of federal programs and
grants available to state and local entities. Successful
3 6 U.S.C. 462. 4 GAO-04-1009.
Page 4 GAO-06-559T
NCR Has Not Produced a Strategic Plan
coordination occurs not only vertically among federal, state, and local
governments, but also horizontally within regions. The effective alignment
of resources for the security of communities could require planning across
jurisdictional boundaries. Neighboring jurisdictions may be affected by an
emergency situation in many ways, including major traffic or environmental
disruptions, activation and implementation of mutual aid agreements,
acceptance of evacuated residents, and treating casualties in local
hospitals.
Although work has continued on a NCR strategic plan for the past 2 years,
a completed plan is not yet available to guide decision making such as
assessment of NCR's strategic priorities and funding needs and aid for NCR
jurisdictions in ascertaining how the NCR strategic plan complements their
individual or combined efforts. In May 2004, we recommended that the
Secretary of DHS work with the NCR jurisdictions to develop a coordinated
strategic plan to establish goals and priorities to enhance first
responder capacities that can be used to guide the use of federal
emergency preparedness funds, and the department agreed to implement this
recommendation. A related recommendation-that DHS monitor the plan's
implementation to ensure that funds are used in a way that promotes
effective expenditures that are not unnecessarily duplicative-could not be
implemented until the final strategic plan was in place. In July 2005, we
testified that, according to a DHS ONCRC official, a final draft for
review had been completed and circulated to key stakeholders. The plan was
to feature measurable goals, objectives, and performance measures.
ONCRC officials state that past references to a NCR strategic plan reflect
availability of the core elements of the NCR strategic plan-the mission,
vision, guiding principles, long-term goals, and objectives, but not a
complete plan. They told us that these core elements, along with other
information, will need to be compiled into a strategic planning document.
ONCRC officials said that NCR leadership had elected to make the core
elements available but to concentrate on preparing other planning and
justification documents required for the fiscal year 2006 DHS grant
process. NCR planning timelines indicate this decision was made in
September 2005.
Because a strategic plan was not available, ONCRC officials provided us
with several documents, which they have said that taken as a whole,
constitute the basic elements of NCR's strategic plan. These documents
include
NCR Strategic Planning Should Reflect Both National and Regional Priorities
and Needs
o a November 18, 2005, NCR Plenary Session PowerPoint presentation
containing information on NCR strategic goals, objectives, and
initiatives;
o a February 1, 2006, National Capital Region Target Capabilities and
NCR Projects Work Book;
o the March 2, 2006, District of Columbia and National Capital Region
Fiscal Year 2006 Homeland Security Grant Application Program and
Capability Enhancement Plan;
o the March 2, 2006, National Capital Region Initiatives; and
o the Fiscal Year 2006 NCR Homeland Security Grant Program Funding
Request Investment Justification, submitted to DHS in March 2006.
According to ONCRC officials, a complete strategic plan is awaiting
integration of additional information that in some cases is not yet
complete. These include an Emergency Management Accreditation Program
(EMAP) assessment of all local jurisdictions in the NCR and regional-level
activities, which, according to the ONCRC, is completed but will not be
available until sometime in April; the peer review of the status of state
and urban area emergency operations plans after Hurricane Katrina, whose
completion is anticipated in April 2006; and the fiscal year 2006 homeland
security program grant enhancement plan for funding, which was completed
in early March 2006. ONCRC officials estimate that after April 2006, it
will take approximately 90 more days to integrate these documents and the
core framework of the strategic plan, plus approximately 60 days for final
review and coordination by the NCR leadership. Thus, an initial strategic
plan will not be available until at least September or October 2006.
NCR strategic planning should reflect both national and regional
priorities and needs. ONCRC officials have said that the November 18,
2005, NCR plenary session PowerPoint presentation represents the vision,
mission, and core goals and objectives of the NCR's strategic plan. If the
NCR's homeland security grant program funding documents prepared for DHS
are used extensively in NCR strategic planning, a NCR strategic plan might
primarily reflect DHS priorities and grant funding-national priorities-
and not regionally developed strategic goals and priorities.
NCR's current goals and objectives are shown in table 1.
Table 1: NCR Vision, Mission, Goals, and Objectives from the November 18,
2005, NCR Plenary Session PowerPoint Presentation
Vision Mission
Working together towards a safe and secure Build and sustain an integrated
effort to prepare for, prevent, protect against, respond National Capital
Region to, and recover from "all-hazards" threats or events
Goals Objectives for each goal
1. A collaborative culture for planning, 1. Enhance and continually adapt
the framework for regional strategic planning and decision making, and
implementation decision making to achieve an optimal balance of
capabilities across the NCR
across the NCR 2. Design and implement an integrated and iterative
performance and risk-based regional planning process that engages
appropriate NCR homeland security partners
effectively utilize available public and private homeland security
resources to satisfy NCR regional, jurisdictional, and sector
preparedness
and investment approach to generate enduring
and sustainable preparedness across the NCR
2. An informed and prepared community of 1. Deliver timely, coordinated,
and targeted emergency information across the NCR those who live, work,
and visit within the before, during, and after emergencies
region, engaged in the safety and security 2. Raise the level of
preparedness across the NCR by utilizing and enhancing of the NCR public
awareness and education campaigns
ing, training, operating, and
(cross-jurisdictional) exercising to maximize threats or events
prevention and mitigation capabilities across the NCR
ness
ity Presidential Directive 8, the
National Preparedness Goal is a national domestic all-hazards preparedness
goal intended to establish measurable readiness priorities and targets.
The fiscal year 2006 Homeland Security Grant Program (HSGP) integrates the
State Homeland Security Program, the Urban Areas Security Initiative, the
Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention Program, the Metropolitan Medical
Response System, and the Citizen Corps Program. For the first time,
starting with the fiscal year 2006 HSGP, DHS is using the National
Preparedness Goal to shape national priorities and focus expenditures for
the HSGP. According to DHS, the combined fiscal year 2006 HSGP Program
Guidance and Application Kit streamlines efforts for states and urban
areas in obtaining resources that are critical to building and sustaining
capabilities to achieve the National Preparedness Goal and implement state
and urban area homeland security strategies.
All states and urban areas were required to align existing preparedness
strategies within the National Preparedness Goal's eight national
priorities. 5 States and urban areas were required to assess their
preparedness needs by reviewing their existing programs and capabilities
and use those findings to develop a plan and formal investment
justification outlining major statewide, substate, or interstate
initiatives for which they will seek funding. According to DHS, these
initiatives are to focus efforts on how to build and sustain programs and
capabilities within and across state boundaries while aligning with the
National Preparedness Goal and national priorities.
It is, of course, important and necessary that the ONCRC, and other
regional and local jurisdictions, incorporate the DHS's National
Preparedness Goal and related target capabilities into their strategic
planning. The target capabilities are intended to serve as a benchmark
against which states, regions, and localities can measure their own
Those priorities are (1) implement the National Incident Management System
and National Response Plan; (2) expand regional collaboration; (3)
implement the interim National Infrastructure Protection Plan; (4)
strengthen information-sharing and collaboration capabilities; (5)
strengthen interoperable communications capabilities; (6) strengthen
chemical, biological, radiological/nuclear, and explosive detection,
response, and decontamination capabilities; (7) strengthen medical surge
and mass prophylaxis capabilities; and (8) review emergency operations
plans and the status of catastrophic planning.
Page 8 GAO-06-559T
capabilities. However, these national requirements are but one part of
developing regional preparedness, response, and recovery assessments and
funding priorities specific to the NCR. The NCR's strategic plan should
provide the framework for guiding the integration of DHS requirements into
the NCR's overall efforts.
While the NCR strategic plan is not complete, our preliminary review of
the NCR initiatives developed to implement NCR's strategic goals and
objectives presented in ONCRC documents indicates they are not completely
addressed in the DHS HSGP documents. Using the November 18, 2005,
PowerPoint presentation as our primary framework, we identified whether
the NCR's 39 individual regional initiatives were specifically supported
in whole or in part by programs or investments in the fiscal year 2006
HSGP documents (enhancement plan and investment justification) prepared
for DHS. Our preliminary analysis indicates that regional initiatives
defined under NCR strategic goals and objectives have some
coverage-individual programs or projects-in the NCR documents prepared for
DHS HSGP funding, but not complete coverage. We found that of the NCR's 16
priority initiatives, 10 were partially addressed in the enhancement plan
and 12 were partially addressed in the investment justification. Of the
other 23 NCR initiatives, 8 were partially addressed in the enhancement
plan and 12 were partially addressed in the investment justification.
Implementation of regional initiatives not covered by HSGP funding likely
would require NCR jurisdictions acting individually or in combination with
others. Our preliminary work did not include an assessment of individual
jurisdictional efforts to implement the NCR initiatives to determine if
uncovered initiatives, particularly those considered priority initiatives,
might be addressed by one or more of the NCR jurisdictions. Further work
would be required to determine to what extent, if any, the NCR initiatives
are addressed in other federal funding applications or individual NCR
jurisdictional homeland security initiatives.
As I stated earlier, ONCRC officials told us a complete NCR strategic plan
is awaiting information from the EMAP assessment, DHS's peer review of the
status of emergency operations plans in the aftermath of Hurricane
Katrina, and the fiscal year 2006 homeland security grant program
enhancement plan for funding. This information may further emphasize
federal priorities in the regional planning process. However, information
from these sources should complement the region's own assessment of
preparedness gaps and the development of strategic goals, objectives, and
initiatives. Officials from the District of Columbia, Virginia, and
Maryland emphasized this point when they testified before this committee
in July 2005. At that time, they said that the regional strategic plan
would be a comprehensive document that defined priorities and objectives
for the entire region without regard to any specific jurisdiction,
discipline, or funding mechanisms. In our view, a NCR plan should
complement the plans of the various jurisdictions within NCR. In the
aftermath of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks and the creation of
the ONCRC, we would have expected that the vast majority of this
assessment work should have been completed. The NCR is considered a prime
target for terrorist events, and other major events requiring a regional
response can be anticipated, such as large, dangerous chemical spills.
A complete NCR strategic plan based on the November 18 PowerPoint
presentation could be strengthened in several ways. In earlier work we
Strategic Plan Could have identified characteristics that we consider to
be desirable for a
national strategy that may be useful for a regional approach to homeland
security strategic planning. 6 The desirable characteristics, adjusted for
a Several Ways regional strategy, are
o purpose, scope, and methodology that address why the strategy was
produced, the scope of its coverage, and the process by which it was
developed;
o problem definition and risk assessment that address the particular
regional problems and threats the strategy is directed towards;
o goals, subordinate objectives, activities, and performance measures
that address what the strategy is trying to achieve, steps to achieve
those results, as well as the priorities, milestones, and performance
measures to gauge results;
o resources, investments, and risk management that address what the
strategy will cost, the sources and types of resources and investments
needed, and where resources and investments should be targeted by
balancing risk reductions and costs;
o organizational roles, responsibilities, and coordination that address
who will be implementing the strategy, what their roles will be
6 GAO. Combating Terrorism: Evaluation of Selected Characteristics in
National Strategies Related to Terrorism, GAO-04-408T (Washington, D.C.:
Feb. 3, 2004).
Page 10 GAO-06-559T
Initiative Development to Match Goal Objectives
compared to those of others, and mechanisms for them to coordinate
their efforts; and
o integration and implementation that address how a regional strategy
relates to other strategies' goals, objectives and activities, and to
state and local governments within their region and their plans to
implement the strategy.
According to the ONCRC, the November 18 PowerPoint presentation contains
the core elements of the NCR's strategic plan-the mission, vision, guiding
principles, long-term goals, and objectives. Our preliminary review of the
presentation indicates it reflects many of the characteristics we have
defined as desirable for a strategy. The presentation includes some
material on the purpose, scope, and methodology underlying the
presentation; what it covers; and how it was developed. For example, the
presentation contains a detailed timeline of key activities in the
execution of the strategic plan and how initiatives were prioritized.
Particular regional problems and performance gaps are described, including
a section on regionwide weaknesses and gaps such as the lack of a
regionwide risk assessment framework and inadequate response and recovery
for special needs populations. These gaps are cross-referenced to priority
initiatives. Specific goals, objectives, and initiatives are in the
presentation, cross-referenced to the regional gaps. Some initiative
descriptions identify if a cost is either high, medium, or low with more
detailed cost information summarized in other places.
Our preliminary review indicates that as the ONCRC fleshes out the
November 18 PowerPoint presentation into an initial, complete strategic
plan, improvements might be made in (1) initiatives that will accomplish
objectives under the strategic goals, (2) performance measures and targets
that indicate how the initiatives will accomplish identified strategic
goals,
(3) milestones or time frames for initiative accomplishment, (4)
information on the resources and investment for each initiative, and (5)
organizational roles, responsibilities, and coordination, and integration
and implementation plans. A discussion of how these elements could be
strengthened follows.
A NCR strategic plan could more fully develop initiatives to accomplish
objectives under the strategic goals. For example, the presentation
contains several objectives that have only one initiative. A single
initiative may not ensure that objectives are accomplished, and it may
merely be restating the objective itself. For example, there is only one
initiative
Page 11 GAO-06-559T
Performance Measure and Target Improvements
(regional strategic planning and decision making process enhancements) for
Goal 1's first objective (enhancing and adapting the framework for
strategic planning and decision making to achieve an optimal balance of
capabilities across the NCR). The initiative in large part restates the
objective. This initiative might be replaced by more specific initiatives
or the objective restated and additional initiatives proposed. Other
objectives in the November 18 PowerPoint presentation provide a more
complete picture of initiatives intended to meet the objective. For any
future plan, these initiatives should be reviewed to determine if the
current initiatives will fully meet the results expected of the
objectives.
A NCR strategic plan could more fully measure initiative expectations by
improving performance measures and targets. First, in some cases, the
performance measures will not readily lend themselves to actual
quantitative or qualitative measurement through a tabulation, a
calculation, a recording of activity or effort, or an assessment of
results that is compared to an intended purpose. Additional measures might
be necessary. For example, Goal 1, Objective 1, Initiative 1 (regional
strategic planning and decision-making process) includes measures such as
(1) the decision-making system is well understood by all stakeholders
based on changed behaviors and (2) time and resources required of
stakeholders in the region to participate in the decision-making process
is more efficient. These could be either refined for more direct
measurement or additional measures posed, such as specifying behaviors for
assessment or what parts of the process might be assessed for efficiency.
Other measures in the document might serve as examples of more direct
measurement, such as those that assess accomplishments using percentages
in Goal 2, Objective 4, Initiative 1 (increasing civic involvement in all
phases of disaster preparedness).
Second, a strategic plan could be improved by (1) expanding the use of
outcome measures and targets in the plan to reflect the results of its
activities and (2) limiting the use of other types of measures. ONCRC
officials said that the performance measures in the November 18 PowerPoint
presentation had a greater emphasis on tracking outcomes, rather than
inputs. They stated that as programs and projects are funded and
implemented, a more thorough effort to develop associated measures for
each will be undertaken. With regard to revising measures to reflect
funded programs and projects, we would suggest NCR officials focus on
measuring outcomes of programs and projects to meet strategic goals and
objectives.
Our preliminary analysis indicates that several measures are
outcomeoriented, such as those for Goal 2, Objective 4, Initiative 1
(increase civic involvement in all phases of disaster preparedness) that
has outcome measures such as the percentage of the population that has
taken steps to develop personal preparedness and the percentage of the
population familiar with workplace, school, and community emergency plans.
However, the majority of the presentation's performance measures and
targets are process- or output-oriented and may not match the desired
result of the initiative. For example, the Goal 1, Objective 4, Initiative
2 (facilitating practitioner priorities into the program development
process) desired outcomes are (1) an easily understood process for
participation and feedback of the practitioner stakeholder communities to
influence programmatic initiatives and priorities defined in Goal Groups
2, 3, and 4 and (2) an awareness and increased participation in the range
of resource opportunities. Measures for this initiative include
communication across Emergency Support Functions (ESFs), an accountability
chart, and governance guidance document show the feedback loop between
ESFs and Senior Policy Group/Chief Administrative Officer (SPG/CAO) and
Regional Working Groups. Such measures identify completed activities or
tasks, not how well understand the process is. A fourth measure for this
initiative-understanding/agreeing on roles, responsibility, and
accountability-might closer to measuring the desired outcome.
Third, many initiatives do not have performance targets. For example,
targets are missing for all or some measures for initiatives under Goal 1,
Objectives 1, 3, 4, and 5. Other targets are unclear. For example, one
measure for both Goal 1, Objective 3, Initiative 1 (tasks and capabilities
for the NCR) and Goal 1, Objective 3, Initiative 2 (gap analysis,
recommendations, and appropriate actions) is the progress toward closing
the gap between baseline and target capabilities. The target is "what we
think we need to accomplish in HSPD 7/8." 7 Any targets such as this would
require clarification if progress toward results is to be assessed.
Timeframes A future NCR strategic plan could also be strengthened by
including more complete time frames for initiative accomplishment,
including specific milestones. In some cases, the time frame description
is missing or is inconsistent with timeframes provided within performance
measure descriptions that generally cover activities or tasks. For
example, Goal 3,
7
HSPD stands for Homeland Security Presidential Directive.
Resources and Investments
Objective 1, Initiative 1 (region prevention and mitigation framework) has
a time frame for fall 2006, but measures include targets in 2007. In
several instances, measures of tasks or activities include milestones, but
an overall time frame is not indicated. For example, Goal 3, Objective 3,
Initiative 1 (critical infrastructure and high-risk targets risk
assessments) and Goal 4, Objective 1, Initiative 1 (corrective action
program for gaps) do not have timeframes identified, but measures have
dates extending into 2007 and 2009 respectively.
Time frames should also match the initiative. In some cases, it is unclear
if the initiative description should be expanded to encompass activities
that appear outside the scope of the initiative as written, but result in
the time frame for the overall initiative. For example, Goal 3, Objective
1, Initiative 3 (health surveillance, detection, and mitigation functions
plan) has an overall time frame of December 2010, but the 2010 date
reflects implementation of a patient tracking system. In the list of
measures, the plan itself is targeted for December 2008. Either the
initiative description could be changed to include the system or the
patient tracking system measure could be removed or revised.
A future NCR strategic plan could provide fuller information on the
resources and investments associated with each initiative. For example,
each initiative in the November 18 PowerPoint presentation has a section
for cost and cost factors. However, there is not an explanation in the
document as to what cost categories of high, medium, or low mean in terms
of dollar ranges. ONCRC officials told us that these descriptions should
be considered more notional in nature, with a low usually meaning well
under $1 million and those rated high in the tens of millions. In many
cases, the categorization of cost for an initiative is missing from the
November 18 PowerPoint presentation initiative sections. More specific
cost information by initiative, such as the funded and unfunded grant
information that is provided in a summary format, would facilitate
decision making in comparing trade-offs as options are considered. A plan
also could be improved by including the sources of funding for the
anticipated costs, whether federal, state, or local, or a combination of
multiple sources.
Organizational Contributions and Integration and Implementation Planning
Last, any future NCR strategic plan could expand on organizational roles,
responsibilities, coordination, and integration and implementation plans.
Organizational roles, responsibilities, and coordination for each
initiative would clarify accountability and leadership for completion of
the initiative. The plan might also include information on how the plan
will be integrated with the strategic plans of NCR jurisdictions and that
of the ONCRC and plans to implement the regional strategy.
Concluding Observations
There is no more important element in results-oriented management than the
effort of strategic planning. This effort is the starting point and
foundation for defining what an organization seeks to accomplish,
identifying the strategies it will use to achieve desired results, and
then determining how well it succeeds in reaching results-oriented goals
and achieving objectives. Establishing clear goals, objectives, and
milestones; setting performance goals; assessing performance against goals
to set priorities; and monitoring the effectiveness of actions taken to
achieve the designated performance goals are all part of the planning
process. If done well, strategic planning is not a static or occasional
event, but rather a dynamic and inclusive process. Continuous strategic
planning provides the foundation for the most important things an
organization does each day, and fosters informed communication between the
organization and those affected by or interested in the organization's
activities.
We appreciate the fact that strategic plans, once issued, are living
documents that require continual assessment. There is an understandable
temptation to delay issuing a strategic plan at some point in the ongoing
strategic planning process until the plan is considered perfect and all
information has been collected, analyzed, and incorporated into the plan.
However, failure to complete an initial strategic plan makes it difficult
for decision makers to identify and assess NCR's first strategic goals,
objectives, priorities, measures, and funding needs, and how resources can
be leveraged across the region as events warrant. We continue to recommend
that the Secretary of DHS work with the NCR jurisdictions to quickly
complete a coordinated strategic plan to establish regional goals and
priorities.
That concludes my statement, Mr. Chairman. I would be pleased to respond
to any questions you or other members of the Committee may have.
For questions regarding this testimony, please contact William O. Jenkins,
Contacts and
Jr. at (202) 512-8757, email [email protected]. Sharon L. Caudle also
Acknowledgments made key contributions to this testimony.
(440496)
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. However, 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.
GAO's Mission
The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and
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.
The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost
is through GAO's Web site ( www.gao.gov) . Each weekday, GAO posts GAO
Reports and newly released reports, testimony, and correspondence on its
Web site. To
have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products every afternoon, go to
www.gao.gov and select "Subscribe to Updates."
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. Government Accountability 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, Contact:
Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm
E-mail: [email protected]
Federal Programs Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202)
512-7470
Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, [email protected] (202) 512-4400 U.S.
Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125 Relations
Washington, D.C. 20548
Paul Anderson, Managing Director, [email protected] (202) 512-4800
Public Affairs
U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149
Washington, D.C. 20548
PRINTED ON
RECYCLED PAPER
*** End of document. ***