U.S. Department of Homeland Security Washington, DC 20528 Homeland Security July 13, 2018 Larry Schwartztol Counsel The Protect Democracy Project 2020 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW #163 Washington, DC 20006 Re: Second Interim Release Protect Democracy Project 17-2202 (2017-HQFO-01153) Dear Mr. Schwartztol: This is the second interim response to your August 3, 2017, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) (2017-HQFO-01153). For this month’s production, DHS processed for release 1,175 pages related to part 5 of your FOIA request. Of the 1,175 pages, 450 pages were non-responsive and 725 pages are being referred to Office of Intelligence and Analysis (I&A) for direct response. DHS will review at least 250 additional pages of responsive documents for the August 30, 2018 release date. Sincerely, Kevin L. Tyrrell Director FOIA Appeals and Litigation 1 U.S. Department of Homeland Security Washington, DC 20528 Homeland Security July 13, 2018 Larry Schwartztol Counsel The Protect Democracy Project 2020 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW #163 Washington, DC 20006 Re: Third Interim Release Protect Democracy Project 17-2202 (2017-HQFO-01153) Dear Mr. Schwartztol: This is the third interim response to your August 3, 2017, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) (2017-HQFO-01153). DHS received a 378 page consult from OPM. Of the 378 pages, 171 paged are released in full, 41 pages are withheld in full pursuant to 5 U.S.C 552(b) (5), (b) (6) (b) (7c) and (b) (7e) and 166 pages are released in part pursuant to 5 U.S.C 552(b) (5), (b) (6) (b) (7c) and (b) (7e). Portions of those pages released in part have been sent to other components for consult as indicated in the release packet. Sincerely, Kevin L. Tyrrell Director FOIA Appeals and Litigation 1 BAN TH BOX U.S. Department of. Homeland Security Washingtori, DC 20528 '1 Homeland Security April 17, 2017 The Honorable Kathleen McGettigan Acting Director U.S. Of?ce of Personnel Management Attn: 1900 Street, NW l- Washington, D.C. 20415-1000 Dear Acting Director McGettigan: The Department of Homeland Security (DI-IS), Of?ce of the Chief Human Capital Of?cer (OCHCO), requests an exception on behalf of 3 Departmental Component to the prohibition in title 5, Code of Federal Regulations, parts 330 and 731, on making early inquiries into an applicant?s criminal and/or adverse credit background history until the hiring agency has made a conditional offer of employment to the applicant. The following appendix is provided in support of our request for exceptions to the timing of suitability inquiries on behalf of a DHS Component: I Appendix A Exception Request for U.S. Immigration and Customs En?wcement (ICE) The Appendix provides comprehensive documentation for the referenced exception request, including the - positions that must be ?lied, the reasons the Component needs these exceptions, and the timing and extent of applicant background inquiries, both current and proposed. Your consideration of this requestis very much appreciated. Sineerelv. (6) CD I an 1 xecuti?ector . Human pital Policy and Programs Appendix A Exception US. Immigration and Customs (ICE) DHS OCHCO US. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) requests anexception to the prohibition in 5 C.F.R. 330 and 73] which prevents hiring agencies from asking preliminary questions about an applicant '3 criminal and/or unfavorable credit history until the agency has made a tentative job offer to the applicant. Based on speci?c job-related reasons and the expense of the pre-employment examination process, this exception will enable ICE to make such inquiries, including those contained in the Optional Form (OF) 306 "Declaration for Federal Employment "or other forms used to conduct background investigations, earlier in the application process. ICE is requesting this exception for the following positions: (5requesting an exception under the criteria in 5 C.F.R. 330.1300, Timing of Suitability Inquiries in Competitive Hiring, in order to conduct both criminal behavior and ?nancial inquiries prior to making a tentative offer of employment. The justi?cation for approving an exception for these positions is as follows: 1. Reason for the agency needing this exception. ICE is requesting this exception for law enforcement positions for which criminal history and adverSc credit history cannot be mitigated during the background investigation adjudication. Eliminating applicants with a disqualifying criminal and/or credit history as early as possible in the process, and eliminating the need for the multi-hurdle pre-employment processing of these applicants, as well as applicants for investigative operational support positions, is in the best interest of ICE. Furthennore, ICE's law enforcement personnel are required to carry a firearm and testify in court. These two a5pects of ICE's law enforcement positions make criminal history a major factor in the suitability determination, and it would be costly and inef?cient to wait until a tentative offer was presented in the hiring process to make these inquiries. The nature of the investigative Operational support work, indicated in the description below, makes criminal and/or unfavorable credit history a major factor in the suitability determination as well. The Executive Order on Border Security and Immigration Enforcement Improvements, dated January 25, 2017, which requires that ICE take "all appropriate action" to hire an additiOnal 10,000 agents and o?'rcers as soon as practicable increases the urgency for this exception. To be in compliance with this mandate, a large-scale hiring effort and an ef?cient streamlined hiring process will have to be implemented. Since the vetting process is extremely time-consuming and expensive (in particular the requirement to conduct medical examinations, drug and ?tness testing, and background investigations), ICE has been seeking ways to make this screening process more ef?cient and avoid consuming unnecessary resources on the processing of thousands of applicants who will ultimately be rejected during the background investigation stage. The ability to conduct initial suitability determinations for disqualifying factors, such as adverse criminal or ?nancial history, prior to the issuance of a tentative o??er of employment is of paramount importance. Otherwise, ICE will unnecessarily expend time, effort and resources on applicants that will ultimately not be granted suitability ciearance. An exception is needed to ensure compliance with a speci?c statutory or regulatory requirement, as outlined in: April 17, 2017 Page I of 3 Appendix A - Exception Request for US. Immigration and Customs (ICE) DHS OCHCO An exception is needed because of the qualifications requirements of the job. These are described below: The primary mission of ICE is to support the ongoing objectives of the Department of Homeland Security; speci?cally, to prevent terrorism and protect America from cross-border crime and illegal immigration that threaten national security and public safety. agents and of?cers identify and dismantle criminal networks that traf?c in weaponry, narcotics, counterfeit goods and most disturbing 01' all, human beings. Criminals who believe they can find safe haven in the United States will be identi?ed, located and prosecuted. For the success of this mission, certain information must be obtained from applicants prior to being considered for law enforcement and national security designated positons and investigative operation support positions. Employees in the law enforcement positions for which ICE is seeking an exception perform the following duties: Employees in the investigative operation support positions for which ICE is seeking an exception perform the following duties: The expense of the examination process makes it appropriate to adjudicate suitability before expending funds on other examination elements because: Prohibiting ICE from asking preliminary questions about prior criminal convictions, prior criminal behavior, and adverse credit history will result in ICE processing a much higher number of applicants through the initial pro-employment hiring steps, as applicable ?tness and drug tests, medical examinations, structured interviews, etc.) This is a misuse of ICE April 17, 2017 Page 2 of3 . Appendix A ?Exceprion Request for U. S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) DHS OCHCO resources and applicants? time, only to then rescind the offer based on a negative suitability ?nding pertaining to past criminal con?ctions and behavior or adverse credit history. This process will also impact lCE?s ability to accomplish the mandate in the Executive Order to hire 10,000 law enforcement of?cers by proceSSing applicants that will not be found suitable for the position. Rather, ICE should be focusing on processing the applicant population that has cleared the initial suitability review. The public trust or national secun'ty would be impacted negatively if inquiries are delayed until a conditional offer of employment is made because: Other: 2. Timing and extent of applicant background inquiries (current and proposed). Currently, asks questions regarding an applicant?s criminal history, drug usage, and credit history after an applicant has been selected. This information is generally obtained after the 306 is received or when a criminal name check is conducted It would be much more efficient for the agency to ask disqualifying questions has the applicant used drugs within a stated time period; does the applicant have outstanding federal debt that does not have a formal payment arrangement, etc.) in the eligibility section of the job opportunity announcement. If you have any questions regarding this request, please contact Deputy Chief Human Capital Of?cer, tion and Customs Enforcement. Karen 13. Filipponl at April 17, 2017 Page 3 of3 .. - . . UNITED STATES OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT Washington. DC 20415 Employee Services JUN 25 2017 Ms. Gwen Yandall Executive Director Human Capital Policy and Programs U.S. Department of Homeland Security 245 Murray Lane, SW Building 410 Mail Stop 0170 Washington, DC. 20528?0170 Dear Ms. Yandallz The U.S. Of?ce of Personnel Management (0PM) approves, in part, your request, on behalf of the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), for an exception to the restriction in 5 C.F.R. parts 330 and 731 on making certain inquiries into an applicant?s criminal and/or adverse credit background history prior to making a conditional offer of employment. 5 C.F.R. 330.1300 addresses the requirements and standards for exception requests, in relevant part, as follows: [En certain situations, agencies may have a business need to obtain information about the background of applicants earlier in the hiring process to determine if they meet the quali?cations requirements or are suitable for the position being ?lled. If so, agencies must request an exception from the Office of Personnel Management in order to determine an applicant?s ability to meet quali?cations or suitability for Federal employment prior to making a. conditional offer of employment to the applicant(s). 0PM will grant exceptions only when the agency demonstrates speci?c job-related reasons why the agency needs to evaluate an applicant?s criminal or adverse credit history earlier in the process or consider the disquali?cation of candidates with criminal backgrounds or other conduct issues from particular types of positions. 0PM will consider such factors as, but not limited to, the nature of the position being ?lled and whether a clean criminal history record Would be essential to the ability to perform one of the duties of the position effectively. 0PM may also consider positions for which the expense of completing the examination makes it appropriate to adjudicate suitability at the outset of the process. On April 17, 2017, DHS requested exceptions to permit suitability screening earlier in the hiring process for applicants to the following positionsm (5): (7)05) (5). (7X5) . Recruit, Retain and Honor aWorld-Class Workforce to Serve the American People - . .. .Ms. Gwen Yandall l. 2 levels). DHS indicated adverse criminal conduct would be disqualifying from performing the core . . (5), ?(ll testify In court for the follonQ noeltons 0PM ?nds that DHS has furnished suf?cient job-related business reasons for making inquiries regarding criminal conduct prior to tentative offer of employment and is approving the request in accordance with 5 ORR. 330.1300 for these positions. (5), (7X5) (5). (7X5) has not demonstrated speci?c job?related reasons Why the agency needs to evaluate criminal or adverse credit history earlier in the process for these positions. If you have any questions, please feel free tg?gptact _y email at (6) or by phone Sincerely, (6) Kimberly A. Holden Deputy Associate Director Recruitment and Hiring . . US. Department of Homeland Secu?ty Washington, DC 20528 I'Marchi?zz, 2017 The Honorable Kathleen McGettigan - . . - - . - ActingDirector .. - . 1. - '2 US. Of?ce of Personnel Management . i . Attn: [900 Street, NW Washington, 13.0. 204154 000 Dear Acting Director McGettigan: The of Homeland Sceun'ty O?ico of the Chief Human Capital Officer (OCHCO), requests exceptions for certain agency Components to the prohibition in title 5, Code of Federal Regulations, parts 330 and 731 on making early Inquiries into an applicant?s criminal and/or adverse - credit background history until the hiring agency has made a conditional offer of employment to the applicant. The following appendices are provided in support of our request for exceptions to the timing of suitability on behalf of two of Component agencies:- Appendix A Exception Request for S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) 9 Appendix Exception Request for US. Secret Service Each appendix provides comprehensive documentation for the referen cad exception request, including the positions that must be ?lled, the reasons the Components need these exceptions, and the timing and extent of applicant background inquiries, both and proposed Your consideration of these requests is appreciated._ Sincerely, lb) (6) tan Yan ercutivce rector .. ital Policy and Programs .3 Appendix A Exception Requesifor U. S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) DHS OCHCO US. Customs and Border Protection requests an exception to the prohibition in 5 C.F.R. 330 and 731, which prevents hiring agencies from making early inquiries into an applicant?s criminal and/0r adverse credit background history until the agency has made a conditional 'o?er of employment to the applicant. This exception, based on reasons, will enable CBP to make such inquiriestincluding those contained in the Optional Form (OF) 306, ?Declaration for Federal Employment? or other forms used to conduct background investigations-earlier in the application process for the following positions: - (5). mks) CBP is requesting this exception under the criteria in 5 0.17 .R. 330.1300, Timing of Suitability Inquiries in Competitive Hiring, in order to conduct both criminal conduct and ?nancial inquiries prior to making a conditional offer of employment. The justification for approving an eXCeptlon for these positions is as follows: . 1. Reasons the agency needs his exception. . - CBP is requesting this exception for law enforcement and other critical frontline positions for which criminal history and adverse credit history cannot be mitigated during the background investigation adjudication. For this reason, itis in best interest to remove applicants with a disqualifying criminal or credit history as early in the process as feasible. This approach saves the agency a signi?cant amount of time, money, and resources. Additionally, the maj orily of law enforcement and other critical frontline personnel are required to carry a ?rearm and testify in court. These two aspects of law enforcement and frontline positions make criminal history a dispositive factor in the suitability determination, and it would be cost?prohibitive and inefficient to wait until the conditional offer- phase of the hiring process to make these inquiries. In addition to the crucial role that criminal and credit history play in the suitability determination for law enforcement and frontline positions, CBP is also subject to mandatory stalling ?oors for its of?cers and agents, necessitating largescale hiring efforts and a streamlined and ef?cient hiring process. The positions for which CBP is seeking exceptions are subject to inteiyiews, . medical examinations, ?tness examinations, and polygraph examinations prior to hiring, and all must undergo background security investigation to screen out candidates who are unsuitable for hiring based on, among other things, past criminal and ?nancial behavior. Because this vetting process is extremely time-consuming and expensive (in particular the requirement to run medical examinations, ?tness examinations, background investigations, and polygraphs), CBP has been seeking ways to make this screening process more efficientand avoid expending unnecessary resources on the processing of thousands of applicants who will ultimately be rejected at the polygraph or background investigation stages. The ability to conduct initial suitability determinations for disqualifying factors, such as adverse criminal or ?nancial history, prior to the issuance of a tentative offer of?employment is of paramount importance. Ifthis March 22, 2017 Page Appendix Exception 1-5. Customs Protection (0 DHS ?exibility were eliminated or signi?cantly restricted, the ability ol'the Agency to hire suitable candidates in the most e?icient and cost?effective manner would be compromised- Increasing the urgency for ?Snis exception is the Executive Order on Border Security and Immigration Enforcement Improvements, dated? January 25, 2017, which requires that CBP take ?all appropriate action? to hire an additional 5,000 Bl-?As as soon as practicable. Additional guidance mandated the hiring of 500 Air and Marine Agents/Of?cers. In compliance with these mandates, CBP is proceeding to conduct a massive hiring effort to include signi?cantlyincreased numbers oi?law enforcement and frontline positions. in support of this effort, CBP is in the process of examining all available opportunities to streamline the frontan hiring process. The. timing of suitability inquiries will remain a critical issue as CBP considers increasingly higher numbers of candidates for law enforcement and i?rontline positions in ful?llnumt 01' these mandates. - An BXUcptlon is needed to ensure complia nee with a speci?c statutory or regulatory requirement, as outlined in: An exception is needed because of the quali?cations requirements of the job. These are described below: CBP is responsible for securing the Nation?s borders. Etnployees in law enforcement and frontiine positions are responsible for protecting our Nation?s borders from terrorism, human and drug smuggling, illegal migration, and agricultural pests, while simUltaneously facilitating the ?ow of legitimate travel and trade. Employees in the law enforcement and t?rontline positions for which CBP is seeking an exception are speci?cdly responsible for perfonning the major duties listed below: March 22, 20.17 . Page 2 of4 Appendix A Exception Requestfm? US. Customs and Border? Protection (CBP) I DHS An exception is requested to include all of the positions listed above based on the national security, border protection, and law enforcement responsibilities performed by incumbents in eaeh'of these positions. . '3th expense of the examination process makes it appropriate to adjudicate suitability beliore 3i expending funds on other examination elements because: It is necessary for CBP to receive an exemption for the aw enforcement and frontline positions listed above. Currently, CBP requires potential applicant: to ?ll out. the ?Gateway Questionnaire? prior to the submission of their online application. This ?Questionnaire? contains ?screen 0 questions regarding past criminal convictiors, behavior Which is criminal in nature, and adverSe credit history-if the potential applicant answers these questions af?nnatively, s/he will not. be able to submit the application. 'l?hcse questions concern behavior which would make the applicant unsuitable for employment, regardless if s/he was found otherwise quali?ed based on testing scores and work/education espericnce. For example, one question asks whether the applicant has been convicted of a crime of domestic Violence; this question is necessary because if the applicant has such a past conviction, she would . i not be able to carry a ?rearm, which is a condition of employment for all law enforcement of?cers and CBPOs. Likewise, questions regarding whether the potential applicant has ever been convicted of a felony will have a direct impact on the applicant?s suitability as well as potentially impact the applicant?s ability to carry a ?rearm. Other questions ask whether the applicant has committed behavior in violation of immigration laws; because CBP enforces the immigration laws of the 'United States, these questions are closely linked to whether an applicant is suitable to perform law enforcement duties in support of (3B P?s mission. Because the new requirement would prohibit (3131? from asking questions about prior criminal convictions, prior criminal behavior, and adverse credit history via the Gateway Questionnaire, CBP will be rcqui red to process a much higher volume of applicants through the initial pre? employment hiring steps. For emtple, CBP would need to conduct individual vetting of the applicant?s education and work experience and administer entrance, ?tness, medical, and polygraph examinations to all applicants prior to making the conditional offer. This is a misuse of CliP resources and applicants" time to have them go through these steps to receive a conditional offer, only to then rescind the offer based on a negative suitability ?nding pertaining to past criminal convictions and behavior or adverse credit history. Since May 2014, CBP has removed approximately 10 percent of the total applicant population based on infomzation obtained dining the initial screen-out questions review. The removal of unsuitable applicants prior to the issuance of the tentative offer resultedin an approximate cost avoidance of 3794 per applicant. During Fiscal Year (FY) 20.16, and FY to date, CLBP received approximately 187,000 applications for CB and EPA positions. .?lhe total 2 number of CBPO and applicants screened out Luring this period was 18,161. This represents a total cost avoidance of more than $14 million in less than tWo years. March 7.2, 2017 . Page 3 of4 Appendix A Exception Request for U. S. Gusto ms and Border Protection (CBP) DHS OCHCO The public trust or national security would be impacted negatively if inquiries are delayed until a conditional offer of employment is made because: Other: 2. Timing and extent of applicant background inquiries (current and proposed). As outlined above, CBP requires potential law enforcement and frontline applicants to ?ll out a Gateway Questionnaire prior to submission of their onliue application. This questionnaire contains screen?out questions regarding past criminal convictions, behavior which is criminal in nature, and adverse credit history. If the potential applicant answers these questions in the af?rmative, s/he. will not be able to continue?past the application process because she is deemed ineligible. CBP is requesting an exception to continue the current process, to include continued use of the Gateway Questionnaire at the time of application. If you have any questions regarding this request, please contact Veronica Bell, Director, Staf?ng Policy Compensation Classi?cation Compliance, Human Re nd Policy, Office of Human Resources Management, at_r March 22, 2017 Page 4 of 4 UNITED STATES OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT Washington, DC 20415 Employee Services JUN 2 6201? Ms. Gwen Yandall Executive Director Human Capital Policy and Programs US. Department of Homeland Security 245 Murray Lane, SW Building 410 Mail Stop 0170 Washington, DC. 20528-0170 Dear Ms. Yandall: The US. Of?ce of Personnel Management (0PM) approves, for certain positions as Speci?ed below, your request, on behalf of the U.S. CUStoms and Border Protection (CBP), for an exception to the restriction in 5 C.F.R. parts 330 and 731 on making certain inquiries into an applicant's criminal and/or adverse credit background history prior to maldng a conditional offer of employment. 5 C.F.R. 330.1300 addresses the requirements and standards for exception requests, in relevant part, as follows: [I]n certain situations, agencies may have a business need to obtain information about the background of applicants earlier in the hiring process to determine if they meet the quali?cations requirements or are suitable for the position being ?lled. If so, agencies must request an exception ??om the Of?ce of Personnel Management in order to determine an applicant?s ability to meet quali?cations or suitability for Federal employment prior to making a conditional offer of employment to the applicant(s). 0PM will grant exceptions only when the agency demonstrates Speci?c job-related reasons why the agency needs to evaluate an applicant's criminal or adverse credit history earlier in the process or consider the disquali?cation of candidates with criminal backgrounds or other conduct issues from particular types of positions. 0PM will consider such factors as, but not limited to, the nature of the position being ?lled and whether a clean criminal history record would be essential to the ability to perform one of the duties of the position effectively. 0PM may also consider positions for which the expense of completing the examination makes it appropriate to adjudicate suitability at the outset of the process. On March 22, 2017, DHS requested exceptions to pennit suitability screening earlier in the hiring process for applicants to the following positions: (5), (M (NH (5), (M (NH Recruit, Retain and Honor a World?Class Workforce to Serve the American People Ms. Gwen Yandall . 2 However, for certain posmons - request not provr spec reasons or I needto evaluate applicants? criminal or adverse credit history earlier' In the process, or for need to disqualify candidates with criminal backgrounds or othei conduct' issues. Accordingly, 0PM requested a supplementary submission, which DHS provided on April 5,2017. 0PM is approving the request for the positions requested, in accordance with 5 C.F.R. 330.1300, based on the suf?cient job-related business reasons provided by DHS as follows: 0 DHS indicates the expense of the examination process makes it appropriate to adjudicate suitability or quali?cations before expending funds on other examination elements that are required, including medical examinations, ?tness examinations, and polygraphs: DHS indicates adverse criminal conduct or other adverse personal history would be disqualifying from performing the core position duty to credibly testify in grand jury investigations or court or other legal proceedings making it inef?cient to defer suitability screening, for the following positions:. DHS?indicates conviction of a crime of domesticviolen?ce would disqualify an individual from carrying a ?rearm, which is a condition of employment for the Ms.GwenYandall - 3 an uestions lease feel free email at by phone at Sincerely, Kimberly A. Holden Deputy Associate Director Recruitment and Hiring Mahoney, MichaelJ From: Holden, Kimberly A. Sent: Friday, March 31, 2017 3:25 PM To, (6) Cc: l0) (0) Mahoney, Michael Yandall, Gwen;(b) (6) Subject: Re: Status: DHS Ban the Box Exceptions Submission (6) can you call me at? Kimberly A, Holden Deputy Associate Director, Recruitment and Hiring of Personnel Management On Mar 31, 2017, at 11:11 (6) (6) Irote: Kim, As a follow-up to your message to Angie, please see full issue below from CBP regarding their announcements. Any further update or guidance is appreciated. CBP: To ensure proper coordinatitn'i of our law enforcement announcements (one that is scheduled to close today and another scheduled to open tomorrow) we really need direction from 0PM on whether their intent is to provide (131? with an exception. if this is not intent, we will need to coordinate with our Hiring Team and 0PM to make several modi?cations to our announcements re?ecting the requirements of ban the box. This will take a substantial amount of time and work this morning and throughout the today, which is the reason we are eager to get a if you do not believe that we will get a response from 0PM by this morning, will extend the closing date of our current CBPO announcement (which closes today) and operate under status quo procedures. excluding the intent of ban the box. guth .. v.4; rhuJFrom: Holden, Kimberly A. Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2017 9:13:20 AM To: Bailey, Angela Cc: Reinhold, Mark Subject: Re: Status: DHS Ban the Box Exceptions Submission Angie- no need to shut down the announcements. Kimberly A, Holden Deputy Associate Director, Recruitment and Hiring Of?ce of Personnel Management On Mar 28, 2017, at 4:30 PM, Bailey, Angela _rote: We'rc very concerned this goes into effect in two days. We have jobs on the street. Can we hold it in abeyance since we have submitted our request timely. It will cost us a fortune if we can't get this exception. We will have to shut down our CBP of?cer and agent announcements. This is a huge deal for us. Do we need to discuss. From: Holden, Kimberly A. Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 4:15:28 PM To: Bailey, Angela Cc: Reinhold, Mark Subject: RE: Status: DHS - Ban the Box Exceptions Submission Hi Angie, Thank you for submitting the Ban the Box exception request. We will ?nalize our review and response soonest. With regard. to the DHA, we need. to make some additional edits to our approval memo in response to your ?nal request that you sent on Friday. I hope to have these changes completed soon so that we can expedite the cl earanee through OGC. Kimberly A. Holden Deputy Associate Director Recruitment and iring Off ice of Personnel Management Employee Services .1900 Street, N. W. 6500M From: Bailey, Angela [mailt Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 1:54 PM To: Reinhold, Mark Holden, Kimberly A. Subject: FW: Status: DHS - Ban the Box Exceptions Submission Mark/Kim?for your awareness. Any assistance we can receive in expediting this request is appreciated. Please let me know if you?d like to discuss further. Also, following up on our DHA request. have to report out tomorrow to Dep i?d like to say it is approved by OPM. Otherwise, anticipate a call from Chip to Kathy. have attempted to manage expectations regarding how long things take to clear at 0PM. "Angie Angela Bailey Chief Human Capital Officer Homeland Security To make an appointment, please email or cal/(b) (6) ?With honor and integrity, we will safeguard the American people, our homeland, and our values.? (Junfidemiz;My Fleece: This message, any musiciaments, isirnencieil {Plilyfvi/l" r24- is and tut-rinses than may Luriliifaential. legal?pretenses", privacy- relevant proprietary in nature ar'm?hmwirug?t?ctcci'edis?y liver; i'czeivmi this message in err-3r, you are fies-em; that "ending, sharing, copying or this message, its -. ., .-.. ., -. ?In. .. .. . LOliifrmm, is reply if) alz'lit?tt: 1h}; $05914 (If ?in? From: Yandall, Gwen Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 1:48 PM To: Mahonev, Michael Cc: Bailey, Angela (6) (6) Mark (6) - 6 Subject: FW: Status: OHS Ban the Box Exceptions Submission Mike, Need your help in approving the exceptions to timing on suitability inquiries, aka ?ban the box? from DHS that were submitted on March 22, 2017. If 0PM does not grant this exception, expeditious hiring will be greatly impacted (please see attached). announcement Closed on March 27, and we would like this exception approved so they may proceed with their suitability inquiries required in their hiring process. Please let me know if there are any questions. Thanks! I GWEN YANDALL Executive Director Human Capital Policy and PrOgrams De artment of Homeland Security To make on appointment, please email or comb) (6) (6) With honor and integrity, we will safeguard the American people, our homeland, and our values.? (ionfiu'ssntiolit'y Notice.- "this including any is totem ed ?Juli/jot the or colityfiesj to which it is addressed our! :wvtains inforirnrtion that may be {collideruia? legally paoier;ted, pfr?vi?u?y "elm-17m", proprietor}: in nature or nthemise protected by oi; insure. if you received this message in error, you are herein; notified that l??a?li?fj, sharing} copying o: (iism'buting this nu3w?3ff23w?, or it; tome-rite, is prohibited. telephone or reply to me inneesliateiy ano? delete copies of the motsege. From:(b) (6) Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2017 1:52 PM To: ?Mahoney, Michael (5) (6) Subject: DHS Ban the Box Exceptions Submission Mike, as follow up to Gwen?s note below, please find attached the DHS request for exceptions to timing of suitability inquiries, aka ?ban the box? exceptions request. We. appreciate expedited consideration ofour request. Please contact me with any questions. - R. (6) Please con?rm receipt of this message due to noted email issues. (6) Manager, Hiring Reform and Staf?ng Policy Human Capital Policy and Programs Department of lomeland Security, HQ (6) From: Yandall, Gwen Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2017 12:17 PM T0: Mahonev, Michael Subject: FW: Upcoming DHS - Ban the Box Exceptions Submission lie-[lo Mike. Giving you a heads up. DIIS will be submitting our Ban the Box Exceptions later today. We are requesting expedited review and approval ofthese exceptions as they will directly impact current major hiring efforts by two of our components, CBP and Please- contact my (6) (6) fyou have any questions or need additional mionnatmn. 'l?hanks for your consideration. (3. YANDALL Executive Director Human Capital Policy and Programs De artment of Homeland Security To make an appointment, please email or 60? 2 ?With honor and integrity, we will safeguard the American people, our homeland, and our values.? Coyg'hl'eng?ialjly Mylar 711i: c-rzrm'l' ?wiggling; any gifaa'lm?lel'rx ,3 jelerw?r'z! only f'iiz' Eli-'3 person-{e} 2mm 1'83} to which is minimum em? contains {ha-f may be ranfr?a'eritirll, legally pm??sscted, ,aviwniy refer-art, pro-uric 3323: ll.- mmre er a?wwlse by law??am disclcaxiure. {i'you regain-ea" rm"; it: era-27:1. you are emu-why rmi?ljlurj ill-.7: readings, sham-n), rum-5mg 1): rilzrl'iinzruzg 551:3. ?#955251.anv' games-23. 5-1 thlh-?nr?. Plum-L? L: {may u. .12: and air ?01.44; (ha. Mahoney, Michael From: Mahoney, Michael Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2017 8:54 AM To; (6) Subject: Re: BTB Exceptions for CPB CBP's Frontline Gateway Questionnaire Full Context Yes, that one came thru Sent from my iPad 6 On Aug 10, 2017, at 8:47 b) (6) wrote: Mike, just checking to see if you received this email/attachment from 7/24. due to the security issues. ll" not. l?ll try and resend. R, (6) From:(b) (6) Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2017 12:42 PM To: 'Mahoney, Michael Holden, Kimberly A- (6) Subject: BTB Exceptions for CPB - CBP's Frontline Gateway Questionnaire Full Context Mike M., In response to the ?in part? CBP ban-the-box approval, please see the below memo and attachment from DHS-CBP providing more information to the Gateway Questionnaire to gain endorsement. The attachment has been due to the sensitivity of the questionnaire; the password will be sent in email 2. Please contact me if you have any questions. Thanks 1 (6) Manager, Staffin Policy Human Capital Policy and Programs CBP would like to extend our gratitude to 0PM in securing approval for an exception to the restriction in 5 ORR. parts 330 and 731 regarding the timing of suitability inquiries for 7 1 speci?c (listed below) mission-critical frontlinc positions within U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP). (6) In response, we would like to provide additional information regarding the CBP Frontlinc Gateway Questionnaire, to include the full text of the collection and the purpose it serves in the hiring process, for Ol?Ms situational awareness as outlined below. The full text of the CBP Frontline Gateway Questionnaire is provided as an electronic attachment to the application process. Potential applicants for frontline positions are required to fill out the questionnaire electronically (online) prior to the submission of their online application. The estimated time required to complete the questionnaire is only approirimately five (5) minutes. The questionnaire contains minimum screen-out questions regarding past criminal convictions. behavior which is criminal in nature, and severe adverse ?nancial credit history. 7 . Use of the questionnaire to remove these applicants as early in the process as feasible saves the agency a signi?cant amount of i money, time. and resources when filling its mission-critical frontline positions. We believe that failure to pro-screen applicants, would be a misuse of government resources and applicants? time, and with the use of our online (electronic) Gateway Questionnaire further complies with the Paperwork Reduction Act. We appreciate the opportunity to provide additional information on the full text of the collection and purpose of CBPs Gateway lirontline Questionnaire. Note: This document is Law Enforcement Sensitive and please do not share with the public. If contact me ac? Con?dentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any attachments. is intended only for the persont's) or entityties) to which it is addressed and contains information that. may be con?dential, legally protected, privacy relevanL proprietary in nature or otherwise protected by law from disclosure. you received this message in error, you are hereby noti?ed that reading. sharing, copying or distributing this message, or its contents, is prohibited. Please telephone or reply to me immediately and delete all copies ofthc message. From: Mahoney, Michael - Sent: Monday, June 26, 2017 4:17:29 PM To: Yandall, Gwen Cc: Holden, Kimberly (6) Subject: BTB exceptions for CPB and ICE Hi Gwen, Attached are the approvals. Please note that for each 0PM approves in -mike Michael J. Mahoney Manager, Hiring Policy 5: DHS DHA ACQUISTITION Mahonex, Michael 4 From: Holden, Kimberly A. Sent: Monday, September 11, 2017 8:31 AM To: Mahoney, Michael} Subject: Fwd: REVISED: DHS Acquisitions Workforce DHA Submission Request for Preliminary Review Attachments: image001.png; ATT00001.htm; DHS Direct Hire Request - Acquisitions Workforcedocx; ATT00002.htm Mike- can you get back to-on the status of this request? Thanks Kimberly A, Holden - Deputy Associate Director, Recruitment and Hiring Mnemanegamem Begin forwarded message: From: Date: September 8, 2017 at 3:32:33 PM EDT To: "Holden, Kimberly Karen 003) (6) (6) Subject: REV15ED: DHS Acquisitions Workforce DHA Submission - Request for Preliminary Review Hello Kim/Karen, Please see the attached preliminary request (REVISED) for Direct Hire Authority for initial 0PM review. This request is based upon a critical need of candidates due to the border security Executive Order and the impending expiration of government-wide DHA for acquisitions positions. We request that you please perform an initial review at your earliest convenience and provide us with any necessary feedback. Please contact me if you have questions about the reqUest. Thank you for your continued efforts in assisting DHS with these requests. Due to reported email delivery i55ues, please confirm receipt of this request and attachments. Vir (6) Hiring Reform and Staffing Policy Human Capital Poiicy and Programs Department of Homeland Security, HQ (6) . . .. aawmw-N- O?ice ofthe Chief Human Capital 035cc:- U.S. Department of Homeland Security Washington, DC 20528 Mun-mi; - RwV-lk' . . ?v'g?mn- . .W. J: .rL in?. 5:19.. tgrg?graoisgly. Huh: un?lr m1.? . rib,? I. ??3?1?5E_?g?a?umalhuu??O?'ice of the Chief Human Capital O?icer Department of Homeland Security Washington, DC 20528 ?ung? Homeland Security . .IJ .M I. .A .21 hub" dun??la??r . 12 . 9 . .. :xi?kl. .. I ?gkv?unk?bahdug ..Im 0 mm .3 A marl 1:31:Page 4 Acquisition Information and Data for USCG 2 . 1 . . . .IIL . . .. I. .u .- iriE3EE. . . .. . . Current Vacancy Current Vacancy Current Vacancy Current Vacancy Current Vacancy Current Vacancy Current Vacancy Current Vacancy Current Vacancy Current Vacancy Current Vacancy Current Vacancy Current Vacancy Current Vacancy Current Vacancy Current Vacancy Current Vacancy Current Vacancy Current Vacancy Current Vacancy Current Vacancy Current Vacancy Current Vacancy Current Vacancy Current Vacancy Current Vacancy Current Vacancy Current Vacancy Current Vacancy Current Vacancy Current Vacancy Current Vacancy - Current Vacancy Current Vacancy Current Vacancy Current Vacancy Current Vacancy Current Vacancy Current Vacancy Current Vacancy Current Vacancy Current Vacancy Current Vacancy Current Vacancy Current Vacancy Current Vacancy Current Vacancy Current Vacancy Current Vacancy . ~asgg~9?lnu?dn?wuhg?gunman.? Acquisition Information and Data for NPPD i Ac uisition Information and Data for NPPD Page 3 Information on Direct-Hire Authority Request for Acquisition Positions within USCIS .. 5 5 5 can 3-Mahoney, Michael . From: Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2017 3:02 PM To: Mahoney, Michael Cc: Holden, Kimberly A. Subject: RE: DHS Acquisition Workforce DHA Submission Request for Preliminary Review Thanks, Mike, we appreciate the quick turnaround. We?ll start working on the edits. From: Mahoney, Michael Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2017 Cc: Holden, Kimberly A. Subject: RE: DHS Acquisition Workforce DHA Submission - Request for Preliminary Review Here are our initial thoughts on your prelim request: 1 Let me know if you?d to discuss further ?mike From: Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2017 12:39 PM To: Holden, leberly Jacobs, Karen Cc:(b) (6) Subject: DHS Acquisition Workforce DHA Submission - Request for Preliminary Review Hello Kim/Karen, Please see the attached preliminary request for Direct Hire Authority for initial 0PM review. This request is based upon a severe shortage of candidates and the impending expiration of government-wide DHA for acquisition positions. We request that you please perform an initial review at your earliest convenience and provide us with any necessary feedback. Please contact me if you have questions about the request or attachments. Thank you for your continued efforts in assisting DHS with these reqUests. Due to reported email delivery issues, please con?rm receipt of this request and attachments. V/r, (6) Hiring Reform and Staffing Policy Human Capital Policy and Programs ent of Homeland Security, HQ Homeland .4: 1 . - Security ?With honor and integrity, we will safeguard the American people, our homeland, and our valuesuri?f- - .-.. - .v 'c i. ., In. . 540516. {(31.5 {.Nzy lu'r' (if that mm b; :enjiden 15:3}, Petiuffv of ear .rtis'evam, cry in eaten: or .w z. . ii," lawfmm xiiscioszrie. if you received ?if: rimmige in error, 32-3-2! are hereby nch?fir-sf am. reading, we}: this er ifs commits, is. invisibft?cd. Pusan-unmedimiz-s?y and delete an triples {am Mahoney:I Michael From: Jacobs, Karen Sent: Monday, September 11, 2017 8:07 AM To: Mahoney, Michael Subject: FW: REVISED: DHS Acquisitions Workforce DHA Submission - Request for Preliminary Review Attachments: DHS Direct Hire Request Acquisitions Workforcedocx Importance: High Mr. Mahoney, (6) I sent a copy of this to Figured you had assigned her the original request. #5535) (6) Sent: Friday, September 08, 2017 1:55 PM To: Holden, Kimberly Jacobs, Karen cc(b) (6) Subject: REVISED: DHS Acquisitions Workforce DHA Submission - Request for Preliminary Review Hello Kim/Karen, Please see the attached preliminary request (REVISED) for Direct Hire Authority for initial 0PM review. This request is based upon a critical need of candidates due to the border security Executive Order and the impending expiration of government-wide DHA for acquisitions positions. We request that you please perform an initial review at your earliest convenience and provide us with any necessary feedback. Please contact me if you have questions about the request. Thank you for your continued efforts in assisting DHS with these requests. Due to reported email delivery issues, please confirm receipt of this request and attachments. Hiring Reform and Staffing Policy Human Capital Policy and Programs Department of Homeland Security, HQ (6) Homeland Securlty "With honor and integrity, we will safeguard the American people, our homeland, and our values." {J?org?deniz?a?z'y Notice: This ear/325:8 message, my arm chmem?s, is irmmdezf 0wa for emii'yg?feg) Er; it 55' (rafdresjsea' aw} {reaming frivrnzaciimn that? may be mimic}! ,?r?eiewwi; in warfare or si?wwise pr?oiae'ai'ted by {aw ?am 15.355303 um. ?f?yvu s?ea?eived ?5 mesmg?s ii} are 319;; are hereby ?otf?ed that reading}, sharis?mmrogjyz'nggr or dis?z'fbui'fng ibis; rrz?zsmga, acmi'erz?s; 5?5 pmz??bfi?ez'?, #555159 'feiepfzme or r'epfy rm: Md sieez?eie of me: Hit-3350963, (If/ice q/?tlze Capital Officer U.S. Department ofllomelaml Security Washington, DC 20528 Mahonex, Michael From: Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2017 3:19 PM To: Ma?honey, Michael Subject: FW: REVISED: DHS Acquisitions Workforce DHA Submission -- Request for Preliminary Review Hi Mike, Have you had an opportunity to take a look at our revised request? Our Components are struggling to get selectees onboard before the current government-wide authority expires on 9/30. Any assistance you can provide would be greatly appreciated. From: Jacobs, Karen -. Sent: Monday, September 11, 2017 7:58 AM To: Cc: Holden, Kimberly A. Subject: RE: DHS Acquisitions Workforce DHA Submission Request for Preliminary Review Good Morning,- received the revised request and will pass it on to Mike Mahoney and staff. Karen Jacobs Senior Policy Advisor Recruitment and Hiring Policy Office of Personnel Management From:(b) (6) Sent: Friday, September 08, 2017 3:33 PM To: Holden, Kimberly Jacobs, Karen Cc:(b) (6) Subject: REVISED: DHS Acquisitions Workforce DHA Submission - Request for Preliminary Review Hello Kim/Karen, Please see the attached preliminary request (REVISED) for Direct Hire Authority for initial OPM review. This request is based upon a critical need of candidates due to the border Security Executive Order and the impending expiration of government-wide DHA for acquisitions positions. We request that you please perform an initial review at your earliest convenience and provide us with any necessary feedback. Please contact me if you have questions about the request. Thank you for your continued efforts in assisting DHS with these requests. Due to reported email deiivery issues, ptease con?rm receipt of this request and attachments. V/r, i: Hiring Reform and Staffing Policy Human Capitat Policy and Programs Department of Homeland Security, HQ 3 Homeland :fi?Security ?4 4. :?ln-u-f "With honor and integrity, we will safeguard the American people, our homeland, and our values." (I- n: (112? 22-2.- 2ss?oge 22 LI 1< on}. for-flat, ?ersom?y? or to whx?rhif 2; 21-69333317'21927' I cc:- M92 ec 13.61.27. 5mrecrea prep-Heavy 2'22 nature or 31.2: credby lav 7? I dw- if 33.22.: r2?: run-92'? 9 yin" 2 2:02- 01? sniff: gr, com/2'21 v.02 dim the; 2718;: 21:;2; 1r (icon? 2 E. 2:2;2 23232:? (1 2"2>12>v :02" ".?rlry 2'22 nr's marrow? 2522?: 222911220 221' 39021750?th Mahonex, Michael From: (6) (6) Sent: Monday, September 25, 2017 1:38 PM To: Holden, Kimberly Mahoney, Michael Cc: (6) Subject: URGENT: DHS Acquisition Workforce DHA Submission - Request for Expedited Review Attachments: DHS Direct Hire Request - Acquisitions Workforcedocx Importance: High Hello Kim, As a followup to Gwen?s status request last week, the OM B-pro posed language that was anticipated would be included in the NDAA does not appear to be in either of the final House or Senate versions. Due to the exclusion, DHS is requesting an expedited review of our direct hire authority reduest for acquisitions positions. This is a critical hiring need for DHS, due to the recent Executive Order on Border Security, and the expiration this week ofthe government-wide DHA. expedited review of our DHA request would be greatly appreciated. Thanks for your assistance. Resending attachment: Due to reported email delivery issues, please confirm receipt of this request and attachments. Rt (6) Manager, Staffing Policy Of?ce ol?the Chief Human ztpital (?IJf?cer/i lCl?l? l.)epartment of Homeland Security From:(b) (6) To: Holden. Kimberly A. cobs, Karen Cc: (6) Subject: REVISED: DHS Acquisition WorKTorce UHA bUDllIlbblUll nequest ?emery Hello Kim/Karen, Please see the attached preliminary request (REVISED) for Direct Hire Authority for initial 0PM review. This request is based upon a critical need of candidates due to the border security Executive Order and the impending expiration of government-wide DHA for acquisitions positions. We request that you please perform an initial review at your earliest convenience and provide us with any necessary feedback. Please contact me if you have questions about the request. Thank you for your continued efforts in assisting DHS with these requests. Due to reported email delivery issues, please confirm receipt of this request and attachments. Hiring Reform and Staffing Policy Human Capital Policy and Programs De artment of Homeland Security, HQ Kg! Homeland 1 Security ?With honor and integrity, we will safeguard the American people, our homeland, and our values.? {Inn?r'ent'r?uliry rubrics: This anv afraez'hrnr-u's, is. to whiz-f; H, adu?s?ersfd and an: 4 sinrarmavtmn than I: may b1 waik?cieni'iai, ren?fiv pr? :?i?iPL?z?m-f, i=7 or ow:- wis by int-v firm c?gsciazrzane, if v.31; {his message in are: .sw?vby :mr?ie-z?l aim: arudmg. Shanna. wiszribtzfuw 2m; massage, or It.? cements(uh! C?f ?2113;?? DHS SPECIAL SALARY RATES ()?ire Of?lt? (hp?lmi Of?cer Department of Homeland Security Washington, DC 20528 WY 2017 Brenda L. Roberts Deputy Associate Director Pay and Leave, Employee Services US. Office of Personnel Management 1900 E. StreetNW Washington, DC. 20415-1000 Dear Ms. Roberts: The Department of Homeland Security (DI-IS) requests approval to extend the current special salary rate (SSR) Table-0706 to Customs and Border Protection Of?cer (CBPO) positions in (7)05) The special rate currently applies to Customs and Border Protection. (CBP) 08-04014, Agriculture Specialists positions. This rate will ensureparity between equivalent grades and Agriculture Specialistsinm (NE) it?) mam will provide DHS. with a competitive pay rate, increasing its ability to retain?CBPO's lin hard-tofu! positions and meet its" mission. - CBPOs possess specialized knowledge related to the prevention of terrorists entering the United States at its ports of entry. Employees in these positions have unique skills in the detection, interdiction, and apprehension of those who attempt to illegally enter or smuggle contraband into the country. The enclosed request addresses the need for additional compensatiOn to attract and retain CBPOs in the remote location 01?? (7)05) is evidenced by inability to maintain staf?ng at higher grade levels. The use ot'non-pay solutions, such as job redesign, alternate work schedules and telework are not available due to the unique nature of the work performed by CBPOs. Without the SSR, ,it is anticipated that the current difficulty to retain CBPOs ir(b) (WE) vill continue and that approval of this special salary'rate will encourage eligible CBPOs at other locationsto relocate to(b) While the original CBP request includes Border Patrol Agent (BPA) positions, CBP elected, to withdraw the EPA occupationfrom the request. The original CBP reQUest and completed 0PM Form 1397 are enclosed for your review and approval. Shouldmc'mbers of your staff WW aycontact? ms)! email at Sincerely, (6) Gwen Yandall Executivc Director Human Capital Policy and Programs Department of Homeland Security Enclosures. .. s-w - - 1300 Avenue NW Washington, DC 207.29 I U. S. Customs and R: 5 Border Protection 3?4? 6" ?an" MAY 1 6 MEMORANDUM FOR: Angela Bailey Chief Human CapitalOft?Icer Department of Homeland Security . .- (6) FROM: Lll'td? L. Jacks Assistant Comvm Oftice ol Human Resources Management SUBJECT: Request for Special Salary Rate for Frontline Positions along the Northem Border U. Customs and Border ProtectiOn (CRPI reauests your approval for a Special salary rate (SSR) tor targeted positions in zeogtaphic location. The requestis for an additional 40 percent or the current salary, wIIiCh includes the base rate plus the respective locality pay. The targeted groups are (38-1895 CBP Of?cers (CBPO) at the GS- 05 through 14 grade levels and (384896 Border Patrol Agents (BPA) at grades 12 and I3. CBPOs and Bl?As possess specialized knowledge related to the prevention of terrorists and instruments of terror entering the United States. Employees In these positions have unique skills In the detection interdiction, and apprehension of those who attempt to illegally onto or smuggle people or contraband into the country CBPOs onk at ports ol entry, and BPAs an: assigned to work between the ports along the U. S. borders. and are critically important to mission ol'sal?eguarding America?s borders and establishing an SSR for them is essential in addlessing frontline hiring needs along the Northern Border. The attached request addresses the need t0] additional compensation for employees who work In the remote location 01(b) evidenced by inability to maintain mandated staf?ng levels and labor mantel data that support an SSR. The use of non- -pay solutions, such asjob redesign alternate work schedules. and tclework arrangements are not available due to the work?s unique nature Without the anticipates that the current dilhculty to reeruit and retain of?cers and. agents i(b )will continue as most current employees will relocate and applicants will accept pualuuns in more'desirable locations. The Iecruitment and retention of CBPOs and BPAs at this location' 15 considered a critically important matter of border security. This was evident whenib (7 - .. .. .I-vnw-H?Request for Special Salary Rate for Frontline Positions along the Northern Border Page 2 Other F7edEe'ral agencies have approved $5113 for occupations affected by oil production the request is in line with the 2015 SSR approved for positions in this area. (b (7 and the expected life span of oil production in thin) This. is, according to the(b) comprises Federal agencies and was created to exchange information, identify common issues, andiiseek-rsolutionsto ongoing andemerging challenges associated with 1115b) energy boom, CBPOs and BPAs are unique to CBP, so the proposed SSR will cause no adverse effects, such as pay inequity and staf?ng problems, to occur for other agencies or My staff will be available to work with your of?ce on any administrative details necessary Please feel free to contact me i tions. If members of your staff have any questions, th Of?ce of Harden or via e-mail at Attachment iumau of Land Managemenc Bureau of Indian Affairs. Bureau of Rcclarnatiom Environmental Protection Agency. Forest Service, National Park Service. USDA Farm Services Agency i (7 i JSDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Of?ce of Indian Energy and Economic ?D?ev'elopment, Office of Special Trustee for American Ind tans, Of?ce of Natural Resources Revenue. US Army Corps of Engineers, US GeOIOgical Survey, DEPARTMENT OF HOMEL-AN SECURITY U.S. CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION SPECIAL SALARY RATE REQUEST (33-1895 Customs and Border Protection Officer - Grades 5, 7, 9, 11,12, 13, and 14 11mm This reQu?s't is to establish coverage of a special?salary rate (SSR) under the authority of 5305 and 5 CF ?-530, subp?art C, for Customs and BorderProtection Of?cer positions in the(b) iuty location within US. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), a component of the Department ofHomeland Security (DI-IS). Section Tme of Regglest and Agency Contact I Information 1. Type: New - to establish an SSR 2-. Agency Contact Infomntion(b) (6) EMS Compensation and Bene?ts, Human Capital Policy and Programs Of?ce ofthe Chief Human Capital Of?cer (6) Section II, Coverage 1. Occupation, series, job title for the occupation covered by this request: Occupations: Inspection, Investigation, Enforcement, and Compliance Series and Job Title: 03-1895 CBP Of?cer Attachment 1 - Position Descriptions 2. ?Namc and code of each agency and sub-element with positions covered by this request. Agency/sun element code: HS CU Agency/sub element name: Department of Homeland Security, .S-. Customs and Border Protection 2a. Duty Station State, City, County, Locality Fay Area, etc, as applicable: . Duty Location I Duty Location Code I Locality Pay Area (7X5) . Rest of the R?t'of the Rest of the Section Staf?ng Status 1. Staf?ng data that represents a snapshot of the staf?ng- situation (7) two speci?c dates. Beginning-Snapshot: anuary 9,}016 I Ending Snapshot January 7, 2017 .r - . - 05-1895 customs and Border Protection Of?cer .- GS . On. Vacant Total On Vacant Total Grade board positions positions board pesitions positions *Note: TheFuil Performance Level (FPL) of the Journey-Level CBP Of?cer-is GS-iz. Therefore, the staf?ng level for the (7XE) TBP Of?cers broken-out by'the following grades and numbers of authorized positions: . Sectioniv: Recruitment and Tgrnove?r . . . 1. Staf?ng data represents recruiting and turnoVer that occurred during the entire reporting period in the 3.130?? snapshot. Recruitment . Turnover during snapshot period during snags shot period 1895 Customs and Border Pretec?on Of?cer .. . GS-Gta'de Positions Offers Number Transfers Quits Quits for Attempted to Made Hired Pay . . . Fill ., . . Note: Job offers for CBP Officers are made at the GS-OS 07 or 09 level with an FPL 12 Offers are made depending on the applicant?s quali?cations Offers are- not made at the GS- 12 level. Therefore, even though CBP was pursuing ten (10) FPL GS-lz positions the actual offers will be at either the 08-05, 07 or 09 level. In the time period abcve, ?ve (5) bffers were made at" the (is-'05 level with three (3) accepting and entering on duty and two (2) applicants declining the location after clearing all the pre-employment steps, and Rm (4) o?ers were made at the 63-07 level with all four (4) accepting and entering on duty. 11". 0 ed eci lRat hedule Section VII. Narrative gg??cgm! a} Explain the cause of the signi?cant recruitinentfteten?onproblenh b. Explain whether 8811: are needed to address (1) an existing recruitment or retention problem or (2) a c. Explain how the nature of the exk?ng labor market-is a?ec??z' your agency?s ability to recruit or retain by the request. CBP Of?cer: Declination Reasons (7) (E) (throughout the pre-employment processes) fa Fiscal Year Declined Grade Declined Declined Declined'for- Grand for Higher Location Po'sition for Other Reasons Total Salary Another Offer 2013 0 67 1 82 . 2014 3 15 75 13 106 2015' .l -0. 67 21 .109 2016 0 3 34 0 37 2017 3 4 0 8 Grand Total 5- 45 247 45 342 Declination Notes: .0 Job opportunities for FY 2013, FY 2014, FY 2015 quarter (Q) l; andFY ZOISQZ were announcedthroughtegions. All applicants who selected the ?Northwest? location will ,be considered in the count. Beginning With FY 2015Q3, speci?c announcements were issued fon(b) FY 20'! 7' counts go through February 13, 2017. Declinations are counted throughout all pro-employment processes. Applicants are removed from pre-employment processes for failing to successfully complete the structured interview, and/or the medical, ?tness, polygraph, and/or background investigation, as well as for declining. Without additional incentives, CBP is expected to continue to experience a high declination rate'for positions in this location. 8 d, Explain ?ue degree to which your agency his considered and used other pay?e?h?i?es to-a?eyi?te the. Staf?ng problems,? Ineludlng- recruitment and relocation bonuses, retention allowances, superior-quali?cations authority, student loan repayments, and performance awards. Exnleinjhe degree-to which your ageneyhas considered and used~other non-spay solutions to the staf?ng problems,- such. as conducting-aggressiverecrui?ng programs, using appropriote redesigning jobs, estab?gll'in'g 'or enhancing taming programs, authorizing ?exible work schedules and/or telework arrangements,- and improving working conditions. 1':in the-staf?ng problem is affecting accomplishment of your agency?s mission. :nm: ITEM . .. VALUE Counterfeit Apple, Bluctoo?l'Phbne Accwsory, and Balance . $387,398.00 211912016 Hov?rbo?mds counterfeit LG, 31mm Mercedcs $586,774.00 10 211612016 Mercedes . . . .. .. . Questionnil. Mignon: ulilt Is able to ucrult peoplqwith ,the . Responses Positive Neutral Negative Know Department ?Homeland Security 41,687 27.2' 42.8 1.32;] customs and Border Protection 11,393. 26.6 48.0 418' Office of?gidoperatlons 5.8321 245 . 25.4 . 50.1 200 424i 26.4 54.3 . 12 l2 g. ,E'xpmn and pro'vlde estimm of the com attributable-to the _sta?'mg sltlia?bn which would bum offset if thisSSR ls appmv?d, such-as overtime; contracting, training, recruiting, o'r other costs. 1'3 Organizationai Location (MB 57 44 --13 77.2% 42.8% 4 9.3% 5 11.2% 1506 1375 ~130 91.4% 113 8.1% 97 7,096 Office of Field Operations 4 23975 22634 ?1341 94.4% 777 3.4% 671 3.0% CBP Officer Historical Staffing Data FY2013 through FY 1017 Organization! Location ME) 54 56 46 40 44 48.5% -10 1409 1359 1502 1390 1376 1.3% 17 [of?ce of ?eld Operations 1 21481 21699 22153 22632 22634 4.3% 935 ?um, ?Mar?: i stlmated Annual Salary Costs with Special Saiary' Rate 7, ?n I v; - "11,53 Grade Step 14?08 $27110 13-06 $21 702' 13-05 .. 105,405 '1 . $19,841 12-08 $89,009 65-12-06 12-05 $81,792 $99 $301 76 12-04 $79,386 9.3 . 42 65-12-01 2,168 $87 1 $15,643 3 3 7, 8- 9 once to 65- .1 CBPO GS.- 1 168 11 3 10 430 .0390 65- 1 816 418 .3 otal Estimated Anhual Costs 745 57 38 Note: The CBP Of?cer posltlon is an FPL 65-12. Entry (38905 are hired at the 65-5. 7 or 9 levels. Therefore, depending on the entry level grade, it could be 5 years before the costsof the SSH takes effect. $72,168 $87,811 $15,643 $140,787 National Bulletin-Dam 2013 Fiscal 'Year '0 7 6 1 2 1' (7X5) for CBPO Entry Level Job Offers fort! Number of Recruitment Ince ntivies Offered Aftet Locatlan Applicant Clea rs I?m-Employment And Accepts-Job Offer 13 Nationwide (For S?lect HTF Locations) Notesf 1) Data as of feb 2, 2017. 223 37 16-5996 167 19 2) Use of recruitment intentives started in July 2015 for select Hard-to-Fill (HTF) locations. 3] Avata;(b) (7) Icantlve is $9.349 4) 0f11 recruitm eril Incenmes and zoos. 10 have been CBPOs and 1 has bean a cams 1V nth-?v41. 1.2 . m. onan?-r?wa-a-w: P0811108 DESCRIPTION {Pious madmcam on 83.6? ?mama u.8. amalgam-rm mam ?Emma-"main? ?Md-m m' mmnun?p-MWW We?. la! (6) V. Custor'n?s and Border Protection Of?Cer 634395-12 sosszi 36a introduction: This position isliocated in the Department'of Homeland I Border Protection (CBP), Of?ce of Field Operations various Portsof t9, include. land border, and Preciesranee locatiOns.' The primary is . to terrorists'a'nd insinunents of. teITOr from suturinglexitin'g the UnitedStates; to enforce_-tl1e laws that _prot?ct America?s the detection, interdiction and apprehensiOni elf-those {Who ;.attempt ,to illegally enter or smuggle; any person Or c0nttabahdauhe or are__.found unlanully present Within their respective. jurisdiction; and toL-j?ci?liiabih? orderly- of?iegdi'tiruate p'ositio'nssupperts this. missioniasa?illperfohnauce levelCustomsand Berder'IProtection Of?cer perfonns-inspecticns, intelligence analysis, examinations, and law enforcement activities including apprehension, detention and arrest'relatingito-arrival anddeparture' ofj'pet?sons, conveyances andmerchandise at the ?The enforcement and inspection continuum is prepritnariyl?sk assessment, primary inspection, secondary inspection (including diSpositionfor enforcement and registration,'exit contrcels, and post dispositiOn. Sign'i?canrdeeisions are made at. every step-cf the continuum; The of?cer must be skilled in interview techniques, . obsetva'tion techniques relative to communication and use of intelligen'eeinfonnation in order'tomake informed decisions, Guidelines have'gaps that require considerable interpretation :for application .to'-iinmediate- issuesan'd problems. TheO?icerappliesbehavioral and cultural analySis and decision?making skiils Gin ortle'rgto perfonnthe risk assessment: required to. release travelers and Shipments and to identify-those requiring-?lrther scrutiny, especially those involving terrorist individuals. and instruments of terror. Asrequired, the Off'ICer and subdues individuals with "the appropriate? useof force, The Of?cer- completes the. initial interactions. and-a more-speci?c applicatiOnLin- increasineg complex. determ inationsa's inspections pregress. The of?cer-anticipates- fu_t_ure__ trendsan'd "Equirements involving obscure problems withcomplic'ating data. I Major Duties and Responsibilities: l, Conducts a widevariety of duties to protect "the U3. homeland, "enforce federal laws, and ef?ciently facilitate legitimate trade and-travel._ La) PreprimaryfRis'kAssessment: Preprimary/riskassessment ocCurs'prior to the arrival of - persons, merchandise, as information about'Impending arrivals-is receivedvia automated manifests, entries, or paSSenger/crew information systems and-is analyzed. via various databases and other information sources. Gathers and? analyzes informationfrom- all available sources such asintelligence various databases. Identi?es Mown' or potential ten'ori'sts and instruments often-or, criminals, and and other threats-to US, borders and. national security. Assesses'threats and creates individual leokOuts and develops and. .dissem'inatBs tacticai inforrnationandiintelligence. I Page 1 of 9- Customs-and Bord er Protection'O??cer 6531 395?1 2 PM: 82.1868 Reviews and. analyzesearricrs?, importersil'and eitporters' invoices, and associated documents-to admissibility 'of-merohandise. or cargosand- levels of risk for possibl violations Of laWs-E?d threats to _national__ and agrieilltural interests-g? Ident-ifies and-targets high-risk shipments and eonveyances fOr-elieniinatiOn. Deve_lops,_plens_and participates; in tactical operations", such" as boarding; and roving-These operations employ the extensive use-of observational and interview techniques such-as busters, identification devices and range ?nders?. .Serieens enrollees of trusted traveler? programsthat are-designed to facilitate low risk arrivals. interacts with oaniers,_ other agencies and foreign entities to exchange information and. provide-- guidanoetm admissibilityicompliance. Participates in and. supports programs designedto secure. supply chains and push -outward._ . 20% b) Primary-Inspection: 'Primary'inspection .isthe questioning and visUal-eXamination oftiav'elers - toxdetertnine alienage, citizenship! admissibility,- and the need for ?irther inspect-tones Well-as the physical and viisual examination of cargo and'conveyan'ces to determine-admissibility Or the: needgfor farther inspection. Ripidly analyzes inform ationi and applies-observational Skills, interview and 'teehn'OIOgy in order- to: - I Determine admissibility 'De?tect- fraudulent claims to citizenship . . Assess-the terrorism threat of persons, goods and-conveyances .A'ssess the. Public Health-threat of persons,- goods and conveyances Detect-?the maritime and level ofirediation Ass'eSs- suSpect?d criminality Assess perSOns and goods for potential health threats .Assess-.-.the' potential. threa for smuggling ofhumans', narcotics, Commercial-0r agricultural cOn'trabandt tattoos-ob techniques and__monitors behavior toassess risk for possible involvement in terrorism, criminal, or violation of-status activities. Conducts a wide range-of- record checks? using a variety ofdatabaSes' and Systems and uses tactical intelligence to-identify-highsrisk travelers. Determines whether traveler (citizen or alien), cargo, or conveyance may be immediately admitted' or- referred to. secondary Inspection for ?irther processing. Controls conveyances, goods and applicants ?for admissionldepartuwu ntil 3? processing" is complete. Rapidly reticts -_to potential threats-This includes the controlled use of force as per agency guidelines where..nece'ssary and may include the use of deadly fOrce. ?nzdg Customs and Border Protection-Officer 052139542 Posszl'ssa Analyzes'a wid?eivarietyiofcommercial documents such'as invoices, bills of-ladin'g' andps'ckin'g -. slipsi'n order to identify anornaiies attendant to the importatiOn and exportation?. ofcomrne'rclal inspection requirements. 'EnfOrces . quarantines'and. coordinates. With affectedparties oflnter'est to ensure the'safe-and timely packing-materials in Violation of entry-"risquirements. Employisnonein?'usive inspect'iOn technology'deViceSsuch .as radiation deviates, radio frequency Identi ?cation.devicos,' andradiation ?isotope identi?cation .- devices when conducting-primary Inspections. Troubleshoots technical problemsswi?t tirin- inti'tlsiv??techn'Ology; detenni'nes the accuracy of readings and s'ign'a'ls- wliich restitution) the. equipment'arld'eOnducts requiredi-safety'eh'ecks-as mandated by eatabliSHe'd 'pretocbls.. 25 Secondary-Inspection: Secondary inspectionis the further intensi?ed inspejetion of people, cargo, 0r eonVeyances not rel eased or. adm itted upon primary inSpection. Th rofu gh. interviews, docutnent teviews, additional database queries, c'ornmunicatiOn with other law enforcement agencies; observational techniques, and the use ofteeh nologyj, the?Of?ceripei-formingthe secondary-inspection centinues to collect inforrnatiOn,jfa0ts_, and evidence asseSs risk and'make decisiOnsconcerning-Violent) us of wguiatiOns. and. statutes suspected fraudulent claims'tocitizenship; Imp'oster determination; suspeeted fraudulent'doeuments; terrorism threat of?persons, convieyaneesgpresenee and {evel oftype of radiation; su s'p eeted criminality; patential health - threats; and 3, commercial or agricultural contraband", Conducts ._v_iSualignd-physieal impaction of cargo,.lbaggage, canveyan'ces', packing materials and people using a wide array-of non-intrusive-teehnology-such ?nders, sta'tiOnary "and portable'X-ray machines, bodyj scanners, radiation deteCtion:.devices. vapor tracers, radiation isotope identi?cation. devices, and biometric-collection units. Based on assessed risks, furtheriand progressively mOre complexan'd extensive physical examinatiuns; interviews and database queries-may be required to Identify and 'interdict-highly sophiStica'ted smuggling schemes andgactiifitl'es and instruments of ten-or. Conducts on for. the 'p'iirpose oft-insuring compliance-with- preacrib'ed laWs- unregulations. Rapidly reacts-to petential. threats. This includes the controlled use-of force-as per-agenCy guidelines where necessary .and may?inelude the useof deadly force. Collaborates. with internal components and to verity-threats (National Targeting?enter, Joint TerroriSm Task ores; [Immigration and Customs Enforcement,- Control, .LBbora'tory and Scienti?c. Processes- . requireddo'cument?ion for Other federallagencies. - Secures and detains suspected persons ?mher exam,-. be in exported, arrested-,and seized or requiring action either bySta'te or looalauthorities or at omits-facilities (Federal Station, Expedited Removal,- Transports. arrestees/detainee's to offsite facilities. . Page 3 of 9 Customs and Border ProtoctiOn? Of?cer (335139-542 821-86'a detailed and-accurate reports regard inginspoctions, gathered _intelligenc'e__and__ incidents for 'supeEVisory-approval. Prepares accurate se_i2ure and arrest repel-mud follows seized property and {legal guidelines as reqt'Jired. Previ'des-ce'urt-'testim Orly-?to support prosecution of' smuggle rs- or narcotics and Other co husband.- Prepares com'pt'ex legai'd'octlments that meet'st'atutory. and legal suf?cient?! the removal offin'admi'ssible indiVidualszunder. Demand-takes sworn. statements. Prepares-and issues charging dOCuments and serves Notices to Appearibefore "an immigratitm judge. Provides court test'rrnony for-the removal and/or =an_d- crunina'l "aliens, Compilesdata, maintains? iogs, and prepares work accomplishment-reports-on. Inspectioii operations. 20% d) Outbound, Registration, andExit-Controi: Tho-purpose Ofthe contrOI-I?mtions target,.eontrol and cenveyances, and cargo leaving the United States or within the. United oversight This function is designed to detect terrorists and prevent-departure of those alien's ordered to-remain within the United States, to collect departure data-en aliens leaving-tho United States, and to ensure complianCe withagricultural and export. . requirements. 2 controls-and examines passengers and cargoz-leaving the-Uniteti-States. ih-ordor-fto - ensure that-themission objecdves: bf interdictin'g terrorists and instruments-of terror, and - -.ciomplian_co- with expert requirements'are met. eomplianm-withquui?red exit control programs to prevent departure of certain aliens, unrepOrtod outreheyiand menetary'insu'umonts, individuals wanted authorities and. referrals-tol'the Joint Terrorism Task Force. Examines. identity documents p'rosented upon departurefor validity and authenticity. Ensures - Reviews; commercial documents, inspects comeysnces and. examines cargo destined'for expert from the that rejected-merchandise, such tai'ntfed- meat and commodities infested with pests, exits-"the" United . Stems under proper supervisionr Targets: merch'drtdise- departing.?1e United States-for licensing requirements,_es_pecially items that have military application and'lor can'be' .usedas-instrUm'ents of terror, En'smesthat United? States; on transportation and eXpertation cuties or; other "inetransit? programs is?eXporte?-iin accordance with established requirements. I 20% Specialized A'srequired, may be assigned asarnembor of teams, ?targeting-sand analysis units, ATCETIenforc?ement teams, or :perfonning-portor facilities-sectirity ?melts. ?rearms'qtla?li?eation duties, non-intrusive inspection, training, schedu'iing, etc. 1.0% Page 4 of 9 Custom sand BorderiProtec'tion Officer 63489512. 2. Serves-as coach and mentor of lower level CBP- Of?cers. "On a regular and recruitingbasi's. Artictrlates and-communicates the assignments, projects, and problems-to-be Coaches. and-trains tower-level Clams-in the-selection: and application. of appropriate prob-lent "selv'ingm'ethods and?techniques- provides advice on work methods; hraetieesi and pmeedums; 'ls-responsible for. monito?ng'and reporting-on the ?status-Tend progress of work, Checking 0? 'work. progress reviewing completed work to ensure: the supe?rviso?s instructions-on work and-quality have been met.? 1 Perfonn?sOther duties as assigned. LEV-EL DESCRIPTIONS: Factor by the Position Level lit-7, 1250 points . The ie-vei and abilities needed and? how they-?are used-tr:I satisfactory . perform-the work is as'fdllows: ComprehenSive knowledge. of Customsand Border Protection iaws, precedents,- Officer processes, techniques, activities and law-enforcement . proCedures to enforce and administer .laws related to the conveyances, .. and 'rn'erch andise. Expert'_knowiedge of proper law enforcement -_methods_, including interviewing, searching-Sewing, arresting andself-defense for use in the apprehension of terrorists, illegal aliens, (brothers. suSpm-ted .ofiliega'l activity. Knowledge of the elementsneeded-to establish reasonable Suspicion and probable cause". - the mission, Operational programs, criminal; ana?leis- in Order to plan, Conduct, providesOund and accurate Interpretations of ?nd'in gs,- and exchange highly sensitive and-critical- information. - Abilityio preparemitten-?ndingsc-and recommendations in anjeffective and convinein'g; manner Which includesthe ability to producefincident reports, analytical ?ndings and apply special tools such; as computerized graphics and Spreadsheets. in-the develOpment- of-reports. -.l Hiring Refonn and Staf?ng Policy Human Capital Policy and Programs HQ 1. Homeland Security Con?dentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is intended only for the person(s) or entityt'ies) to which it is addressed and contains information that maybe con?dential, legally protected, privacy relevant, proprietary in nature or otherwise protected by law from disclosure. If you received this message in error, you are hereby noti?ed that reading, sharing, copying or distributing this message, or its contents, is prohibited. Please telephone or reply to me immediately and delete all cepies ot?the message. . . . .. t; Mahoney, Michael From: Jacobs, Karen Sent: Frida Ma 19 2017-4154 PM Subject: Re: DHS Second-Round DHA requests Preliminary Review Happy Friday to you, too, - N0, the file didn't make it Sent from my iPad 0? Mai 1912017'at1?04 From: Jacobs, Karen Hi Karen, happy Friday! ljust sent the DHA reQiiest for Secret Service again. Did it make it through this time? Thanks Subject: RE: DHS Secon ?Roun . reques - re Immary Review OK (33; Thank you. P.S., i am not back in the office until next Wednesday but I will have my iPad et a1 and will be able to receive the documents. From? Sent: Thursday, May 1 To: Jacobs, Karen Subject: RE: DHS Second?Round DHA requests - Preliminary Review Maybe the computer gurus only allow me to send one attachment-ed email to you a clay think I'll wrestle with it tomorrow morning Have a nice evening, Karen ($25 Thanks again for all of your help and patience! (5) Mahoney, Michael From: Jacobs, Karen Sent: cl Ma 24, 2017 1:42 PM To: Subject: RE: DHS Second-Round DHA requests -- Preliminary Review Success! 1 have the fax Karen Jacobs Empioyee Services Office of Personnel Management Sent: Tue ay, ay To: Jacobs, Karen Subject: RE: DHS Second-Round DHA requests - Preliminary Review All right, I give up. i just tried to fax it to you, but got a message that the number had been forwarded? Is your fax nur?bel_ Hiring Reform and Staf?ng Policy Human Capital Policy and Programs Ho eland Security, HQ ecur I ty "With honor and integrity, we will safeguard the American people, our homeland, and our values?19m: 3.2m): ?yd, af?rirlwwu riff/2r firsruiri-l sinuirdf?f) whim our? an}: rum. m- rezu'emnr, .Er, ourure 3 low ?ow: 2.. r. . audimii, (My ?3673-3477:. 0. i1}: From: Jacobs, Karen Sen To: Subject: Re: DHS Second?Round DHA requests - Preliminary Review 1 Mahonex, Michael From: Jacobs, Karen Sent: 4, 2017 8:31 AM To: Subject: RE: DHS Second?Round DHA requests - Preliminary Review Good Morning, The fax machine is working; Ijust tested it. However, the fax number is actuall-(l corrected my Signature block (3) Karen Jacobs Employee Services Office of Personnel Management From-W Sent: ues ay, To: Jacobs, Karen Subject: RE: DHS Second-Round DHA requests - Preliminary Review Ail right, I give up. I just tried to fax it to you, but got a massage that the number had been forwarded? is your tax Hiring Reform and Staf?ng Policy Human Capital Policy and Programs De artment of Homeland Securi HQ. Homeland Security "With honor and integrity, we will safeguard the American peOple, our homeland, and our values.? 1 .m zItI that Iii-.iI- I713 ii MINI: I if?t.? aim: Iain/mt, 3391' In or: II Inks; 123.. .?t'is'ssiiaswe. ifyuzg iz. :u :m y: Ccifl: moi waving}, rm}: no 'Im' -- I. I . . i/IO?nx?i?I? fi- PIE: 93km iJ/i zoom: 03' Fromziacobs, Karen Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2017 1:55 PM Tom Subject: Re: DH econ - oun requess- re 1mi aryReview 1 {fut-I Nc?it?c-J JI. if}; [5-6 150.". in mi ifjc (5,517: 7-5Jacobs, Karen From: Jacobs, Karen Sent: To: Subject: 7 1:42 PM .3 - .. DHA requests Preliminary Review (6) Success! have the fax (L2) Karen Jacobs Employee Services From Sent: ues ay, ay To: Jacobs, Karen Subject: RE: DHS Second?Round DHA requests Preliminary Review All right i nu be Hiring Reform and Stauing Policy Human Capital Policy and Programs Department of Homeland Security, HQ \ggx Homeland Security ive up. i just tried to. fax it to you, but got a message that the number had been forwarded? is your fax ?With honor and integrity, we will safeguard the American people, our homeland, and our values.? a hrruin; .. .414st wailhxl?f.? (.415! .a '5 pm .- Halo12:33:?. page: 130? {my 301%" PM :g yam. :8 '42- u'm nu. mm}, ?fths-??3. Fain -. . r2 shiny 3-3: m? rim)?; Subject: Re: DHS Second?Roun A requests - reliminary Review Sent from my iPad Hi Karen, ljusl sent it again any luck this Time? Thanks, Sent: Friday, May 19, 2017 4:54 PM To: Subject: Re: DHS Second-Round DHA requests - Preliminary Review Happy Friday to you, to- No, the file didn't make it Sent from my iPad OnMavm?w Hi Karen, happy Friday! [just sent the DHA request for Secret Service again. Did it make it through this time? Thanks From: Jacobs, Karen Subject: RE: DHS Second-Round DHA requests - Preliminary Review OK ?g Thank you. P.S., I am not back in the office until next Wednesday but I will have my iPad et al and will be able to receive the documents. From: Sent: To: Jacobs, Karen Subject: RE: DHS Second-Round DHA requests - Preliminary Review Maybe the computer gurus only allow me to send one attachment?ed email to you a day think I?ll wrestle with it tomorrow morning Have a nice evening, Karen (52" Thanks again forali ofyour help and patience! From: Jacobs, Karen RF Ma 18,2 1 . rah Subject: RE: DHS Second-Round DHA requests -- Preliminary Review .. From Sent: . To: Jacobs, Karen Subject: RE: DHS Second-Round DHA requests - Preliminary Review Lxcellentil Anti the one from Secret Service, too? From: Jacobs, Karen r? Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2017 2:51 PM To= Subject: RE: DHS Second-Round DHA requests - Preliminary Review Got it. Sent:T urs ay, ay 1 To: Jacobs, Karen Holden, Kimberly A. Subject: FW: DHS Second?Round DHA requests - Preliminary Review attempt for the supplemental request tied to the Executive Orders :zm - - . From:- Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2017 4:11 PM To: 'Jacobs, Karen Cc: Holden, Kimberly Subject: RE: DHS Second-Round DHA requests - Pre unlnary Review attempt only two requests attached From: Jacobs, Karen Holden, Kimberly econ - ound evrew received this e-mail but not a request. I check my spam each day and I didn?t receiveanything from you all last week. P.S., Oh more DHA for Sent: hes ay, ay . To: Jacobs, Karen Cc: Yandall, Shrew? Subject: RE: DHS econ oun A requests Preliminary Review Thanks for letting us know, Karen. ljust reusent it to both you and Kim. Please let us know ifyou receive it. lfyou don?t see it, is it possible it is being filtered directly to your spam folder for some reason? From: Jacobs, Karen Sent: Wednesday, May Subject: RE: DHS Second?Round DHA requests - Preliminary Review i did not receive this. Apparently, the people living in my computer have been misbehaving. This is the third message from an agency about an e- mail that I did not receive. Karen Jacobs Senior Policy Advisor Recruitment and Hiring Policy 4 Sent: We nes ay, ay To: Jacobs, Karen Subject: RE: DHS SecondFRound DHA requests Preliminary Review Good afternoon, Karen: Could you please let me know if you and Kim received this request last week? lcan break it into three separate emails, if not Thanks very much, From: Sent: Thursday, May 11 2017 8:23 AM To: Holden Kimberl acobs, Karen Cc: O'Donnell, Ruth(b) (6) Su iect: econ - oun HA requests?Pr Ilcllo Kim/Karen, Please. see attached preliminary requests for Direct Hire Authority for initial review: 0 Critical need DI IA request for four DHS Components. supplemental to the DHA granted April 5, 20] 7 0 Critical need request for the US. Secret Service 0 Severe shortage DH A request for the US. Customs and Border Protection agency (with three enclosures) We request that you please perform an initial review at your earliest convenience and provide us with any necessary feedback. You may reach out I myself with any questionslcormuents. Thanks l'or your continued efforts in assisting DHS with these requests. (5) manager, luring and Staf?ng Policy Human Capital Policy and Programs of lomeland Security, HQ Con?dentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is intended only for the pei'son(s) or entity(ies) to which it is addressed and contains information that may be con?dential, legally protected, privacy relevant, proprietary in nature or otherwise protected by law from disclosure. If you received this message in error, you are hereby noti?ed that reading, sharing, copying or distributing this message, or its contents, is prohibited. Please telephone or reply to me immediately and delete all copies of the message. Mahoney, Michael From: Mahoney, Michael Sent: Wednesda Jul 19, 2017 1:57 PM To: olden, Kimberly A. Cc: Subject: RE: DHS Follow up re supplemental DHA requests Thank We?re strugg ing with the CBP (5), (5). ?m ike From: Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2017 1:25 PM Mahoney, Michael Su Ject: ow up re supplemental DHA requests Ki m/ lke, DHS is In the process of strengthening our multl?Component DHA request, and should have that to you for preliminary review by the end Ofthe month. Could you please advise on (5) (5) Thank you. -. From: Mahoney, Michael 1_ hursda Jul 6 201 . Subject: RE: Follow up re meeting to discuss DHA requests We?ll be in touch And DHS agreed to refine/provide additional justification for each ofthe positions in the multi-component request. Sent: iurs ay, Ju To' CCMandall, Gwen Su Jec ow meeting to discuss DHA requests Hi Mike, When we met on June- 22 re requests, you and yourteam offered to assist us in refining two of them: (5) 9 Any feedback you could provide would be extremely helpful, and very much appreciated, V/r, Nancy From: Mahoney, Michael Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2017 9:10 AM To(b) (6) Cc Subject: He: IVIeetIng to DISCUSS urm request: Sent from my iPhone On Jun 21, 2017, at 8:52 Aim?wrote Mike M.. can you confirm i'l?this meeting is in regards to a particular component?s request (ex. or is it involving multi pie components. .1 l" it?sjust one cm?nponenl, we may want them on the call as well. $37.21From: Mahoney, MichaelF Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2 To: Holden. Kimberly Cc: Edwards, Rolandib) (6) . (6) Yandall, Gwenib) (6) O'Donnell, Subject: RE: Meeting to discuss DHA requests I can be available From: Holden, Kimberly A. Semzo, 2017 12:47 PM To: 6 . Cc: Edwards, Roland;?( Mahoney, Michael Yandall, Gwen; O'Donnell, Ruth Subject: Re: Meeting to discuss DHA requests Met me confirm Thursday. I will be in a coop exercise and I believe ahoney is on leave. Kimberly A, Holden Deputy Associate Director, Recruitment and Hiring iffice of Personnel Management wrote: ilcllo Kim, we have. ayaiiabilit'y to discuss DHA on Thurs, 6/22/17, at :30 am or 1:00 pm. Please include all on this email on the invite with Roland as optional. Thanks R, Manager, lcibrm and Staf?ng Policy Human Capital Policy and Programs ?mauve-?uni (?FUnmain-nr' Qecurity? (6) Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is intended only for the person(s) or entity(ies) to which it is addressed and contains information that may be con?dential, legally protected, privacy relevant, proprietary in nature or otherwise protected bylaw from disclosure. if you received this message in error, you are hereby noti?ed that reading, sharing, copying or distributing this message, or its contents, is prohibited. Please telephone or reply to me immediately and delete all copies of the message. From Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2 To: Holden. A. (6) Cc(b) (5) Vlahoney, MichaeIJ Yandall, Gwen (6) Subject: RE: Meetmg t0 ISCUSS DHA requests Copying a few folks from this side as well. Thanks Roland Edwards Deputy (Thief Human Capital Of?cer ()l?licc of the Chief Human Capital Of?cer From: Holden, Kimberly A. Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2017 11:22:07 AM To:(b) (6) Edwards, Roland Cc: Mahoney, Michael Subject: Meeting to discuss DHA requests 6 and Roland, We would like to meet and discuss the HA requests. Can you let me know if your team is available to meet at the following times? 6/21 9:00 6/21 10:00 6/21 11:00 6/21 1:00 Kimberly A. Holden Deputy Associate Director Recruitment and Hiring Office of Personnel Miamigemenl Employee Services 1900 Street, N. W. 6500le Washin ton Mahoney, Michael From: Mahoney, MichaelJ Sent: Thursda October 19 2017 3:23 PM Cc: (6) Subject: DHS Supplemental DHA Request Linked to Buildup EOs Request for Review of Revisions Importance: High (5) As was the case with the previous approval we cannot approve for longer than President?s first term. This approval will likely be for 2 years (similar to the previous) (5) l?d be happy to discuss over the phone ifyou?d me know ~mil "With honor and integrity, we will safeguard the American people, our homeland, and our values.? This {Mahdi} marketing any attachments, cwiyfn: fhe or {mum-'1: 55 nnzi diz'lfifii?li informal-ion mm sin- ii" currently-mini, protest-ad, privacy relevant. ,iilr'igl'rif?lrfi'y nature or .vsx?flsi'fst'i?tf :iu?zctc?o by tel-1' ??xtures: (iu?a Mic-f, you berm);- tilol? mum-.3, lug. IL?eZL?pyi?g 9r this :mz?'mgaa, or ?214: E5, is girr'z?'ziizii'z?rd. Meme 05' zepfy we and {31:23:5m (rapier; of?m :msmge. Mahonex, Michael From: Sent: Friday, October 27, 2017 2:36 PM To: Mahone Michael] Cc: Subject: RE: ICE training specialists 2nd round DHA According to these positions differ from the FLETC staff, as these are needed in support of the leadership development of Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) and Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) agents/officers. In other words, the FLETC staff train the entry level/new agents and these ICE Training Specialists train LEO supervisors and managers to prepare for the surge ofsubordinate LEO staff resulting from the E0 mandates. r26 2017 4:17 PM Subject: RE: training specialists - 2nd round DHA (5) ~rnike WW Sent: Tuesday, Octo er 2 To: Mahoney, Michael Subject: ICE training specialists - 2nd round DHA DUAL COMPENSATION WAIVERS O?ice of the Chief Human Capita? O?icer U.S. Department of Homeland Security Washington, DC 20523 Homeland a 5 Secur 1ty MAY 0 2 2017 The Honorable Kathleen McGettigan? Acting Director Of?ce of Personnel Management 1900 Street, NW Washington, DC. 20415-1000 Dear Acting Director McGettigan: The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) requests that the Of?ce of Personnel Management (0PM) delegate the authority to approve reemployment without reduction or termination of annuity in emergencies or other unusual circumstances in accOrdance with the criteria in 5 Code of Federal Regulations 5 5 3 .202 ?Request for delegation of authority to approve reemployment without reduction or termination of annuity in emergencies or other unusual circumstances.? The circumstances DHS is responding to are the mandates required by Executive Order, which is consistent with de?nition of ?other unusual circumstances.? 1. Description of the situati0n(s) for which the authority is requested This dual compensation waiver request is driven by. Executive Order: Border Seem-1'11! and Iii-intimation Enforcer-item Improvements and Executive Order: Enhancing Public Safety in the Interior afthe United States, both issued on January 25, 2017. The stated purpose of Executive Order: Border Security and Immigration Enforcement Improvements is to direct executive departments and agencies to deploy all lawful means to secure the Nation?s Southern Border, to prevent further illegal immigration into the United States and to repatriate illegal aliens swiftly, consistently and humanely. The Order mandates DHS to: 0 Hire 5,000 additional Border Patrol agents.-..as soon as is practicable; 0 Immediately construct, operate, to detain aliens at or near the land border with Mexico; 0 Immediately assign asylum of?cers to immigration detention facilities; 0 Ensure the detention of aliens apprehended for violations of immigration law; 0 Issue new policy the appropriate and consistent use of lawful detention authority; 0 Ensure that returned; and Require that all personnel are properly trained. Executive Order: Enhancing Public Safety in the Interior of the United State directs agencies to employ all lawful means to enforce the immigration laws of the United States, and directs the Secretary DHS to: 0 Hire 10,000 additional immigration of?cers, who shall complete relevant training and be authorized to perform the law enforcement functions; 0 Establish an office within ICE to provide services to victims; 0 Prioritize removal of aliens; and 0 Ensure the assessment and collection of ?nes and penalties. The reappointment of experienced operational and support staff will have a signi?cant and positive impact 'on the Department?s ability to quickly meet the requirements of the Executive Orders. 2. Identi?cation of the occupations, grades, and locations of positions that might be ?lled under this delegated authority DHS anticipates ?lling 1,618 positions under this delegated authority in multiple components across DHS including: U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (U SCIS), U.S. Coast Guard (USCG), Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC), U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and U.S. Secret Service as identi?ed in the attached. approval of this delegated dual compensation waiver request will provide DHS the needed ?exibility to reappoint experienced annuitants to meet the requirements of the Executive Orders and keep operational employees focused on mission critical responsibilities. 3. Statement of expected duration DHS requests this delegation of authority for a period of four years in order to achieve the hiring mandate. DHS expects each reappointment made to not exceed two years. The component points of contact follow: I appreciate your thoughtful and expeditious consideration and approval of this request. Sincerely, (5) Angela Chief Human Capital Officer Attachment Component Requested Positions Estimated Levels" - Series Training Specialist GS- I 712 13/14/15 Training Specialist (Firearms) General inspection, Investigation, and 13/14/15 Compliance positions, such as: - Supervisory investigative Program Specialist (polygraph examiner) Investigative Program Specialist (polygraph examiner) . Law Enforcement Instructor (non-law covered positions only) Personnel Security Specialist (ES-0080 12/1 3/14/ 15 Security Specialist Senior Security Specialist Supervisory Security Specialist Instructional Systems Specialist GS-1750 12/13/14 Supervisory Instructional Systems Specialist . lluman Resources Specialist (is-0201 12/13/14/15 General Attorney GS 0905 14/ 1 5 Senior Attorney I Financial Program Specialist GS-OSOI 12/13/14 Financial Systems Specialist Accountant GS-OS 0 12/13/14 Staff Accountant Budget Analyst (38-0560 12/13/14 Contract Specialist (35-1 102 12/1, 3/ 4 Procurement ?Analyst Information Technology Specialist 14/ 15 Mission Support Specialist . 11/12/13 Lowtlons k4.) Component Requested Positions . Estimated Number of 1 - Grade Reemploycd IS Positions Series . Levels Annu_itant?s_?_ Asylum Officer GS -0930 12/14 Supervisory Asylum Of?cer GS-0930 GS-1801 (33-1801 133-1801 GS 1801 AgLidication Of?cer _Supe1visory Adjudication Of?cer Supervisory Immigration DNS Immigration Services Of?cer Supervisory Immigration Services Of?cer 1801 _1nves"11 gduve Specialist 68-1?80] Supervisory investigative Specialist Refugee Of?cei (18?1801 Supervisory Refugee Officer GS-1801 TOTAL 1 Locations to be determined in alignment with CBP and ICE requirements. Component Requested Positions Number of Estimated USCGPosrtions Serles Levelsfi?i" Security Specialists 65?0080 12 l' l' Specialists (Info Sco)/Lead lT (38-2210 12?14 Specialists 4 Intelligence Operations Specialists 65?0132 13 Civil Engineers .. GS-810 12 Human Resources Specialists GS-201 13 1 Clinical Nurse, 65-610 9 _Visual Information Specialists GS-1082 11 Marketing Specialist 65-301 12. Advertising 65?301 12 Wr_iter/Editors (Doctrine) 11 Electronic Mul_t_i Media Specialists . 11 Training GS-1712 11/12 ?in Engineers 65?810 13 Architects 65-0808 12 Employee Assistance/Program 65-101 12 Coordinators Sexual Assault Prevention 65?101 12 __Family Resource SpeCIaIIsts 11 TOTAL Component Requested Positions IT Specialist (SYSADMIN) ETAL Estimated Number of Grade Reemployed _ELETC_PositiOns Series Levels _Annuitants .. Personnel Security Specialist (35-0080 09/11 Security Specialist (Program 65-0080 09/11" Support) 'Human Resources Specialist 65-0201 12/13 (Recruitment and Placement) Management Analyst 65-0343 09/11/12 Accounta nt 11/13 A . .5 Budget Analyst 65?0560 13 Contract Compliance Specialist 65-1101 11 C0ntract Specialist 65?1102 12/13 Training Research Analyst 65-1701 12 ??hletic Trainer 65-1701 12 IT Specialist (cusr SPT) 65-2210 13 it specialist (INFOSEC) 65?2210 _iT Specialist 65-2210 12 (CUST SPT - ETWORK) 65-2210 11 Locations Component Requested Positions Number? Deportation Officer (Secondary law enforcement covered Mes)? 65?1801 12/13/14 Detention and Deportation Officer (Secondary law enforcement covered positions)2 13/14/15 Medical Officer (Pre-employment medicals exams are a pre?requisite and often require medical review) 65-0602 Enforcement Programs Manager 2 (Analyzes plans and directs national law enforcement programs that impact multiple organizations) 65-1801 15 ?Management and Program Analyst3 65-0343 12/13/14 Mission Support Specialist 11/12/13 Administrative Officer (Provide critical analysis and evaluation of ICE programs and operations) (SS-0341 14 Criminal Investigator (Secondary law enforcement - covered)? 65?1811 13/14/15_: Supervisory Criminal Targeting Specialist (Oversee National Criminal and Jargeting Center operations) Law Enforcement Specialist (Oversee Law Enforcement Support Center operations)? Criminal Targeting Specialist (Analyzes fugitive alien and criminal population) 65-12301 13 GS-1801 11;13 GS-1801 Personnel Security Specialist (as-0080 12 9-12. 1 includes parenthetical titles such as (Course. (Compliance Standards Of?cer), etc. 1 Includes Supervisory Detention and Deportation Officer 3 Includes parenthetical titles 4Includes Su crviso Criminal lnvesti ator 5 Includes Supervisory Law Enforcement Specialist p? . .i i Component Requested Positions ICE Positions Series Grade Levels Estimated Number of Reemployed Ann'uita Locations Supervisory Intelligence Research Specialist (Supervises the collection, analysis, and sharing of timely and accurate intelligence on illicit trade, travel, and financial activity) 65-0132 Training Specialist 14/15 (35-1712 Supervisory Social Science Program Specialist (Liaisons with ICE, DHS, and other federal, state, local {and non? governmental agencies regarding victim assistance and/or child victim cases) Deportation Liaison Officer (35-1801" 13 121 ICE raeucai Officer (Image and process digital information, gather evidence)6 65-1801 Supervisory Intel Operations Specialist Te?chnical'Enforcement Officer 65-0131 65-1661 12/13 15 ?'13 Intelligence (Specialists, Watch Reports Officers, Program Managers, Counterintelligence Operations) HR Specialist (35?0132 11/12/13/14 65-0201 12/13/14 5 includes Supervisory Tactical Of?cer Component Requested Positions Estimated Number of y. . I . Reemployed Series GradeLevels Annmtants 5 Physical Security SpeCIaIIst 0080 12 P_rotec_tive Support Technician 7/8/9/10/11/12_ L?aw Enforcement Instructor ?1801/1712 12 Instructional Systems Specialist 1750 13 5 Information Technology 2210 12/13/14/15 Specialist Investigator 1801 13 Special Officer . 1802 9/10/11/12/13 _Polygraph Examining Investigator 1801 .. 13 Human Resources Specialist 0201 12/13/14/15 Personnel Security Specialist .0080 12/13/14/15 Recruitment Program Manager 0301 14 Operations Research Analyst 1515 12/13/14/15 Contract Specialist 12/13/14 Statistician 1530 . 12/13/14/15 Location 9 UNITED STATES OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT Washhigton, DC 20415 . TheDirector JUN 2 7 2017 Ms. Angela Bailey Chief Human Capital Of?cer U.S. Departmant of Homeland Security Of?ce of the Chief Human Capital Of?cer 245 Murray Lane, SW Washington, DC 20528 . Dear Ms. Bailey: I The US. Of?ce of Personnel Management (0PM) has approved your May 2, 2017, request on behalf of the US. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), US. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), US. Citizenship and Immigration Services (U SCIS), US. Coast Guard (USCG), Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC), US. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and US. Secret Service (U for a delegation of authority for dual compensation reduction (salary off-set) waiver under 5 CFR 553.202. . The enclosed delegated authority will enable CBP, USCIS, USCG, FLETC, ICE, and to waive the salary off-set in order to reemploy up to a total of J, 618 annuttants across DHS components in various mission critical positions (see attached) at grade levelsGS?7 through located nationwide. This delegation of authority will assist DHS to respond to an unusual circumstance arising from the mandates of two Executive Orders (E0). Though DHS requested this delegation until June 30, 2021, granting this dual compensation waiver delegation of authority until June 30, 2020. If ssary, DHS may request an extension of this delegation of authority if the same conditions exist beyond June 30, 2020. The DHS request meets the criteria under 5 CFR 553 .202, as follows: 1. Description of the situation69) for which the authority is requested. DHS components are faced with an unusual- circumstance resulting in the need to ?ll over one thousand positions in various geographic locations in support of the President?s border security initiative. DHS is charged with carrying out one of the President?s top Administration priorities, as described in two E03 signed on January 25, 2017. These EOs are titled: ?Border Security and Immigration - Enforcernent Improvements? and ?Enhancing Public Safety in the Interior ofthe United States. This unusual circumstance was brought about through the new mandates of the Executive Orders. The E0 titled, ?Border Security and Immigration Enforcement Improvements among other things directs: - The Secretary to take immediate action to plan, design, and construct a physical wall along the southern border and mandates DHS to hire 5,000 additional Border Patrol Agents immediately to include necessary support sta?relatedto training and on- boarding; Recruit, Retain and Honor a Wor1d~Class Workforce to Serve the American People WWMsaJobsgov The Secretary to take immediate action to construct, operate, control (or contract to do these things) facilities to detain illegal immigrants at or near the land border with Mexico; and The Secretmy-to take action to assign Asylum Of?cers to immigration detention facilities, to deploy all lawful means to secure the nation?s southern border, to prevent further illegal immigration into the United States and to repatriate illegal aliens swiftly, consistently and humanely. The E0 titled, ?Enhancing Public Sqfety in the Interior of the United States directs ICE to employ all lawful means to, enforce the immigration laws of the United States and to hire 10,000 additional immigration of?cers to include necessary support staff for training and ctr-boarding of employees. This delegation of authority is needed to help DHS conform to the requirements ofthis Presidential directive. The positions for which this delegation of authority is granted will enhance ability to address these mandates. This unusual circumstance could not be avoided due to the mgency and scope of hiring needs, as expressed by the President in his E05. Due to the critical nature of the work, and unique quali?cations required of the positions, and the small number of individuals available; there is a lack of quali?ed individuals available for thwe types of positions. 2. Identi?cation of the occupations, grades. and locations afpositians that might be ?lled under this delegated authority. This approval allows DHS to hire up to 1,618 annuitants in various positions (see enclosed) in grade levels through 15 nationwide. Appointees will be hired under a temporary time-limited. appointmant. 3. Statement of expected duration Dl-lS anticipates the unusual circumstance will last no more than four years, through 2021. The delegation, however, is effective on the date DHS signs the attached delegation of authority and ends on June 30, 2020. This delegation also identi?es the speci?c requirements and limitations related to this authority. In addition, you must maintain a record of each request and of the action taken for three years following the action date. If on have an questions, pl uman Resources Specialist at Her by email a Sincerely, (6) Kathleen M. McGettigan Acting Director Enclosures . . .. .. ?i if. {TisSer-ies I Levels Training? Specia1ist Training Specialist (Firearms) . 13/14/15 General Inspection, Investigation, and Compliance positions, such as: - Supervisory lnvesrigative Program Specialist (polygraph examiner) . Investigative Program Specialist (polygraph examiner) 0 Law Enforcement Instructor (non-law enforcement covered positions only) GS-1801 13/14/15 Personnel Security Specialist Security Specialist Senior Security Specialist Supervisory Security Specialist 03-0080 12/13/14/15 Instructional Systems Specialist Supervisory Instructional Systems Specialist GS-1750 12/13/14 Human Resources Specialist 08-0201. 12/13/14/15 General Attorney Senior Attorney 14/15 Financial Program peeialist Financial Systems Specialist GS-0501 12/13/14 Acwuntant Staff Accountant 08-05 10 12/13/14 Budget Analyst GS-OSGO 12/13/14 Contract Specialist Procurement Analyst 12/13/14 Information Technology Specialist (33-221 0 12/13/14/15 95.4.1391. 11/12/13 .. TOTAL Mission Support Speeralist Locations to be determined in alignment with CBP requirements. - ma . Grade -- iUSCISPosl?tmns Levels Asylum Oii?cer GS-093 0 1 2/14_ Supervisory Asylum Of?cer (18- 0930 13/15 ?c?ca?om Of?cer (SS-1801 12/14 Supervisory Adjudication Of?cer (38- 1801 ?14/1 5 Supervisory Immigration Officer (FDN S) 1 1 GS 1801 14/15 Immigration Services Of?cer GS-1801 12/13?? Suge rvisory Immigration Services Of?cer 13/15 Investiga?ve Specialist 08-1801 13/15 Supervisory mvesugaUVegpeC1m1? ?S-l 801 ]4/15 Refugee Of?cer (38-1801 12/14 TOTAL Supervwory Refugee Of?cer ?is-.1801 1311.5 . .rv-w 030-080? (33-22] 0 ists - 'I'fSpecialists (Info Sec)/Lead IT Sgcialists Intelligence operati'S?'? Specialists (350132 68-0810 GS-0201 GS-0610 ?rS-1082 08?0301 (is-0301 08-1001 (33-1712 GS-0810 Civil Engjneers _H__mnan Resources Clinical 'Nurgc,_ Visual Information Specialists Marketing Specialist WriQI/Editors (Docnine El ectroni cull/?31m Media 3 ali?s?uctorsu Civil Engineers . (33?0808 Employee Assistance/Hogan (ls-0101 Coordinators Sexygl Assault Prevention Famil Resource ts GS-0101 (38-0101 aux. . 1 his Pcrsonnel Security Specialist (is-6080 Security Specialist (PTogram Support) (38-0080 Specialisl (Recruitment and Placement) Gs-bzm 12/13 iManagcment Analyst (is-0343' 09/11/12 Awounlam 11/13' {Sci Analyst l3 Contract Compliancc Specialist (BS-1101 ll Contract Specialist 03-1102 12/13 Training Research Analyst Trainer 701 (6) GS-2210 13 "E's-2210 12 GS-2210 ll rpyawwun, . ?unwary Amy-Mama?s?? 3.: .. -m 'Posltm; . Deportation Of?cer . (Secondary law enforcement covered positions)1 Gs-isoi Iii/13714 Detention and Deportation Of?cer (Secondary law cniorcement covered positions)2 (is-ism 13/14/15 Medical Of?cer at pre-rcquisite and often require medical review) (Pm-employment medicals exams are (is-0602 15 Enforcement Programs Manager (Analyzes plans and'directs national . law enforcement programs that impact multiple organizations) GS-1801 Management and Pro gram _Analyst3 GS 03?4?" 15 "12/13/14 . M18. sion Support?ewiaha Administrative Of?cer (Provide critical analysis and evaluation of ICE programs and operations) GS 0391 GS 0341 11/12/13 14 Criminal. Investigator (Secondary law enforcement covered)4 GS-1811 13/14/15 Supervisory Criminal Targeting Specialist (Oversee National Criminal and ?l?argeting Center operations) 08?1801 l3 Law Enforcement Specialist (Oversee Law Enforcement Support Center operationgj GS-1801 11-13 Criminal Targeting Specialist (Analyzes fugitive alien and . criminal population) (is-1801 12 Personnel Security Specialist GS-OOSO 09/11/12 (6), (NB 1Includes parenthetical titles such as (Course Developer/Instructor), (Compliance Standards Of?cer), etc. 2Includes Supervisory Detention and Deportation Of?cer 3Includes parenthetical titles m. 4Includes Supervisory Criminal Investigator . Supervisory Intelligence Research Specialist (Supervises the collection, analysis, and sharing of timely and accurate intelligence on illicit trade, travel, and ?nancial activity) 1 ?63-0132? Training Specialist - GS-1712 12/13 Supervisory Social Science Program Specialist (Liaisons with'ICE, DHS, DOJ and other federal, state, local and non- governmental agencies regarding victim assistance and/or child victim cases) 13 Deportation Liaison Of?cer 65-1801 14 ICE Tactical Of?cer Gmage and process digital information, gather evidence)6 GS-1801 12/13 Supervisory Intel Operations Specialist 63-0131 15 Technical Enforcement Of?cer 801 13 Intelligence (Specialists, Watch Reports O?icers, Program Managers, Counterintelligence Operations) GS-0132 11/12/13/14 HR Specialist GS-0201 12/13/14 - 4 Locations to be determined in alignment with ICE requirements. (6) osmons ?w?w?w . Physical Security Specialist. 12 Protective Support Techttician GS-1802 Law Enforcement Instructor Gs-isoi/mi 12 Instructional Systems Specialist. .H Information Technology Specialist GS-1750 13 GS-221 0 12/13/14/15 Investigator 1 13 Special Of?cer Polygraph Examining Investigator 9/10/11/12/13 l3 Human Resources Specialist Personnel Security Specialist 32/13/14/15 Recruitment Program Manager (ls-0301 0320939-; 1243/14/15 14 Ogerations Research Analyst 12/13/14/15 Contract Specialist 63-1102? ?7 12/13/14 Statistician ?33:539. -1 12/13/1415. Locatno (6) . DELEGATED AUTHORITY TO DEPARTMENT or HOMELAND SECURITY FOR UNUSAL CIRCUMSTANCES The Director, US. Of?ce of Personnel Management (0PM), hereby delegates to the head or acting head of the US. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Custom?and Border Protection (CBP), S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), U. S. Coast Guard (USCG), Federal Law Enforcement Training Cente1 (FLETC), U. S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and S. Secret Service or his designee, authmity to waive the dual compensation reduction (salary off?set) required of Ieemployed annuitants by sections 8344 and 8468 oftitle 5, United States Code in connection with appointments to DHS. This delegation will enable the Chief Human Capital Officer or his designee to waive the salary off-set when necessary to reemploy a Civil Service Retirement System or Federal Employees Retirement System annuitant on a temporary basis, but only if, and for so long as, the authority is necessary to hire applicants for positions In support of two Executive Orders titled: ?Border Security and Immigration En?rcemcnt Improvements? and ?Immigration Enforcement Improvements and Enhancing Public Safety' at the Interior of the United States This delegation begins on the date the DHS Chief Human Capital Of?cer signs this delegation below, and ends on June 30, 2020, and Is - subject to the following limitations and l. The head or acting head 01 his or her delegate (hereafter, you) may waive the salary off- set on a case?by~?case basis, when necessary to quickly hire, on temporary an annuitant with optional retirement, excluding annuitants with early voluntary and buyout retirements, when DHS has an urgent need to accomplish tasks associated with the mandates of the two Executive Orders. 2. You must terminate the waiver ?when the conditions that make the waiver necessary change, when the annuitant leaves the position, when the position or nature of the Work . changes, or when the not-to-exceed date is reached. Any waiver granted pursuant to this delegation must terminate no later than 1111630, 2020. 3. You may redelegate this authority to a senior HR of?cial at the Headquartels level familiaI with the mandates of the two ExecutiVe Orders 4. Waiver requests must be in writing (email is acceptable). "The annuitant must have declined reappointment without a waiver in order for a waiver to be requested. The waiver must include the following: 0 The position?s title, series, pay plan, grade, work schedule (full-time, part-time, or intermittent), work location (city and state), the proposed appointing authority, the appointment?s termination date, and the waiver?s termination date. a The annuitant?s full name and civil service Ietiiement number and a lecitation whether the annuitant has declined 1e-employment without a waiver (quoting the - annuitant?s wor'ds lS acceptable)._ 0 A brief statement documenting that the position and work are of a temporary nature and, reciting that the appointment in question will be used solely to support your?hjring efforts for the mandates of the two EXecutive Orders, and eXplaining how the appointment in question will directly support such efforts. I Approval must also be in writing. .You must maintain the record of each request and your action on any request that was approved for three years following the action date. You m_g_st forward to on a Quarter-1y basis, copies of the waive1 requests p1oeessed, and the records of the actions on these requests foi the period covelcd by that quartei. You must also make these records available upon request You may approve requests under this delegation authority for a total of up to 1,618 positions. These positions are located nationwide. You may approve a request when the of?ce has a temporary critical need in support of two Executive Orders titled: ?Border Security and Immigration Enforcement Improwments and ?Immigration Enforcement Inmravements and Enhancing Public Safety in the Interior ofthe United States.? For a continuing position, you must post immediately a vacancy announcement on USAJ OBS and use all reasonable recruiting incentives and staf?ng ?exibilities to ?ll the vacancy as soon as possible" You may approve a request only if, and for as long as, no other reasonable staf?ng option exists.* _*Other reasonable staffing options include doing the following first: - Hiring all quali?ed applicants who are available to wo1k; - Hiring all quali?ed mmuitants who am available to work with their salary offset; - Offering details, reassignments, voluntary overtime or compensatory time off .to quali?ed employees; and - Replacing annuitants working with a salary off?set waiver. Note: Reemployed armuitants serve at the will of the appointing official, per 5 SC 3323. Agencies may hiie annuitani's using any appropriate existing appointing authority. Agencies . may adjust the Work schedule of annultants without advanced notice or procedures. Annuitants With a salary off-set waiver may not make retirement contributions or participate in the Thrift Savings Plan. This delegation enables you to pay armuitants under a ternporary time-limited appointment. A reemployed annuitant may not hold another civil service position if the basic (non-overtime) hours for that position would cause the combined total of basic (non-overtime) houns for both positions to exceed 40 hours pe1 week. (See U. .C 5533 and 5 CFR part 550, sol-mart. (6) Kathleen M. McGettigan/ Angela Bailey Acting Director Chief Human Capital Officer US. Of?ce of Personnel Management Department of Homeland Security JUN 2 .7 2017 Date *w Date ?mun. Mahoney, Michael From: Reinhold, Mark Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2017 9:44 AM To: Holden, Kimberly Mahoney, Michael Subject: FW (5), (6) Attachments: (5), (6) Attachment 1 - Homeland Security_ Oversight of Neglected Human Resources Information Technology Investment Is Neededpdf; Attachment 2 - Attachment 3 - Presidential Executive Order Enhancing Public Safety Interior United.pdf; Attachment 4 -- Executive Order Border Security And Immigration Enforcement Attachment 5 (6) .esumedocx; Attachment 6 - DHS SIO Not sure if this will also come in under separate cover- but c0u d you get. this in the QUeue for processing? Thanks. From: Bailey, AngelF Sent: Monday, June . To: Reinhold Marv Subject: (6) (5) Mark? Thank you?this one is very important for the success of our HRIT, Angie O?icc ofthe Chic/Human Capital O?iccr U.S. Department of Homeland Security Washington, DC 20528 gm: C6 Homeland ?if Securlty *4 (OH JUN 1 9 2017 The Honorable Kathleen McGettigan Acting Director US. Of?ce of Personnel Management 1900 Street, NW Washington, DC 20415 Dear Acting Director McGettigan: The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) requests a dual compensation (salary offset) waiver for a period not to exceed three years fr his waiver will enable DHS to retair(b) (6) ill the position of Executive Director, Human Capital Business Solutions (6) very niche and unique combination of skills in human resources, information technology, and program and ?nancial management is required to develop the program strategy, structure, and requirements of the Department?s high visibility Human Resources Information Technology (HRIT) program. Since my arrival at DHS, I have found the HRIT program to be a particularly dif?cult challenge. Ever since her appointment, I have relied heavily 01?? (6 :0 put the HRIT program back on track, successfully manage HCBS, and to position HCBS and the HRIT for future success. I have evaluated the organization and programs found in the Of?ce of the Chief Human Capital Of?cer (OCHCO), and it is clear that(b) (6) expertise in HRIT management, and her demonstrated skill sets in implementing change, building coalitions, and working with senior government of?cials are unavailable amongst the current staff and are scarce throughout DHS and the federal sector. Therefore, the Department of Homeland Security requests this waiver under the criteria in 5 Code of Federal Regulations 553.201 ?Exceptions based on the need to retain a particular individual.? The criteria for approving a waiver for met by the following: 1. Critical nature ofthe project. (6) will be responsible for developing the strategy, establishing the organizational tounclanon, and implementing operations for the HCBS division within OCHCO. This division is responsible for the identi?cation and management. of HRIT investment priorities, ongoing management of operational systems, and continued assessment to enhance/re?ne technology solutions for the department. The HCBS division?s work impacts all personnel with the Department addressing opportunities to improve learning management, payroll, and time-to-hire. The Honorable Kathleen McGettigan Page 2 Importance of the project to the Department?s mission. The Department initiated the program in 2003 to consolidate, integrate, and modernize its infrastructure. In 2011, DHS rede?ned scope and implementation timefrarnes. In 2016, OCHCO and the Of?ce of the Chief Information Of?cer (0010) partnered to reestablish priorities and reinvigorate the HRIT program. The Department re- launched the HRIT Executive Steering Committee (ES C) in February 2016, chaired by the Chief Human Capital Officer (CHCO) and Chief Information Of?cer (C10). The ESC identi?ed a new set of Strategic Improvement Opportunities (8103) in collaboration with DHS components designed to more efficiently manage department resources with important outcomes such as reducing time to hire. (6) oined OCHCO in FY 2017 and immediately began to refocus and redesign the work efforts and progress tracking, improving program accountability and communication and enhancing collaborative efforts with component and line of business partners across the Department - Potential costs of project failure/delay. Over the past few years, OCHCO and mission support functions across DHS have seen funding reductions, and improvement initiatives for the enterprise have languished. The inability to identify and implement solutions has impacted the human resources management function by limiting opportunities for updated/integrated systems that reduce duplication of effort and manual intervention. DHS takes its ?scal responsibility seriously, and seeks to invest its limited resources prudently, reduce the potential for personnel coding errors through integrated systems, and implement systems to manage performance wisely in accordance with the President?s Executive Order. The Department further strives to ensure that we have systems that allow us to effectively deliver and track training to help improve skills and engagement, while simultaneously seeking ways to reshape the workforce. Legislative or Presidential deadlines. The HRIT program has come under tremendous scrutiny over the last several years by . Congress, the Government Accountability Of?ce (GAO), and Of?ce of Inspector General (016). The Subcommittee on Oversight and Management Ef?ciency, Committee on Homeland Security, House of Representatives asked GAO to review efforts to implement the HRIT investment and subsequently made 14 recommendations in a report to Congress, dated February 2016, to address the perceived lack of progress and ineffective management of the HRIT program. DHS concurred with the recommendations and provided estimated completion dates for implementation.I DHS must address the concerns of Report to the Subcounriirtee on Oversight and Management Ef?ciency, Committee on Homeland Security. House of Representatives The Honorable Kathleen ettigan Page 3 to Congress, GAO, and 0102 to ensure that we are delivering the most effective, secure systems and are implementing DHS and govemment-wide successful practices. The Department testi?ed to Congress in 2016 about the strategic future and status of the HRIT program and how the Department is addressing its HRIT program challenges by connecting systems to improve manpower budget preparation and execution, and integrating human resources data sets with other corporate data to increase its analytic capability. These efforts are designed to improve human resources servicing and customer satisfaction, reduce processing errors, and eliminate the administrative burden of data entry across the workforce, while improving the governance and oversight of our programs. The Department committed to implementing solutions for nine 8105 within the next two years, including overall improvement of hiring systems, implementing workforce planning, learning management, perfonnance management, and labor relations/employee relations management systems. Integrating these systems to ensure IT accesses are created and revoked in a timely manner will reduce the time needed to produce time~to-hire metrics by six weeks, reduce the time-to-hire by ?ve days for security processing, and enable DHS-wide reporting. These capability gaps negatively impact the Department?s ability to hire and manage its workforce. Any further delays in resolving these gaps will severely hamper and possibly prevent ability to execute the President?s Executive Orders3, which increase the size and complexity of the workforce. Other factors that demonstrate the unusually critical nature of the project. The HRIT program is at a critical juncture. The program needs leadership with expertise in information systems, human resources, and program management to identify best- case solutions, and to ensure that the Department can meet and implement the technical requirements throughout the organization. The Federal Information Technology Acquisition Reform Act (FITARA) requires DHS to ensure that the C10 has a significant role in information technology decisions, including annual and multi-year planning, programming, budgeting, execution, reporting, management, governance, and oversight functions. To support this, OCHCO needs a representative with an understanding of the FITARA policy and implementation guidelines to work hand in hand with OCIO to ensure compliance and transparency due to the nature of the data housed in the . DHS human resources systems. Candidate '5 unique quali?cations(b) (6) )bust, in-depth experience in the following key areas makes her excepuonauy quanned for the Executive Director, Human Capital Business Solutions position and to the success of the overall HRIT program. 0 Human Resources Management; Served as the Deputy CHCO at the Department of Defense (DOD) and served as the CHCO for the Secretary of the Navy?s immediate staff. 2 DHS Oversight oflts Workforce Training Needs improvement 3 Executive Orders mar} lnmrigrarimr Enforcement and Enhancing Public .S?rzj?u' in (he, [ulterior off/w United States, both issued on January 25, 2017. .73. . The Honorable Kathleen McGettigan Page 4 Her intimate understanding of human resources processes and policy is key to ensuring that the Department implements systems and/or solutions that align with requirements established by the Of? cc of Personnel Management (0PM). I Information Technology Management: Served as a C10 at several federal agencies, with responsibility for strategic planning, pro gram planning, budgeting, and implementation of federal policy. - Human Resources Information Technology: Responsible for delivery and operation of the civilian HRIT systems for DOD, Where she provided oversight for military personnel system. 0 Program Management: Has a speci?c understanding of the processes that are essential . for the planning and implementation of complex systems. As a certi?ed Level 3 Program Manager, a highly technical certi?cation, she is able to quickly assess pro grams, identify corrective actions, and ensure programs achieve success. Throughout her career, she has managed a variety of programs, encompassing critical weapons systems and information technology programs. *3 0 Financial Management: Responsible for planning and executing a $45 billion annual budget, including the oversight of Capital Planning Investment Control to ensure aligrnnent with the ?nancial plamnng process, as well as the selection, control and evaluation of investmentsadditror .pertlse and 810118 ensure compliance With government- wide requirements to nnplement FITARA and OCIO requirements for security and system compliance for the enterprise. The success of these efforts is necessary 'to address key concerns related to management and oversight of these investments identi?ed by GAO. It is extremely dif?cult to ?nd executives with the combination of knowledge and'experience tha'lb) (6) has in these areas. Her depth of knowledge spans many years, which would be very d1r?cult to achieve for a new appointee. Her technical experience, paired with both her program and ?nancial management expertise, are essential to the continued success of this program. 1 the tvne of robust HRIT 1 (6) uniquely quali?ed to structure, staff, and implemeg; (6) has pmg. revered for such a large agency. Since her appointment reenergized the program and accomplished the following: Reshaped HCBS to improve ability to sustain the program moving forward. Prepared detailed project plans for nine 8105, with costing based on the independent cost estimate. . Strengthened the governance structure, Cadence, and analysis structure that supports inforrned decisions by the executive steering committee. 0 Documented technical roadmap and standards for HRIT systems. 3. Need for retention. Iappointed The Honorable Kathleen McGettigan Page 5 Developed an approach to perform and measure continuous analysis of human capital processes and requirements to identify future strategic improvement further improve the HRIT systems in support of the human capital strategic goals. 0 Documented Component time-to~hire report processes and identi?ed data sources for automating the report, saving approximately six weeks of effort for each of the Components and providing DHS with timely time-to-hire information. Documented Component personnel security processes and identi?ed data sources for automatically triggering initiation of pre-employment security processes and background investigation outcomes, which once implemented, expect to save ?ve days in the hiring process. - Documented Component information technology on-boarding and off-boarding processes and data sources to automatically trigger network, email, and system access privileges; expected to save five days in the hiring process and greatly improve ability to ensure information technology accounts are closed when personnel separate from DHS, thus reducing audit ?ndings. 0 Documented Component talent acquisition processes and HRIT system usage to identify gaps in data interchanges and other automation capabilities. Developed Mission Needs Statement to support the Acquisition Decision for the HRIT program in concert with the Joint Requirements Council. Developed justi?cation and guidance to enable the HRIT program to remain organizationally aligned with OCHCO to ensure support of human capital strategic goals while ensuring OCIO maintains strong technical oversight. Organized the HRIT program budget to improve reporting and ensure Dl-lS programs and expends funds appropriately, which will address audit ?ndings. (6) December 2016 to the position of Senior Advisor, Human Capital Business Solutions, as a reemployed annuitant on an intermittent appointment, and her time under NDAA will expire December I 1, 2017. (6) vill resign and refuses reemployment without this waiver. However, due to the state of the project when hired,(b) (5) has worked in excess of the hours originally projected during her ?rst six months. In addition, she is now nearing her annual cap. Consequently, DHS will losdb) (6) ;ervices unless 0PM grants the waiver. The program will not be able to sustain the forward momentum achieved to date without the consistent leadership, technical expertise, and level of decision-making authority that is able to leverage. The loss of this leadership insight will result in delays and adversely affect the program apt?) 2135:): overall service delivery of human capital solutions throughout the enterprise oversight and championship of requirements will help DHS to implement the $103 for the human capital community. Other sta?ing options. The HRIT program requires eXperience in human resources Operations, information technology program management, acquisitions management, and strategic planning. We currently do not have any other experienced, executive employee who possesses the unique characteristics required to deve10p the strategy, establish the structure and implement requirements, or conceptualize improvements in the HRIT program to complete this effOrt. Althoughu?) (6) )ntinues to mentor, coach, and develop - "awn-54. The Honorable Kathleen McGettigan Page 6 employees to assume her role and responsibilities, current staff members do not have the suf?cient breadth of experience to replaceib) (6) Since initiation of the program in 2003, several senior employees and executives have led this effort1 but without the level of success we have seen in the short timt has been onboard. During ?scal year 2016, DHS attempted to fold this capability within the strategic planning arm of the organization and leverage the technical expertise of leadership and management in OCIO. HoWever, the executive was not equipped to set the necessary executive-level strategic direction for this highly technical portfolio, not to mention it stretched them too thin as HRIT is at a Critical juncture in its development and requires an executive?s concentrated [focus Also, joint OCHCO-OCIO management led to an imbalance between the requirements driver (OCHCO) and the service provider (OCIO). After trying several approaches using existing staff, we brought on (5) as a rehired annuitant to help ?ll in the gaps based on her expertise. Undedb) (6) .uidance, the program has regained focus and greater stability, but much effort is still required to solidify those gains. contributions have strengthened overall management and set the stage for the development and implementation of solid technical solutions across the department, which will greatly improve human capital service delivery and data reporting. For these compelling reasons, I request that you approve the dual compensation (salary offset) waiver for am con?dent that the Department has met the criteria for approving a waiver foib) (6) the information provided and '1 look forward to receiving your favorable consideration. Please feel free to contact me directly with an uestions or ma have or your staff may contact my deputy, Roland Edwards, 0 Sincerely, (6) Angela Bailey Chief Human Capital Officer Attachments . - United States Government Accountability Office Report to the Subcommittee on Oversight and Management Efficiency, Committee on Homeland Security, House of Representatives February 2016 HOMELAND SECURITY Oversight of Neglected Human Resources Information Technology Investment Is Needed GAO-1 6-253 i Highlights of a report to the Subcommittee on Oversight and Management Ef?ciency, Committee on Homeland Security, House of Representatives Why GAO Did__This Study human resources administrative environment includes fragmented systems, duplicative and paper-based processes, and little uniformity of data management practices, which according to DHS, are compromising the department?s ability to effectively carry out its mission. DHS initiated HRIT in 2003 to consolidate, integrate, and modernize human resources information technology infrastructure. in 2011, DHS rede?ned scope and implementation time frames. GAO was asked to review DHS's efforts to implement the HRIT investment. GAO's objectives included, among others, evaiuating the progress DHS has made in Imptementing the HRIT investment. GAO compared HRIT's goats and scope to the investments actual accomplishments, and compared planned schedule for implementing strategic improvement opportunities (key areas identi?ed by DHS as needing improvement) against its current schedule. What GAO Recommends GAO is making 14 recommendations to DHS to, among other things, address poor progress and ineffective management. For example, GAO recommends that the HRIT executive steering committee is consistently involved in overseeing and advising the investment. In addition, GAO recommends DHS evaluate the HRIT investment to determine whether its goats are still valid and re?ect the department?s priorities. DHS concurred with alt 14 recommendations and provided estimated compietion dates for implementing each of them. View For more information, contact Caroi R. Cha at (202) 512?4456 or ChaC@gao.gov, or Rebecca 3. Gambler at (202) 512-6912 or GamblerR@gao.gov. Febrhary?QO?IG .. . . . HOMELAND SECURITY Oversight of Neglected Human Resources Information Technology Investment ls Needed What GAO Found The Department of Homeiand Security (DHS) has made very little progress in impiementing its Human Resources information Technology (HRIT) investment in the last several years. This investment includes 15 improvement opportunities; as of November 2015, DHS had fuily implemented only 1, see table below. Status and Planned Completion Dates for Implementing the 15 Strategic Improvement Opportunities, as of November 2015 Original planned Current expected Strategic improvement opportunity name Status completion? completion date 1. Data management and sharing 0 September 2014 Unknown 2. Performance measures tracking and . reporting - December 2012 Unknown 3. Personnel action processing 0 September 2013 Unknown 4..Human resources document management 0 September 2014 Unknown 5. End-to-end hiring December 2016 Unknown 6. Performance management 0 December 2012 Unknown 7. Off-boarding process 0 December 2012 Unknown 8. Policy issuances and clarification 0 June 2015 Unknown 9. Payroii action processing 0 June 2014 Unknown 10. HRIT depioyment process 0 September 2012 Unknown 11. Knowledge management 0 December 2014 Unknown 12. Training 0 June 2015 Unknown 13. Communication and collaboration among 0 Components December 2012 Unknown 14. On-boarding process 0 December 2012 Unknown . Implemented 15. HRIT intake process December 2011 October 2011 Key: IDFully impiemented oParlialIy implemented ONot yet started Source: GAO analysis of data provided by DHS of?cials. a'Dates re?ect the last month of the quarter in which the opportunities were planned to be complete. limited progress was due in part to the lack of involvement of its executive steering committee?the investment?s core oversight and advisory body-?which was minimaily involved with HRIT, such as meeting only one time during a nearly 2?year period when major problems, including 'schedule deiays, were occurring. As a result, key governance activities, such as approve! of HRIT's operational plan, were not completed. Officials acknowledged that HRIT should be re- evaluated and took early steps to do so meeting to discuss the need to re- evaluate); however, specific actions and time frames have not been determined. Until DHS takes key actions to re?evaluate and manage this neglected investment, it is unknown when its human capital weaknesses be addressed. United States Government Accountability Office Contents Letter 1 Background I 3 DHS Has Made Very Little Progress in Implementing Investment Lacked Effective Management 15 DHS Justified Its Investment in the PALMS Program 25 Selected PALMS Capabilities Have Been Deployed to Headquarters and Two Components; but Full Implementation at Four Components Is Not Currently Planned 27 PALMS Program Had Made Mixed Progress in Implementing Key IT Acquisition Best Practices 33 Conclusions 44 Recommendations for Executive Action 45 Agency Comments and Our Evaluation 46 Appendixl Objectives, Scope, and Methodology . 48 Appendix II Comments from the Department of Homeland Security 52 Appendix GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments 57 Tables Table 1: Scope and Original Planned Implementation Dates for the 15 Strategic Improvement Opportunity Areas, as Outlined in August 2011 Human Capital Segment Architecture Blueprint 10 Table 2: Status and Planned Completion Dates for Implementing the 15 Strategic Improvement Opportunities, as of November 2015 . 16 Table 3: Estimated Number of Performance and Learning Management System (PALMS) Planned Users at Each Component if Fully Implemented, as of November 2015 28 Table 4: Delivery Schedule Identified in Performance and Learning Management System?s (PALMS) Original August 2012 Schedule and the Current Deployment Strategy and Schedule for PALMS, as of November 2015 . 36 Page i GAO-16-253 Homeland Security Figures Figure 1: Simplified and Partial DHS Organizational Structure 4 Figure 2: Human Resources information Technology?s Progress towards Achieving Performance Targets, as of November 2015 18 Figure 3: Components Planning to implement Performance and Learning Management System (PALMS), as of November 2015 29 Figure 4: Percentage of Total Expected Users from Components Planning to implement the. Learning Management Capabilities of Performance and Learning Management System (PALMS), as of November 2015 31 Figure 5: Percentage of Total Expected Users from Components Planning to implement the PerformanceManagement Capabilities of Performance and Learning Management System (PALMS), as of November 2015 32 Page ii GAO-16-253 Homeland Security Abbreviations - CBP US. Customs and Border Protection Capability Maturity Model? integration for Acquisition DHS Department of Homeland Security FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency FLETC Federal Law Enforcement Training Center Human Resources Information Technology US. immigration and Customs Enforcement IT information technology OCHCO Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer OCIO Office of the Chief Information Of?cer PALMS Performance and Learning Management System Project Management Body of Knowledge PMO program management office TSA Transportation Security Administration USCG US. Coast Guard US. Citizenship and immigration Services USM Under Secretary for Management This is a work of the US. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the United States. The published product 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. Page Homeland Security US. GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE St. N.W. Washington, DC 20548 February 11, 2016 The Honorable Scott Perry Chairman The Honorable Bonnie Watson Coleman Ranking Member Subcommittee on Oversight and Management Efficiency Committee on Homeland Security House of Representatives The Honorable Jeff Duncan House of Representatives Since the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) was created in 2002 and merged 22 agencies into one department with eight components, its human resources environment has included fragmented systems, duplicative and paper?based processes, and little uniformity of data management practices. According to DHS, these issues are . compromising the department?s ability to effectively and efficiently carry out its mission to, among other things, enhance security and respond to disasters. For example, according to DHS, while it is imperative that it respond quickly to emergencies, catastrophic events, and threats, and deploy appropriately trained, certified, and skilled personnel during these events, the department?s inefficient and disjointed hiring process has limited the department?s hiring abilities. To address these issues, initiated the Human Resources information Technology investment in 2003 to consolidate, integrate, and modernize the department?s lT infrastructure that supports human resources. One of the types of human resources programs to be addressed through the umbrella was management of department? wide employeeperformance and learning?referred to as the Performance and Learning Management System (PALMS). This program is designed to implement an enterprise?wide employee performance management and appraisal solution that is to automate the department?s primarily paper?based performance management processes. in addition, PALMS is to provide a system that will consolidate nine existing learning management systems into one system and enable comprehensive training reporting and analysis across the department. Page 1 GAO-1B-253 Homeland Security in light of expected role in transforming the department?s human resources processes and system environment, you asked us to review efforts to implement the investment. Our objectives were to (1) evaluate the progress DHS has made in implementing the investment and how effectively DHS managed the investment since completing the Human Capital Segment Architecture in August 201 1, (2) describe whether DHS has justified its investment in the PALMS program, (3) determine whether PALMS is being implemented enterprise?wide, and (4) evaluate the extent to which PALMS is implementing selected IT acquisition best practices. To address the first part of our first objective?to evaluate the progress DHS had made in implementing the investment??we compared goals, scope, and implementation time frames to the investment?s actual acComplishments. We also compared planned schedule for implementing the improvement opportunities and projects, as of August '2011, against current planned schedule for implementing them, .For the second part of our first objective?to evaluate how effectively DHS has managed _the investment??we analyzed documentation, such as the investment?s schedule, program management briefings, Human Capital Segment Architecture blueprint, cost estimates, and budget documentation, and compared them against relevant cost and schedule best practices identified by GAO, the Software Engineering Institute at Carnegie Mellon University, and the Project Management institute, nc.'I To determine the amount spent to date on we asked officials from DHS headquarters and the components to provide expenditure information on since the investment began in 2003; of?cials were unable to provide complete information. As such, we were unable to identify the total amount spent on the investment and discuss this limitation further in the report. in addressing our second objective, we analyzed documentation, such as the program?s business case and the documented analysis of alternatives 1GAO, GAO Cost Estimating and Assessment Guide: Best Practices for Deveioping and Managing Capital Program Costs, GAO-OQ-SSP (Washington, D.C.: March 2009); GAO Scheduie Assessment Guide: Best Practices for Project Scheduies, GAO-10896 (Washington, D.C.: Dec. 22, 2015); Software Engineering institute, Maturity Modei? integration for Acquisition Version 1.3 (Pittsburgh, Pa: November 2010); and Project Management Institute. Inc., A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowiedge Guide), Fifth Edition, (Newton Square, Pa: 2013). is a trademark of the Project Management Institute, inc. Page 2 GAO-16-253 Homeland Security that was conducted to identify recommended approaches for pursuing a commercial off-the-shelf learning management system. We used this information to determine the various alternative solutions that DHS assessed for delivering enterprise?wide performance and learning management capabilities and justifying its investment in PALMS. Additionally, we reviewed program management briefings provided to the Executive Steering Committee that outlined, for example, the proposed solution and rationale for such a solution. . To address our third objective, we analyzed the program?s acquisition plan and original schedule for implementing the system department?wide, and compared it against program status documentation and the program?s current implementation schedule, as of November 2015. Lastly, for our fourth objective, we analyzed the program?s iT acquisition documentation acquisition plan and risk logs) and compared it to relevant project planning, project monitoring, and risk management best practices as identi?ed by the Guide, and GAO.2 Additionally, we interviewed officials from PALMS, the Office of the Chief information Officer the Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer (OCHCO), and eight components to obtain additional information on the program?s IT acquisition processes in these areas. We conducted this performance audit from March 2015 to February 2016 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our ?ndings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. See appendix for a more detailed discussion of our objectives, scope, and methodology. mission is to lead the'unified national effort to secure America by preventing and deterring terrorist attacks and protecting against and responding to threats and hazards to the nation, among other things. Created in 2002, DHS merged 22 agencies and offices that specialized in one or more aspects of homeland security. The intent behind the merger the Guide; 6-896; and Page 3 GAO-1B-253 Homeland Security that created DHS was to improve coordination, communication, and information sharing among these multiple federal agencies. Each of these agencies is responsible for specific homeland security missions and for coordinating related efforts with its sibling components, as well as external entities. Figure 1 shows a simplified and partial DHS organizational structure. Figure 1: Simpli?ed and Partial DHS Organizational Structure Secretary Deputy Secretary Human Capital Business Systems Unit Of?ce of the Chief Human capital Of?cer Under Secretary for Management Deputy Under Secretary for Management I US. Customs Federal Federal Law I U.S. immigration Transportation US. Citizenship US. Coast US. Secret and Border Emergency Enforcement and Customs Security and immigration . Guard Service Protection Management Training Center Enforcement Administration Services Age ncy Source: GAO analysis of U.S. Department oi Homeiand Security data. GA0A1B-253 Within the department's Management Directorate, headed by the Under Secretary for Management (USM), are the OCHCO and OCIO. The OCHCO is responsible for department?wide human capital policy and development, planning, and implementation of human capital initiatives. The is responsible for departmental lT policies, processes, and standards, and ensuring that IT acquisitions comply with DHS IT management processes, among other things. Page 4 GAO-16-253 Homeiand Security Oversight of Acquisition Programs DHS acquires IT and other capabilities that are intended to improve its ability to execute its mission. DHS classifies these acquisition programs into three levels that determine the extent and scope of required project and program management, the level of reporting requirements, acquisition decision authority. Specifically, DHS policy defines acquisition programs as follows: . Level 1 major acquisition programs are expected to cost $1 billion or more over their life cycles. - Level 2 major acquisition programs are expected to cost at least $300 million over their life cycles. . Special interest programs, without regard to the established dollar thresholds, are designated as Level 1 or Level 2 programs. For example, a program may be raised to a higher acquisition level if its importance to strategic and performance plans is disproportionate to its size or it has high executive visibility. . Level 3 programs are those with life?cycle cost estimates less than $300 million and are considered non?major. As outlined in DHS's Acquisition Management Directive 102-01, Chief Acquisition Of?cer-the responsible for the management and oversight of the department?s acquisition policies and procedures.3 The Deputy Secretary, USM, and CompOnent Acquisition Executives are the acquisition decision authorities for DHS's acquisition programs. For Level 1 programs, the acquisition decision authority may be either the Deputy Secretary or for level 2 programs, the acquisition decision authority maybe either the USM or a Component Acquisition Executive; and for Level 3 programs, a Component Acquisition Executive is the acquisition decision authority. As of March 2015, the department had 72 major acquisition programs and 42 non?major acquisition programs. 3The Secretary of DHS designated the USM the department's Chief Acquisition Of?cer in April 2011. DHS instruction Manual 102-01-001, ?Acquisition Management instructioniGuidebook" (Oct. 1, 2011). Page 5 GAO-16-253 Homeland Security Management of Human Capital Is a High? Risk Effort In 2003, we designated the transformation of DHS as high risk because it had to transform 22 agencies?several with major management challenges?into one department.4 We emphasized that failure to effectively address management and mission risks could have serious consequences for US. national and economic security. in 2007 and 2009, in reporting on progress in addressing the high- risk area since its creation, we found that DHS had made more progress in implementing its range of missions than its management functions?? such as in the areas of IT and human capital?and that continued work was needed to address an array of programmatic and management challenges.5 Since then, DHS had continued to make important progress in strengthening and integrating its management functions; however, significant work remained for DHS to improve in these areas. For example, - - As of September 2015, DHS had taken steps to identify current and future human capital needs, including the size of the workforce, its deployment across the department and components, and the knowledge, skills, abilities, and diversity needed; however, DHS had yet to fully implement its workforce planning model that was intended to allow the department to plan for its current and future organizational and workforce needs. . In February 2015, we reported that while DHS established a human capital strategic plan in 2011 and made progress in implementing it, the department had considerable work ahead to improve employee morale, which has decreased each year since 2011.6 For example, the Office of Personnel Management?s 2014 Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey data showed that scores continued to decrease in all four dimensions of the survey?s index for human capital accountability and assessment. 4GAO, High-Risk Series: An Update, GAO-03419 (Washington, D.C.: Jan. 1, 2003). 5GAO, High-Risk Series: An Update, GAO-07310 (Washington, D.C.: Jan. 31, 2007) and High-Risk Series: An Update, (Washington, D.C.: Jan. 22, 2009). High?Risk Series: An Update, GAO-15290 (Washington, D.C.: Feb. 11, 2015). Page 6 Homeland Security . While the department had made progress in implementing its lT Strategic Human Capital Plan forfiscal years 2010 through 2012, in January 2015 DHS shifted its IT paradigm from acquiring assets to acquiring services, and acting as a service broker an intermediary between the purchaser of a service and the seller of that service). According to DHS officials in May 2015, this paradigm change will require a major transition in the skill sets of iT workforce, as well as the hiring, training, and managing ofthose new skill sets; as such, this effort will need to be closely managed in order to succeed. - . Moreover, as of September 2014, DHS faced challenges in integrating employee training management across all the components, including centralizing training and consolidating training data into one system. According to DHS officials, the department planned to address these limitations through the development and deployment of PALMS program. Overview of Human Resources information Technology Investment Since DHS was created, the department?s human resources environment has included fragmented systems, duplicative and paper-based processes, and little uniformity of data management practices. According to DHS, these limitations in its human resources environment are compromising the department?s ability to effectively and efficiently carry out its mission? For example, . While it is imperative that DHS responds quickly to emergencies, catastrophic events, and threats, and deploys appropriately trained, certified, and skilled personnel during these events, according to DHS, the department?s hiring process involves numerous systems and multiple hand?offs which result in extra work and prolonged hiring.B This inefficient process is one factor that could have contributed to the skill and workforce gaps that we have previously identified. For example, in April 2015, we reported that 21 of the 22 major acquisition programs we reviewed faced shortfalls in their program office workforce in fiscal year 2014.9 7DHS, Human Capital Segment Architecture Blueprint, Version 1.0 (Aug. 9, 2011). 8DHS, Business Justi?cation for Consoiidation and Modernization (Feb. 1, 2008). Homeiand Security Acquisitions: Major Program Assessments Reveai Actions Needed to improve (Washington, D.C.: Apr. 22, 2015). Page 7 GAO-16-253 Homeland Security . According to DHS, the department does not have information on all of its employees, which reduces its abilities to strategically manage its workforce and best deploy people in support of Homeland Security missions'.10 . According to DHS, reporting and analyzing enterprise human capital data are currently time?consuming, labor?intensive, and challenging because the department?s data management largely consists of disconnected, standalone systems, with multiple data sources for the same content.11 As one example, we reported in 2014 that DHS could not provide-complete information on how much it had spent on administratively uncontrollable overtime to its personnel from fiscal years'2008 through 2014.12 Specifically, certain components could not provide information such as duty location or payments for certain years. To address these issues, in 2003, DHS initiated the investment, which is intended to consolidate, integrate, and modernize the department?s and its components? human resources IT infrastructure. These components include US. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC), US. immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), US. Citizenship and immigration the US. Coast Guard (USCG), and the US. Secret Service. is managed by Human Capital Business Systems unit, which is within OCHCO and has overall responsibility for Additionally, plays a key supporting role in the implementation of by reviewing headquarters? and components? human resources investments, identifying redundancies and efficiencies, and delivering and maintaining enterprise lT systems. Human Capitai Segment Architecture Biueprini?, Version 1.0 (Aug. 9, 2011). 11DHS, Human Capitai SegmentArchitecture Blueprint, Version 1.0 (Aug. 9, 2011). 12GAO, Department of Homeiand Security: Continued Action Needed to Strengthen Management ofAdminisiraiiveiy Uncontroiiabie Overtime, (Washington, DC: Dec. 17, 2014). Page 8 GAO-16-253 Homeland Security From 2003 to 2010, DHS made limited progress on the investment, as reported by inspector General.13 This was due to, among other things, iimited coordination with and commitment from components. To address this problem, in 2010 the DHS Deputy Secretary issued a memorandum emphasizing that wide variety of human resources processes and IT systems inhibited the ability to unify DHS and negatively impacted operating costs. The memorandum stated that, without an enterprise operating model, support for core mission was at risk and valuable workforce management information remained difficult to acquire acrossthe department. Accordingly, the Deputy Secretary stated that DHS could no longer sustain a component?centric approach when acquiring or enhancing human resources systems, and prohibited component spending on enhancements to existing human resources systems or acquisitions of new solutions, unless those expenditures were approved by OCHCO or The memorandum also directed these offices to develop a department?wide human resources architecture. - in 2011, in response to the Deputy Secretary?s direction, DHS completed an effort called the Human Capital Segment Architecture, which, according to DHS, defined the department?s current (or as?is) state of human capitalmanagement processes, technology, data, and relevant personnel. Further, from this current state, the department developed a comprehensive future state (or target state) and a document referred to as the Human Capital Segment Architecture blueprint that redefined the investment?s scope and implementation time frames. As part of this effort, DHS conducted a system inventory and determined that it had 422 human resources systems and applications, many of which were single- use solutions developed to respond to a small need or links to enable disparate systems to work together. DHS reported that these numerous, antiquated, and fragmented systems inhibited its ability to perform basic workforce management functions necessary to support mission critical programs. To address this issue, the blueprint articulated that HRIT would be comprised of 15 strategic improvement opportunity areas enabiing seamiess, ef?cient, and transparent end-to?end hiring) and outlined 77 13DHS Of?ce of inspector General, Management Oversight and Component Participation Are Necessary to Compiete DHS?vHuman Resource Systems Consoiidation Effort, OIG- 10?99 (Washington, DC: July 1, 2010). Page 9 GAO-16-253 Homeland Security associated projects deploying a department?wide hiring system, establishing an integrated data repository and reporting mechanism, and developing a centralized learning center for all personnel action processing information) to implement these 15 opportunities. Each opportunity area includes from 1 to 10 associated projects. Table 1 summarizes the scope of the 15 strategic improvement opportunities?- listed in the order of assigned priority?-and identifies their original planned completion dates, as of August 2011 when the blueprint was issued. Table 1: Scope and Original Planned Implementation Dates for the 15 Strategic Improvement Opportunity Areas, as Outlined in August 2011 Human Capital Segment Architecture Blueprint Strategic improvement Original planned opportunity area name completion date in (number of associated Human Capital Segment projects) Problemi'solution approach Architecture blueprinta 1. Data management Problem: inability to support enterprise reporting and data quaiity issues, September 2014 and sharing (5) among other things. Solution approach: Develop, execute, and supervise plans, policies, programs, and processes that control, protect, deiiver, and enhance the value of-data and information assets. 2. Performance 'Probiem: Enterprise-level performance information not availabie and lack of December 2012 measures tracking and standardized performance measures across the components, among other reporting (3) items. Solution approach: Establish ongoing monitoring and reporting of program accomplishments, particularly in the area of progress towards pre-established goals. . 3. Personnel action Problem: Signi?cant costs associated with maintaining seven different September 2013 processing (10) systems for personnel action requests, and loss of ef?ciency due to duplicative data entry into multiple systems, among other things. Solution approach: Estabiish the process necessary to appoint, separate, or make other personnel changes, which serve as a foundation for ail human resources functions. 4. Human Resources Problem: Accessibility chailenges and fragmented systems are unable to September 2014 document management support new business requirements, among otherthings. (8) Solution approach: Enable accessibility, work processes, storage, and search ability of case fiie management contents within hum an resources activities. 5. End?to-end hiring (9) Problem: Hiring process involves numerous systems and multiple hand-offs, December 2016 resulting in extra work and delayed hiring, among other things. Solution approach: Establish workforce planning, recruitment, hiring, security and stability, and orientation. Page 10 GAO-16-253 Homeland Security Strategic improvement opportunity area name (number of associated projects) Problemisolution approach Original planned completion date in Human Capital Segment Architecture blueprinta 6. Performance management (3) Problem: Portions of performance management are done manually throughout all components, and there is a lack of reporting capabilities and transparency into the performance management process, among other things. Solution approach: Create a process to support the attainment of organizational goals by promoting and sustaining a high?performance culture. Accomplished through the issuance of employee performance work plans. December 2012 7. Off?boarding process (1) Problem: No standardized approach to off-boarding at DHS and there are time lags before selected systems recognize that an employee has left DHS, which poses a high risk of security. infractions, among other things. - Solution approach: Establish a process through which an employee is formally separated from employment in the federal government, including canceling badges, credentials, and passwords, removing the employee from the payroll, and initiating back?till process. December 2012 8. Policy issuances and clari?cation (4) Problem: Policies are deployed without fully understanding and reporting implications, and components' participation in policy discussions is not consistent, among other things. Solution approach: Create a process for promulgating new policies and standards to improve compliance and enhance efficiency, as well as streamline and enhance existing policies so that they are clearer and easier to follow. - June 2015 9. Payroll action processing (6) Problem: lnadequately trained timekeepers negativelyimpact payroll and three systems are used to initiate payroll actions, among other things. Solution approach: Establish a process for conducting those actions that impact an employee?s pay, including personnel actions, payroll actions, and timekeeping. June 2014 10. deployme nt process (4) Problem: Expectations with regard to system requirements and the potential need to customize system solutions do not align with overall delivery related to commercial off-the?shelf products; and lack of transparency around project plans and schedules related to overall deliVery, among other things. Solution approach: Create a process for the activities DHS's Human Capital Business Systems unit undertakes to implement enterprise HRIT systems to components, including coordination of initiation and approval processes within DHS governance structures. September 2012 i 1. Knowledge management (7) 12. Training (4) Problem: No effective enterprise search capability and lack of department- wide visibility of stove-piped content with restricted access, among other things. Solution approach: Establish a solution for capturing, retaining, sharing, and disseminating essential knowledge across community of human resources professionals in their respective components. Problem: Training varies greatly from component to component, and current junior-level human resources specialists are not as well trained in core human resources skills as their predecessors, among other things. Solution approach: Create a systematic process for teaching employees work-related skills and guiding them to adopt cultural changes. December 2014 June 2015 Page 11 GAO-16453 Homeland Security Strategic improvement opportunity area name (number of associated Original planned completion date in Human Capital Segment projects) Problemlsolution approach Architecture blueprinta 13. Communication and Problem: Lack of an integrated plan for OCHCO communication, and lack of December 2012 collaboration among regular communication across DHS, among other things. components (5) Solution approach: Establish a process for sharing information in response to data calls, audits, Congressional requests, or the simple requirements of day? to-day business, along with the process of components Working together to solve common challenges. 14. On-boarding Problem: Multiple, duplicative systems used to track on?boarding activities December 2012 process (6) and no standardized, automated capability to trigger on-boarding activities, among otherthings. Solution approach: Create a process for the activities that occur from after the conclusion of pre-employment (when security and any necessary medical screenings are completed) to when an of?cial Entrance on Duty date is establiShed and provisioning (ensuring new employees have the tools to do theirjob) is scheduled. - 15. intake proces Problem: No enterprise?wide HRIT governance process for determining December 2011 (2) - whether to pursue a project. Solution approach: Establish an overall governance process to determine project initiation based on business needs, preliminary definition, review, and decision along various defined IT paths. Source: Data provided by DHS. GAO-16453 3These dates reflect the last month of the quarter in which the strategic improvement opportunities were planned to be complete, as identi?ed in the Human Capital Segment Architecture Blueprint. only ongoing program is called PALMS and is intended to fully address the Performance Management strategic improvement opportunity area and its three associated projects. PALMS is attempting to implement a commercial off?the?shelf software product that is to be provided as a service? in order to enable, among other things, comprehensive enterprise-wide tracking, reporting, and analysis of employee learning and performance for DHS headquarters and its eight components. Specifically, PALMS is expected to deliver the following capabilities: . Learning management. The learning management capabilities are intended to manage the life cycle of learning activities for all DHS employees and contractors. PALMS is intended to, among other 1?q?For software provided as a service, a consumer uses a provider?s applications that are accessible from various client devices through an interface such as a web browser web?based e?mail). The consumer does not manage or control the underlying infrastructure or the individual application capabilities. Page12 GAO-16-253 Homeland Security things, act as a gateway for accessing training at DHS and record training information when a user has completed a course. Additionally, it is expected to replace nine disparate learning management systems with one unified system. - Performance management. The performance management capabilities are intended to move existing primarily paper- based performance management procesSes into an electronic environment and capture performance?related information throughout - the performance cycle recording performance expectations discussed at the beginning of the rating period and performance ratings at the end of it). Each component is responsible for its own PALMS implementation -pr0ject, and is expected to issue a task order using a blanket purchase agreement that was established in May 2013 with an estimated value of $95 million.15 Before implementing PALMS, each component is completing a fit-gap assessment to, among otherthings, identify any requirements and critical processes that cannot be met by the preconfigured, commercial off-the?shelf system. if such component- specific requirements are identified, the component must then decide whether to have the vendor customize the system. The headquarters PALMS program management office (PMO) is responsible for overseeing the implementation projects across the department. Additionally, 0010 is the Component Acquisition Executive responsible for overseeing PALMS.16 - in addition to implementing projects intended to address the strategic improvement opportunities in the blueprint, the investment also carried out the following two projects that were not included in the blueprint: 15A blanket purchase agreement is a method of ?lling anticipated repetitive needs for supplies or services by estabiishing ?charge accounts? with qualified sources of supply. These agreements between agencies and Vendors have terms in place for future use and agencies issue individual orders to ful?ll requirements for goods and services as they arise; funds are obligated when orders are placed. 16Component Acquisition Executives are the senior acquisition of?cials within the components, responsible for, among other things, acting as the acquisition decision authority for Level 3 programs and establishing component?level acquisition policy and processes. Page 13 GAO-1B-253 Homeland Security . Balanced Workforce Assessment Tool: This project provided an enterprise?wide tool to automate the formerly paper-based balanced workforce strategy process to determine the appropriate mix of federai employees and contractor employees required to fulfill a specific work function in the government. DHS deployed this tool beginning in September 2013. . Workers Compensation Medical Case Management Services: This project provided an enterprise?wide contract to enable nurses to execute case management processes and facilitate the case management activities to be performed by DHS human resources staff. As part of this, the project provided access to a web application where DHS workers? compensation coordinators could work on cases with nurses. As of March 2015, the tool had been implemented at six components. Best Practices for Planning and Managing IT Acquisition Programs Entities such as the Project Management Institute, the Software Engineering Institute at Carnegie Mellon University, and GAO have developed and identified best practices to.help guide organizations to effectively plan and manage their acquisitions of major iT systems.17 Our prior reviews have shown that proper implementation of such practices can significantly increase the likelihood of delivering promised system capabilities on time and within budget.18 These practices include, but are not_limited to: . Project planning: Establishes project objectives and outlines the course of action required to attain those objectives. It also provides a means to track, review, and report progress and performance of the project by defining project activities and developing cost and schedule estimates, among other things. 17Software Engineering Institute, Capability Maturity Modei? integration for Acquisition Version 1.3 (Pittsburgh, Pa.: November 2010); Project Management institute, Inc.. A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowiedge Guide), Fifth Edition (Newton Square, Pa.: 2013); and GAO, Executive Guide: information Technoiogy investment Management, A Framework for Assessing and improving Process Maturity, (Washington. DC: March 2004). 15?See, for example, GAO, information Technoiogy: Foundationai Steps Being Taken to Make Needed Systems Modernization Management improvements, (Washington, DC: Sept. 10, 2004) and information Technoiogy: is impiementing Key Acquisition Methods on its New Case Management System, but Reiated Agencywide Guidance Needs to Be improved, GAO-084014 (Washington, DC: Sept. 23, 2008). Page 14 GAO-16-253 Homeland Security Little Progress in Implementing Investment Lacked- Effective Management . Project monitoring and control: Provides an understanding of the project?s progress, so that appropriate corrective actions can be taken if performance deviates from plans. Effective practices in this area include, among other things, determining progress against the program plan and conducting program management reviews. . Risk management: Establishes a process for anticipating problems and taking appropriate steps to mitigate risks and minimize their impact on program commitments. It involves identifying and documenting risks, categorizing them based on their estimated impact, prioritizing them, developing risk mitigation strategies, and tracking progress in executing the strategies. Has adme DHS has made very little progress in delivering planned capabilities, such as end-to-end hiring and payroll action processing. While the vast majority of HRIT capabilities (called strategic improvement opportunities) were to be delivered by June 2015, only 1 has been fully implemented, and the completion dates for the other 14 are currently unknown. These delays are largely due to unplanned resource changes and the lack of involvement from the executive oversight committee. in addition, the department did not effectively manage the investment. For example, DHS did not update or maintain the HRIT schedule,.have a life- cycle cost estimate, or track all associated costs. Moreover, the strategic planning document?~referred to as the Human Capital Segment Architecture Blueprint?has not been updated in approximately 4.5 years and, as a result, the department does not know whether it is reflective of current priorities and goals. As a result of ineffective management and limited progress in implementing this investment, the department is unaware of when critical weaknesses in the department?s human capital environment will be. addressed, which is, among other things, impacting ability to reduce duplication and carry out its mission. Limited Progress Has Been Made in Implementing HRIT DHS has made very limited progress in addressing the 15 strategic improvement opportunities and the 77 associated projects included in HRIT. According to the Human Capital Segment Architecture Blueprint, DHS planned to implement 14 of the 15 strategic improvement opportunities and 68 of the 77 associated projects by June 2015; and the remaining improvement opportunity and 9 associated projects by December 2016. However, as of November 2015, DHS had fully implemented only 1 of the strategic improvement opportunities, which inciuded 2 associated projects. This improvement opportunity established an enterprise?wide governance process for evaluating HRIT projects and Page 15 Homeland Security proposals priorto funding them. This process is referred to as the investment intake process and is intended to help encourage the use of enterprise-level investments, rather than component-specific investments, by preventing components from investin in duplicative systems when an existing DHS capability can meet a particular business need. Table 2 summarizes the implementation status and planned completion dates of the strategic improvement opportunities?listed in the order of assigned priority?as of November 2015. Table 2: Status and Planned Completion Dates for implementing the 15 Strategic Improvement Opportunities, as of November 2015 Strategic improvement opportunity name (number Original planned completion date in Human Capital Segment Architecture Current expected of associated projects) Status Blueprinta completion date 1. Data management and sharing (5) 0 September 2014 Unknown 2. Perforrnanoe measures tracking and reporting (3) 0 December 2012 Unknown 3. Personnel action processing (10) 0 September 2013 Unknown 4. Human resources document management (8) 0 September 2014 Unknown 5. End-to-end hiring (9) 0 December 2016 Unknown 6. Performance management (3) 0 December 2012 Unknown TOff?boarding process (1) 0 December 2012 Unknown 8. Policy issuances and clarification (4) 0 June 2015 Unknown 9. Payroll action processing (6) 0 June 2014 Unknown 10. Human Resources Information Technology 0 September 2012 Unknown deployment process (4) 11. Knowledge management (7) 0 December 2014 Unknown 12. Training (4) 0 June 2015 Unknown 13. Communication and collaboration among 0 December 2012 Unknown components (5) 14. On-boarding process (6) 0 December 2012 Unknown 15. Human Resources Information Technology intake 0. December 2011 implemented in process (2) October 2011 Key:' Fully implemented, meaning that the objectl to the opportunity area, but did not report that the opportunity area was the opportunity area. ve of the opportunity area was met. OPartialty implemented, Source: GAO analysis of data provided by DHS of?cials, 0-253. fully implemented. ONot yet started. meaning that meaning that of?cials identi?ed at least one project that was Underway or completed related of?cials did not identify any projects that wera underway or oompieted related to 3These dates reflect the last month of the quarter in which the strategic improvement opportunities were planned to be complete, as identi?ed in the Human Capital Segment Architecture Blueprint. Page16 GAO-16-253 Homeland Security DHS has partially implemented five of the other strategic improvement opportunities, but it is unknown when they will be fully addressed. For example, PALMS program is intended to fully address the blueprint?s strategic improvement opportunity for Performance Management; however, while progress to implement PALMS has been made, many actions remain before it can be fully implemented and it is unknown when those actions will be taken (discussed in more detail later). Further, officials stated that DHS has not yet started to work on the remaining nine improvement opportunities, and the of?cials did not know when they would be addressed. Additionally, DHS developed an HRIT strategic plan for fiscal years 2012 through 2016 that outlined the investments key goals and objectives, including reducing duplication and improving efficiencies in the department?s human resources processes and systems. The strategic plan identified, among other things, two performance metrics and associated targets for'delivering human resources IT services across DHS, These performance metrics were focused on reductions in the number of component-specific human resources IT services provided and increases in the number of department-wide services provided by theiend of fiscal year 2016. However, DHS has also made limited progress in achieving these two performance targets. Figure 2 providesa summary of progress towards achieving its service delivery performance targets. Page 17 GAO-15-253 Homeland Security Figure 2: Human Resources Information Technology?s Progress towards Achieving Its Performance Targets, as of November 2015 Percent 100 - Focused on decreasing these services 80 Focused on increasing these services 60 4D 20 Component-speci?c U.S. Department of Homeland Security-wide Human Resources Information Technology services 33,227 Baseline measure in 2012 Measure as of November 2015 Performance target for end of ?scal year 2016 Source: GAO analysis of data provided by U.S. Department of Homeland Security of?cials, Specifically, . goal is to reduce its component?specific HRIT services by 46 percent?from 81 percent to 35 percent?however, it had reduced these services by 8 percent as of November 2015, according to OCHCO officials. . Additionally, while DHS is aiming to increase its DHS?wide HRIT services by 38 percent?from 2 percent to 40 percent?as of November 2015, OCHCO officials stated that the department had increased these services by 8 percent. Key causes for lack of progress in implementing HRIT and its associated strategic improvement opportunities include unplanned resource changes and the lack of involvement of the HRIT executive steering committee. These causes are discussed in detail below: Page?lB GAO-16-253 Homeland Security . Unplanned resource changes. DHS elected to dedicate the vast majority of resources to implementing PALMS and addressing its problems, rather than initiating additional HRIT strategic improvement opportunities. Specifically, PALMS-?which began in July 2012?experienced programmatic and technical challenges that led to years-long schedule delays.? For example, while the PALMS system for headquarters was originally planned to be delivered by a vendor in December 2013, as of November 2015, the expected delivery date was delayed until the end of February 2016-?an over 2-year delay. officials explained the decision to focus primarily on PALMS was due, in part, to the investments declining funding stream. However, in doing so, attention was concentrated on the immediate issues affecting PALMS and diverted from the longer?term HRIT mission. . Lack of involvement of the HRIT executive steering committee. The HRIT executive steering committee?-which is chaired by the department?s Under Secretary for Management and co?chaired by the Chief information Officer and Chief Human Capital Officer?is intended to be the core oversight and advisory body for all DHS-wide matters related to human capital IT investments, expenditures, projects, and initiatives. in addition, according to the committee?s charter, the committee is to approve and provide guidance on the department?s mission, vision, and strategies for the HRIT program. However, the executive steering committee only met once from September 2013 through June 2015?in July 2014-?and was minimally involved with for that almost 2 year period. It is important to note that DHS replaced its Chief Information Officer (the executive steering committee?s co-chair) in December 2013?during this gap in oversight. Also during this time period HRIT's only ongoing program?PALMS-was experiencing significant problems, including schedule slippages and frequent turnover in its program manager position PALMS had five different program managers during the time that the executive steering committee was minimally 1QPALMS PMO of?cials attributed these slippages to multiple causes, including, among other things, the vendor?s commercial off-the-shelf system not meeting certain requirements that it was expected to meet, thereby requiring the vendorto customize the system to meet those requirements. As of November 2015, according to PALMS headquarters PMO officials, DHS had 483 baseline requirements, 32 of which needed customizations, and 5 of these 32 requirements still needed to be fully addressed by the vendor. DHS expected these requirements February 2018. Page 19 GAO-16-253 Homeiand Security involved). As a result of the executive steering committee not meeting, key governance activities were not completed on HRIT. For example, the committee did not approve notional operational plan for fiscal years 2014 through 2019.20 OCHCO and 0010 officials attributed the lack of HRIT executive steering committee meetings. and committee involvement in to the investment?s focus being only on the PALMS program to address its issues, as discussed earlier. However, by not regularly meeting and providing oversight during a time when a new co?chair for the executive steering committee assumed responsibility was experiencing such problems, the committee?s guidance to the troubled program was limited. More recently, the executive steering committee met in June and October 2015, and OCIO and OCHCO officials stated that the committee planned to meet quarterly going forward. However, while the committee?s charter specified that it meet on at least a basis for the first year, the charter does not specify the frequency of meetings following that year. Furthermore, the committee?s charter has not been updated to refiect the increased frequency of these meetings. As a result of the limited progress in implementing HRIT, DHS is unaware of when critical weaknesses in the department?s human capital environment will be addressed, which is, among other things, impacting ability to carry out its mission. For example, the end-to-end hiring strategic improvement opportunity (which has an unknown implementation date) was intended to streamline numerous systems and multipie hand-offsin order to more efficiently and effectively hire appropriately skilled personnei, thus enabling a quicker response to emergencies, catastrophic events, and threats. As another example, the data management and sharing strategic improvement opportunity (which also has an unknown impiementation date) was intended to enable the department to have visibility of all its employees, to improve its ability to strategically manage its workforce, and best deploy people in support of DHS missions. Therefore, until executive steering committee effectively carries out its oversight responsibility, DHS will be limited in its ability to improve HRIT investment results and accountability. notional operational plan for ?soai years 2014 through 2019 identified the high- ievel projects and activities that planned to fund each year and the planned phase of each project planning, acquisition, operations and maintenance). Page 20 GAO-16-253 Homeland Security HRIT Lacked a Current Schedule, Life?Cycle Cost Estimate, and Cost Tracking DHS Did Not Update or Maintain the HRIT Schedule HRIT Did Not Have a Life- Cycle Cost Estimate According to the GAO Schedule Assessment Guide, a key activity in effectively managing a program and ensuring progress is establishing and maintaining a schedule estimate. Specifically, a well maintained schedule enables programs to game progress, identify and resolve potential problems, and forecast dates for-program activities and completion of the program.21 In August 2011, DHS established initiation and completion dates for each of the 15 strategic improvement opportunities within the Human Capital Segment Architecture Blueprint. Additionally, HRIT developed a more detailed schedule for ?scal years 2014 through 2021 that updated planned completion dates for aspects of some strategic improvement opportunities, but not all. However, DHS did not update and maintain either schedule after they were developed. Speci?cally, neither schedule was updated to reflect that DHS did not implement 13 of the 15 improvement opportunities by their planned completion dates?several of which should have been implemented over 3 years ago. HRIT officials attributed the lack of schedule updates to the investments focus shifting to the PALMS program when it started experiencing significant schedule delays. Without developing and maintaining a current schedule showing when DHS plans to implement the strategic improvement opportunities, DHS and Congress will be limited in their ability to oversee and ensure DHS's progress in implementing HRIT. OMB requires that agencies prepare total estimated life?cycle costs for information technology investments.22 Program management best practices also stress that key activities in planning and managing a program include establishing a life?cycle cost estimate and tracking costs 21GAOA16-89G. 22OMB, Fiscal Year 2016, Capital Planning Guidance (Washington, D.C.: May 2014). Page 21 GAO-1B-253 Homeland Security DHS Did Not Track All Costs Incurred on expended.? A life-cycle cost estimate supports budgetary decisions and key decision points, and should include all costs for planning, procurement, and operations and maintenance of a program?4 OCHCO officials stated that a draft life?cycle cost estimate for was developed, but that it was not completed or finalized because detailed projects plans for the associated projects had not been developed or approved. According to the blueprint, OCHCO roughly estimated that implementing all of the projects could cost up to $120 million. However, the blueprint specifies that this figure did not represent the life- cycle cost estimate; rather it was intended to be a preliminary estimate to initiate projects. Without a life-cycle cost estimate, DHS has limited information about how much it will cost to implement which hinders the department?s ability to, among otherthings, make budgetary decisions and informed milestone review decisions. According to and the Guide, programs should track program costs in order to effectively manage the program and make resource adjustments accordingly. in particular, tracking and monitoring costs enables a program to recognize variances from the plan in order to take corrective action and minimize risk.25 However, DHS has not tracked the total actual costs incurred on implementing across the enterprise to date. Specifically, while the investment received line item appropriations for fiscal years 2005 through 2015 which totaled at least $180 million,26 DHS was unable to provide all cost information on activities since it began in 2003, including all government?related activities and component costs that were financed through the working capital fund, which, according to DHS officials from multiple offices, were provided separately from the at least $180 million Project Planning and Project Monitoring and Controi Process Areas; PM Guide, Project Cost Management; and GAO-09-38P. Project Monitoring and Contra! Process Area; Guide, Project Cost Management. 2E"Appropriations acts passed for ?scal years 2003 through2004 did not include a iine item appropriating speci?c funds to and DHS officials were unaware of how much had been appropriated for those years. Page 22 GAO-16-253 Homeland Security appropriated specifically to OCHCO of?cials attributed the lack of cost tracking to, among other things, the investments early reliance on contractors to track costs, and said that the costs were not well maintained nor centrally tracked, and included incomplete component? provided cost information. The components were also unable to provide us, with complete information. For example, . FEMA officials stated that it would require a significant administrative effort to identify how much it has spent on since inception in - 2003 because of the way their financial system obligates and expends funds for Working Capital Fund activities. . USCG officials also said that compiling its expenditure information for fiscal years 2003-2009 would require a substantial administrative effort, including reviewing a significant number of paper files. . was unable to identify its HRlT-related expenditures for fiscal years 2003-2010. Without tracking all costs associated with including components? costs, stakeholders are limited in making informed resource decisions, and DHS cannot provide complete and accurate information to assist congressional oversight. 2011 Blueprint May Not Be Valid and Reflective of Current Priorities and Goals According to the executive steering committee?s charter, the Under Secretary for Management (as the chair of the committee) is to ensure - that the department?s human resources lT business needs are met, as outlined in the blueprint. Additionally, according to the GPRA (Government Performance and Results Act) Modernization Act of 2010, agency strategic plans should be updated at least every 4 years. While this is a legal requirement for agency strategic plans (the Human Capital Segment Architecture blueprint does not fall under the category of an ?agency strategic plan?), it is considered a best practice for other strategic pianning documents, such as the blueprint. 27The working capital fund is available to DHS for expenses and equipment necessary for maintenance and operations of administrative services that the Secretary of Homeland Security determines would be performed more advantageously as central services. Pub. L. No. 108-90, 117 Stat. 1137, 1153, 506 (2003). Page 23 GAO-16453 Homeland Security However, the department issued the blueprint in August 2011 (approximately 4.5 years ago) and has not updated it since. As a result, the department does not know whether the remaining 14 strategic improvement opportunities and associated projects that it has not fully implemented are still valid and reflective of current priorities, and are appropriately prioritized based on current mission and business needs. Additionally, DHS does not know whether new or emerging opportunities or business needs need to be addressed. Officials stated that the department is still committed to implementing the blueprint, but agreed that it should be re?evaluated. To this end, following a meeting we had with Under Secretary for Management in October 2015, in which we expressed concern about lack of progress, OCHCO and officials stated that HRIT was recently asked by the Deputy Under Secretary of Management in late October 2015 to re?evaluate the blueprint?s strategic improvement opportunities and to determine the way forward for those improvement opportunities and the HRIT investment. However, officials did not know when this re- evaluation and a determination for how to move forward with would occur, or be completed. Further, according to OCIO officials, DHS has not updated its complete systems inventory since it was originally developed as part of the blueprint effort, in response to a 2010 Office of inspector General report that stated .that DHS had not identified all human resource systems at the components. This report also emphasized that without an accurate inventory of human resource systems, DHS cannot determine whether components are using redundant systems.28 Moreover, OCIO officials were unable to identify whether and how its inventory of human resources systems had changed, Until DHS establishes time frames for re-evaluating the blueprint to reflect current priorities and updates its human resources system inventory, the department will be limited in addressing the inefficient human resources environment that has plagued the department since it was first created. 28DHS Office of inspector General, Management Oversight and Component Participation Are Necessary to Comptete Human Resource Systems Consotfdatr'on Effort, 10-99 (July 2010). Page 24 Homeland Security Investment in the PALMS Program DHS took several steps to justify its investment in the PALMS program for both of the program's two main purposes (the learning management capabilities and the performance management capabilities) through multiple mechanisms. Specifically, although existing DHS guidance did not require an analysis of alternatives29 for PALMS because it is a Level 3 acquisition program,30 the department initiated such an analysis in 2010 to identify recommended approaches for pursuing a commercial off-the- shelf learning management system to replace the components? nine existing learning systems. According to the analysis of alternatives, the nine systems at the department were disconnected from each other and did not exchange information. The components had independently purchased these learning management systems and, in some cases, had done so before DHS was established in 2002. However, DHS determined that a unified strategy for learning management systems at the department was needed, rather than disparate, component?centric efforts. In particular, DHS determined that such a strategy was necessary to provide, among other things, improved reporting, greater automation, less duplication and redundancy of training courses, better governance, and streamlined IT infrastructure. The analysis of alternatives, which was performed by the Homeland Security Studies and Analysis institute,31 included, among other things, an assessment of six alternative approaches, including status quo, implementation of two systems from separate vendors (allowing components to choose which system to use), and implementation of a single system (either centrally managed by DHS or individually managed by each component). As part of the analysis, the Institute assessed the alternative approaches based on five evaluative categories, including cost, benefits, and risks. Based on the analysis of alternatives process, the institute recommended that DHS adopt a single enterprise-wide, 29An analysis of alternatives is intended to help identify the most promising acquisition approach by comparing alternative solutions? costs and operational effectiveness. guidance was subsequently revised and reissued in Juiy 2015. DHS, DHS Acquisition Management Directive 102-01-003 (July 2015). 31The Homeland Security Studies and Analysis Institute is a federally funded research and development center that provides the government with expertise to conduct, among other things, crosscutting mission analysis, strategic studies and assessments, and operational analysis across the homeland security enterprise. Page 25 . GAO-16-253 Homeland Security centrally managed learning management system as the most cost- effective approach to providing such a capability to the department. Regarding the second purpose of PALMS?enabling performance management capabilities?the August 2011 Human Capital Segment Architecture Blueprint called to conduct an analysis of alternatives to identify the preferred approach for such a solution.32 Officials stated that DHS leadership ultimately determined that such an analysis for a performance management solution was unnecessary because the requirement for DHS to automate performance management functions across the department was the same as it was during prior attempt to pursue an automated performance management system for instituting pay-for?performance?an effort that was ultimately abandoned.33 Therefore, instead of conducting an analysis of alternatives on performance management system approaches for DHS enterprise?wide adoption, in January 2012, departmental leadership made an executive decision on the approach based on the findings of a December 2011 request for information from industry. in particular, the accumulated industry information highlighted that vendors for an enterprise-wide learning management solution could in most cases also provide a system that integrated performance management capabilities. This industry information validated DHS officials? understanding that a combined solution for learning and performance management at the department was consistent with prevailing industry offerings. According to OCHCO officials, the department?s request for information from industry to help justify its preferred approach allowed for competition within industry for supplying a solution to the department. As part of the department's considerations, officials had determined that this competition could better 32As discussed earlier, the blueprint included a strategic improvement opportunity for deveiopin?g an enterprise-wide performance management system. The biueprint did not address the development of an enterprise-wide learning management system, as the anaiysis of alternatives for learning management was aiready in development at the time the blueprint was developed. 33DHS had stopped using this prior automated pay-for-performance, performance management system authorized by 5 U.S.C. 9701 (the Homeland Security Act of 2002)?called MaxHR?because fiscal year 2009 Appropriations Act directed that no further funds be spent on any Human Resource Programs authorized by section 9701. Consolidated Security, Disaster Assistance, and Continuing Appropriations Act, 2009, Pub. L. No. 110-329, 122 Stat. 3574, 3684, 522 (2008). Page 26 Homeland security help to reduce overall implementation costs for a consolidated learning and performance management system, versus adopting, without competition, one of the components? existing learning or performance management systems for DHS enterprise-wide deployment. Additionally, OCHCO officials stated that they contacted other federal departments to determine whether existing shared services could be used by DHS to establish an integrated system for learning and performance management, but DHS determined that other departments? contracts with service providers could not be modified to allow DHS to use the same services. Based on the collective results of the learning management system analysis of alternatives and the request for information from industry on performance management systems, the executive steering committee exercised its executive decision-making authority and decided that an integrated, enterprise?wide learning and performance management systemshould be pursued for adoption at the department. . integrated solution is now being implemented by the PALMS program. By providing the executive steering committee with enough information for determining this preferred approach for the department, DHS justified its investment in the PALMS programpreviously mentioned, PALMS is intended to provide an enterprise? S?led?9 PALMS wide system that offers performance management capabilities, as well as Capabilities Have learning management capabilities to headquarters and each of its components. As such, DHS headquarters PMO and the components Been Deployed to estimate that, if fully implemented across DHS, learning Headquarters and management capabilities would be used by approximately 309,360 users, and its performance management capabilities would be used by at least TWO component; bUt 217,758 users. Table 3 identi?es the total estimated number of planned FUll Implementation users for both learning management capabilities and performance management capabilities if PALMS is fully implemented at Four Components departmen,_w,de_ Is Not Currently Planned Page 2? GAO-16-253 Homeland Security Table 3: Estimated Number of Performance and Learning Management System (PALMS) Planned Users at Each Component if Fully Implemented, as of November 2015 Estimated number Estimated number of of planned learning pianned performance Component management users management users Federal Emergency Management 14,000 To be determined - at Agency least ~8,400a Federal Law Enforcement Training 2,000 1,200 Center Headquarters 41,500 41,500 Transportation Security Administration 70.000b US. Citizenship and immigration 24,000 14,000 Services us. Coast Guard 00,000? 8,000? US. Customs and Border Protection 67,360 60,000 us. Immigration and Customs 24,000 19,0009- Enforcement U.S. Secret Service 6,500 6,500 Total . 309,360 217,758 Source: Data provided by DHS of?cials. GAO-16253 8'As of November 2015, Federal Emergency Management Agency and US. Immigration and Customs Enforcement of?cials stated that they were not currently planning to implement the performance management capabilities of PALMS. However, ifthe Federal Emergency Management Agency decides at a later date to implement PALMS, officials stated that the number of users would be ~8,400, but would be substantially more if the system is able to accommodate the component?s performance management requirements for Reservists, which are a type of incident management responder, hired as temporary, intermittent employees. bAs of November 2015, of?cials from these components stated that their components were not currently planning to implement either the learning or performance management of PALMS. These user estimates from Transportation Security Administration and US. Coast Guard officials represent those components? users if they decide to implement PALMS. According to Transportation Security Administration officials, as of January 2016, the administration was in the process of conducting its ?t-gap analysis to determine whether it will implement learning andfor performance management capabilities. Of?cials expected the fit-gap assessment to be . completed by the end of March 2016. US. immigration and Customs Enforcement of?ciais stated that they are waiting for the vendor to demonstrate that all requirements have been met?which is expected to occur by the end of February 2016. ?According to of?cials, the estimate of 60,000 learning management users includes US. Coast Guard?s military users; if PALMS is unable to meet these users? requirements, then the ptanned number of users is 8,500 (if US. Coast Guard decides to implement PALMS for these users?see footnote above). However, there is uncertainty about whether the PALMS system will be used enterprise?wide to accomplish these goals. Specifically, as of November 2015, of the eight components and headquarters, five are planning to implement both learning and performance management capabilities (three of which have already implemented the Page 28 Homeland Security learning management capabilitieswdiscussed later), two'are planning to implement only the learning management capabilities, and two components are not currently planning to implement either of these PALMS capabilities, as illustrated in figure 3. nd Learning Management System (PALMS), as of November 2015 Figure 3: Components Planning to implement Performance a Federal Law Enforcement Training Center Headquarters Planning to implement both I Citizenship and Immigration services customs and Border Protection 2 Planning to implement ONLY learning management capabilities US. Secret Service Federal Emergency Management Agency 1.1.5. Immigration and Customs Enforcement 2 Transportation Security NOT CURRENTLY planning to Administration implement either LLB. Coast Guard DHS components planning to lmpie?ment PALM 5 Learning and performance management capabilities ONLY teaming management capabilities Not currentiy planning to implement either Source: one anaiysis of data provided by US. Depanment of Homeland Security i GAO-164153 . Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials stated that,_before they will decide whether to implement performance management capabilities, they are waiting for the vendor to demonstrate that all requirements have been met?which is expected to occur by the end of February 2016. . bAccording to Transportation Security Administration officials, as of January 2016. the administration was in the process of conducting its fit-gap analysis to determine whether it will implement PALM S's learning andior performance management capabilities. Of?cials expected the fit-gap assessment to be completed by the end of March 2016. Page 29 GAO-16453 Homeland Security Officials from FEMA, TSA, ICE, and the USCG cited various reasons for why they were not currently planning to fully implement PALMS, which include: . FEMA and officials stated that they were not currently planning to implement the performance management capabilities because the program had experienced critical deficiencies in meeting the performance management?related requirements. FEMA officials stated that they do not plan to make a decision on whether they will or will not implement these performance management capabilities until the vendor can demonstrate that the system meets needs; as such, FEMA officials were unable to specify a date for when they plan to make that decision. ICE officials also stated that they do not plan to implement the performance management capabilities of PALMS until the vendor can demonstrate that all requirements have been met. PALMS headquarters PMO officials expected all requirements to be met by the vendor by the end of February 2016. . TSA Officials stated that they were waiting on the results of their fit- gap assessment34 of PALMS before determining whether, from a cost and technical perspective, TSA could commit to implementing the learning and/or performance management capabilities of PALMS. TSA officials expected the fit-gap assessment to be completed by the end of~March 2016. . USCG officials stated that, based on the PALMS schedule delays experienced to date, they have little confidence that the PALMS vendor could meet the component?s unique business requirements prior to the 2018 expiration of the vendor?s blanket purchase agreement. Additionally, these officials stated that the system would not meet- all of its learning management requirements for about 31,000 auxiliary volunteer members and certain other employee groups. Further, although the fit gap assessment for implementing PALMS at USCG had not been fully completed, the component?s officials stated that the system would likely not fully meet the performance management requirements for all of military 34Before implementing PALMS, each component is completing a fit-gap assessment to, among other things, identify any requirements and critical processes that cannot be met by the preconfigured, commercial off?the-sheif system. If such component-speci?c requirements are identi?ed, the component must then decide whether to have the vendor customize the system. Page 30 GAO-16-253 Homeland Security components. .Due to the component?s uncertainty, the officials were unable to specify when they plan to ultimately decide on whether they will implement one or both aspects of PALMS. As a result, it is unlikely that the department will reach its expected user estimates as presented in table 3, and meet its goal of being an enterprise?wide system. Specifically, as of November 2015, the components estimate 179,360 users will use the learning management capabilities of PALMS (not the 309,360 expected, if fully implemented). Figure 4 shows the percentage of expected users from components currently planning to implement learning management capabilities in comparison to the total expected users if PALMS was fully implemented, as of November 2015. Figure 4: Percentage of Total Expected Users from Components Planning to implement the Learning Management Capabilities of Performance and Learning Management System of November 2015 Not currently planning to implement PALMSs learning management capabiirtles Pianning to implement learning management capabilities Source; GAD analysis of data provided by 11,3. Department of Homeland Security of?cials. 1, GAOJEQEES 8'According to Transportation Security Administration of?cials, as of January 2016, the administration was in the process of conducting its tit-gap analysis to determine vmether it will implement learning andior performance management capabilities. Of?cials expected the ?t~gap assessment to be completed by the end of March 2016, US. Immigration and Customs Enforcement of?cials stated that they are waiting for the vendor to demonstrate that all requirements have been met??which is expected to occur by the end of February 2016. Page 31 GAO-16-253 Homeland Security Additionally, as of November 2015, the components estimate 123,200 users will use the performance management capabilities of PALMS (not the 217,758 expected, iffully implemented). Figure 5 shows the percentage of expected users from components planning to implement performance management capabilities in comparison to the total expected user estimate if fully implemented as intended. Figure 5: Percentage of Total Expected Users from Components Planning to Implement the Performance Management Capabilities of Performance and Learning Management System (PALMS), as of November 2015 Not currently planning to implement performance management capabilities .mw smears-5 to implement performance management capabilities Somme: GAO analysis of data provided by US. Department of Homeland Security of?cials. 3if the Federal Emergency Management Agency were to implement performance management capabilities, of?cials stated that the number of users would be approximately 8,400, but would be substantially more if the system is able to accommodate the component?s performance management requirements for its Reservists. bAccording to Transportation Security Administration of?cials. as of January 2016, the administration was in the process of conducting its tit-gap analysis to determine whether it will implement learning andror performance management capabilities. Of?cials expected the tit-gap assessment to be completed by the end of March 2016. US. Immigration and Customs Enforcement of?cials stated that they are waiting for the vendor to demonstrate that all requirements "have been met?which is expected to occur by the end of February 2016. Of the seven components and headquarters that are currently planning to implement the learning and/or performance management aspects of PALMS, three have completed their implementation efforts of the learning management capabilities and deployed these capabilities to users Page 32 Homeland Security (deployed to CBP in July 2015, headquarters in October 2015, and FLETC in December 2015); two have initiated their implementation efforts on one or both aspects, but not completed them; and two have not yet initiated any implementation efforts, as of November 2015. As a result, current trajectory is putting the department at risk of not meeting its goals to perform efficient, accurate, and comprehensive tracking and reporting of training and performance management data across the enterprise; and consolidating its nine learning management systems down to one. Accordingly, until FEMA decides whether it will implement the performance management capabilities of PALMS and USCG decides whether it will implement the learning and/or performance management capabilities of PALMS, the department is at risk of implementing a solution that does not fully address its problems. Moreover, until DHS determines an alternative approach if one or both aspects of deemed not feasible for TSA, FEMA or the USCG, the department is at risk of not meeting its goal to enable enterprise-wide tracking and reporting of employee learning and performance management. PALMS program varied in its implementation of lT acquisition best PALMS Program Had practices for project planning, project monitoring, and risk management.35 Made Mixed Progress Specifically, the program management office had implemented selected lT acquisition best practices in each of these areas; however, the Implementing Key program had not developed complete life?cycle cost and schedule IT Best estimates. Additionally, the PALMS PMO did not monitor total costs spent Practices on the program or consistently document the results from progress and milestone reviews. Further, the program management office had not fully implemented selected risk management practices. Without fully implementing effective acquisition management practices, DHS is limited in monitoring and overseeing the implementation of PALMS, ensuring that the department obtains a system that improves its performance management and learning management weaknesses, reduces duplication, and delivers within cost and schedule commitments. Guide; and erw1e?sse. Page 33 GAO-16-253 Homeland Security DHS and the PALMS PMO Had Not Fully Implemented Selected Project Planning Best Practices PALMS Lacked a Life-Cycle Cost Estimate AcCording to Cost Estimating and Assessment Guide, having a complete life-cycle cost estimate is a critical element in the budgeting process that helps decision makers to evaluate resource requirements at milestones and other important decision points.36 Additionally, a comprehensive cost estimate should include both government and contractor costs of the program over its full life cycle, from inception of the program through design, development, deployment, and operation and maintenance to retirement of the program. However, according to PALMS PMO officials, they did not develop a life? cycle cost estimate for PALMS. In 2012 DHS developed an independent government cost estimate to determine'the contractor-related costs to implement the PALMS system across the department (estimated to be approximately $95 million); however, this estimate was not comprehensive because it did not include government-related costs. As a result, DHS was not able to determine the impact on cost when the PALMS program experienced problems (discussed in more detail later), since the baseline cost estimate was incomplete. PALMS PMO officials stated that PALMS did not develop a life?cycle cost estimate because the program is a Level 3 acquisition program and DHS does not require such an estimate for a Level 3 program, However, while DHS acquisition policy does not require a life-cycle cost estimate for a program of this size, we maintain that such an estimate should be prepared because of the program?s risk and troubled history. Without deveioping a comprehensive life-cycle cost estimate, DHS is limited in making future budget decisions related to PALMS. 35cAo-os?ssp. Page 34 Homeland Security PALM S?s Schedule Was Incomplete and lnaccUrate As described in Schedule Assessment Guide, a program?s integrated master schedule is a comprehensive plan of all government and contractor work that must be performed to successfully complete the program. Additionally, such a schedule helps manage program schedule dependencies.37 Best practices for developing and maintaining this schedule include, among other things, capturing all activities needed to do the work and reviewing the schedule after each update to ensure the schedule is complete and accurate. While DHS had developed an integrated master schedule with the PALMS vendor, it did not appropriately maintain this schedule. Specifically, the program?s schedule was incomplete and inaccurate. - While original August 2012 schedule planned to fully deploy both the learning and?performance management capabilities in one release at each component by March 2015, the program?s September 2015 schedule did not reflect the significant change in deployment strategy and time frames. Specifically, the program now plans to deploy the learning management capabilities first and the performance management capabilities separately and incrementally to headquarters and the components. However, the September 2015 schedule reflected the deployment?related milestones (per Component) for only the learning management capabilities and did not include the deployment?related milestones for the performance management capabilities. in September 2015, PALMS officials stated that the deployments related to performance management were not reflected in the program?s schedule becaUse the components had not yet determined when .they would deploy these capabilities. Since then, two components have determined their planned dates for deploying these capabilities, but seven (including headquarters) remain unknown. As a result, the program does not know when PALMS will be fully implemented at all components with all capabilities. Table 4 provides a comparison of the program?s initial as of August 2012, to the program?s latest schedule, as of November 2015. 37GAO-1S-BQG. Page 35 Homeland Security Table 4: Delivery Scheduie Identi?ed in Performance and Learning Management System?s (PALMS) Original August 2012 Schedule and the Current Deployment Strategy and Schedule for PALMS, as of November 2015 August 2012 delivery schedule Current delivery schedule for Current delivery schedule for (including both learning and PALMS learning management PALMS performance Component performance management capabilities) capabilities management capabilities Federal Emergency September 2014 December 2016 Unknown Management AgencyEl Federal Law September 2013 December 10, 2015* Unknown Enforcement - Training Center Headquarters June 2013 October 6, 2015* Unknown Transportation September 2013 Unknown Unknown Security Administrationa US. Citizenship and September 2014 March 2016 October 2017 Immigration Services US. Coast Guard3 March 2014 Unknown Unknown US. Customs and March 2015 July 13, 2015* Unknown Border Protection US. Immigration March 2014 April 2016 Unknown and Customs Enforcementa US. Secret Service September 2014 May 2016 July 2016 Source: Data provided by DHS of?cials. GAO-164253 *Represents actual date. of November 2015, the Federal Emergency Management Agency and US. Immigration and Customs Enforcement were not planning to implement the performance management capabilities of PALMS. Transportation Security Administration and the US. Coast Guard were not currently planning to implement either the learning or performance capabilities of PALMS. According to Transportation Security Administration officials, as of January 2016, the administration was in the process of conducting its fit-gap analysis to determine whether it will implement learning andz?or performance management capabilities. Of?cials expected the ?t-gap assessment to be completed by the end of March 2016. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials stated that they are waiting for the vendor to demonstrate that at! requirements have been met?which is expected to occur by the end of February 2016. . Moreover, the schedule did not include all government-specific activities, including tasks related to employee union activities (such as notifying employee unions and bargaining with them, where necessary) related to the proposed implementation of the Page 36 GAO-16-253 HometandSecurity performance management capabilities.? For example, time frames for when DHS planned 'to notify employee unions at DHS headquarters, FLETC, and were not identified in the schedule. In September 2015, PALMS program officials stated that certain government? specific tasks were not included in the schedule because the integrated master schedule was too big and difficult to manage, so the program decided to track certain government activities, such as union negotiation activities, separately. However, without an integrated master Schedule that includes all government and contractor work that must be performed, the program is at risk of failing to ensure schedule dependencies are appropriately managed and that all essential activities are completed. . Additionally, the August 2015 schedule had incorrect completion dates listed for key activities. For example, DHS reported in the schedule that the actual ?nish date for deploying the learning management capabilities of the PALMS system at CBP was February 17, 2015; however, according to CBP officials, they did not deploy these capabilities until July 2015. in September 2015, program officials acknowledged our concerns and attributed the inaccurate dates to a lack of oversight; subsequently, the program took actions to update the dates. Without developing and maintaining a single comprehensive schedule that fully integrates all government and contractor activities, and includes all planned deployment milestones related to performance management, DHS is limited in monitoring and overseeing the implementation of PALMS, and managing the dependencies between program tasks and milestones to ensure that it delivers capabilities when expected. 3% accordance with Title 5, Chapter 71 of the United States Code, implementing regulations and relevant Executive Order, federal agencies are to notify their unions and offer them the opportunity to negotiate on policies and practices that would affect working conditions. As such. each DHS component must determine whether implementing PALMS - would affect working conditions and, if so, notify their unions. Page 37 Homeland Security PALMS Had Implemented Selected Project Monitoring Best Practices, but Did Not Implement Others The PALMS PMO Did Not Monitor Total Costs According to and the Guide, a key activity for tracking a program?s performance is monitoring the project?s costs by comparing actual costs to the cost estimate.39 The PALMS PMO?which is responsible for overseeing the PALMS implementation projects across DHS, including all of its components?monitored task order expenditures on a basis. As of December 2015, DHS officials reported that they had awarded approximately $18 million in task orders to the vendor. However, the program management of?ce officials stated that they were not monitoring the government?related costs associated with each of the PALMS implementations. The officials stated that they were not tracking government-related implementation costs at headquarters because many of the headquarters program officials concurrently work on other acquisition projects and these officials are not required to track the amount of time spent working specifically on PALMS. The officials also said that they were not monitoring the government?related costs for each of the component PALMS implementation projects because it would be difficult to obtain and verify the cost data provided by the components. We acknowledge the department?s difficulties associated with obtaining and verifying component cost data; however, monitoring the program?s costs is essential to keeping costs on track and alerting management of potential cost overruns. 3QCI'vlilill-ACQ, Project Monitoring and Control Process Area, and the Guide, Project Cost Management. Page 38 GAO-16-253 Homeland Security The PALMS PMO Did Not Consistently Document the Results from Performance Reviews Additionally, because DHS did not develop a comprehensive life-cycle cost estimate for PALMS that included government-related costs,40 the program management office was unable to determine cost increases to the program because it could not compare actual cost values against a baseline cost estimate. For example, program officials were unable to identify how much the program?s cost estimate had increased when the implementation at headquarters experienced schedule delays to address deficiencies identified during testing. Without tracking and monitoring all costs associated with PALMS, the department will be unable to compare actual costs against planned estimates and thus, will be limited in its ability to fully monitor the program, which is essential for alerting the program to possible cost overruns and prompting corrective actions. According to and the Guide, key activities in tracking a program?s performance include conducting and documenting the results from progress and milestone reviews to determine whether there are signi?cant issues or performance shortfalls?that need to be addressed.41 Although the PALMS PMO conducted reviews to monitor the program?s performance, it did not consistently document the results of its progress and milestone reviews. For example, . The PALMS PMO did not document the results of the status updates that the PMO provided to DHS executives during its bi-weekly integrated project team meetings, so it is unclear whether the program was appropriately monitoring the progress of all government?specific activities. - . According to PALMS PMO officials, PALMS achieved Initial Operating Capability?which was specified in the contract to be the point when the contractor would deliver an initial set of requirements to the ?As discussed earlier, PALMS PMO officials stated that PALMS did not develop a life- cycle cost estimate because the program is a Level 3 acquisition program and DHS does not require such an estimate for a Level 3 program; however, developing a life-cycle cost estimate is a best practice described in Cost Estimating and Assessment Guide. Additionally, while DHS acquisition policy does not require a life?cycle cost estimate for a program of this size, we maintain that such an estimate should be prepared because of the program?s risk and troubled history. MOMMI-ACQ, Project Monitoring and Control Process Area, and the Guide, Project integration Management. Page 39 GAO-16-253 Homeland Security mumwmm??w government?in January 2015; however, the review for this major milestone was not documented. In September 2015, program officials stated that the results were not documented because this milestone did not align with the typical Initial Operating Capability milestone that is defined in DHS acquisition guidance. Specifically, guidance defines it as when capabilities are first deployed to end users (PALMS capabilities were not deployed to any users until July 2015). Nevertheless, achieving Initial Operating Capability in January 2015 was still considered a major milestone that prompted a review. However, without documenting the results of the milestone review, it is unclear whether any action items were identified during this review and, if so, whether they have all been appropriately managed to closure. . Although CBP officials stated that the results of their progress reviews with the vendor were typically documented, CBP was unable to provide the results of the milestone review conducted prior to deploying the PALMS learning management capabilities in July 2015. As such, it is unclear whether any action items were identified during this review and, if so, whether CBP had appropriately managed them to closure. In the absence of documenting progress and milestone reviews, including all issues and corrective actions discussed, the program cannot demonstrate that these issues and corrective actions are appropriately managed. The PALMS PMO Had Implemented Selected Risk Management Best Practices, but Lacked Others PALMS Was Not Regularly Tracking the Status of Its Risks and Mitigation Efforts According to and the Guide, key risk management practices inciude identifying risks, developing mitigation plans, and regularly tracking the status of risks and mitigation efforts.42 In particular, 42CMMI-ACCI, Risk Management Process Area; and the Guide, Project Risk Management. Page 40 GAO-164253 Homeland Security identifying risks and periodically reviewing them is the basis for sound and successful risk management. Additionally, risk mitigation plans should be developed and implemented when appropriate to proactively reduce the potential impact if a risk were to occur. While PALMS officials had identified program risks, developed associated mitigation plans, and documented them in the HRIT investment?level risk log (which is intended to be the centralized log containing all PALMS risks and mitigation plans, including both government? and vendor?identified risks?), the program did not consistently maintain this log. Speci?cally, the PALMS risks in this log were out of date, the log did not accurately capture the status of all of the risks identi?ed by the program, and it was unclear which risks and associated mitigation plans were being assessed on a basis. For example, - In the May 2015 risk log, 16 of the 17 active PALMSrisks stated that the last time any action was taken to mitigate or close any of these risks was in 2014. However, the mitigation strategy details for 5 of these active risks included information related to decisions made in 2015. As such, it was unclear which risks and mitigation plans were regularly assessed and updated in the risk log, and when actions were last taken on each of the risks. . One of the high?impact and high?probability risks from the May 2015 risk log stated that DHS needed to determine an interim solution for consolidating human resources-related data from components by December 2014; however, the status of this risk had not been updated since August 2014 and it was unclear whether this was still a risk or had been realized as an issue. Additionally, while the investment?level risk management plan identified that the PALMS program was to, among other things, generate weekly status reports to document the status of decisions made during risk review meetings and identify planned completion dates for each step of the risk mitigation plans, the program was not always complying with these processes.44 For example, the program was not developing the 43PALMS risks identi?ed by the vendor are also documented and maintained in a separate vendor?developed risk tog. 44As discussed later, the PALMS vendor also developed a separate risk management plan that documented how vendor-identi?ed risks are to be maintained in the vendor- developed risk log. Page 41 GAO-16-253 Homeland Security The PALMS PMO Did Not Prioritize the Program?s Risks or Document Criteria for Elevating Component Risks required weekly risk status reports or identifying planned completion dates for its risk mitigation plan steps. Program officials acknowledged that the PALMS risks in the HRIT risk log were out of date and inaccurate, and the program was not complying with all of the-documented processes in the risk management plan. Program officials attributed this to, among other things, the focus being on meeting upcoming deadlines; as such, implementing certain processes identified in the HRIT risk management plan were not a priority, However, by not carrying out these key risk management functions, program of?cials introduced additional risk to the program. In October 2015 and in response to us identifying these issues, PALMS officials stated that they were in the process of validating and updating the risks and mitigation plans in the HRIT risk log to address these issues, ?as well as were updating their risk management processes to align with the documented processes in the risk management plan. The program completed this validation update process in October 2015', however, the updated log continued to have these issues. For example, the PALMS PMO had not yet identified the planned completion dates for each mitigation step (where appropriate). Further, this updated log? which is intended to be the program?s centralized log of all government- and vendor?identified PALMS risks?did not contain all of the vendor? identified risks. For example, two component-specific risks that were identified in the vendor?maintained risk log were not included in the program?s centralized risk log. As such, it is unclear whether the program is appropriately managing these risks. Until a comprehensive risk log is established that accurately captures the status of all risks (including both government? and vendor?identified risks) and mitigation plans, and includes planned completion dates for each mitigation step (where appropriate), the program is limited in effectively managing all of its risks. According to and Guide risk management best practices, effective risk management includes evaluating and categorizing risks using defined risk categories and parameters, such as probability and impact, and determining each risk?s relative priority. Risk prioritization helps to determine where resources for risk mitigation can be applied to provide the greatest positive impact on the program. The parameters for evaluating, categorizing, and prioritizing risks should include defined thresholds for cost, schedule, performance) that, when exceeded, trigger management attention and mitigation activities. These risk parameters should be documented so that they are available for Page 42 GAO-16453 Homeland Security - reference throughout the life of the project and are used to provide common and consistent criteria for prompting management attention.45 While the PALMS program'had categorized its risks and assigned parameters to them, including probability and impact, the program did not prioritize its risks or document criteria for elevating them to management. Speci?cally, the PALMS PMO did not use the aSsigned parameters to determine each risk?s relative priority and overall risk level high, medium, and low). PALMS officials acknowledged in June 2015 that the risks were not prioritized in the logs, but said, based on the experience of the PALMS PMO staff, officials are able to determine each risk?s priority by reviewing the assigned probability and impact parameters. However, this is an inadequate method for managing risks. Specifically, it introduces unnecessary subjectivity by relying heavily on officials to make prioritization decisions, rather than using the assigned parameters to determine and document each risk?s relative priority. Additionally, the program had not documented criteria for elevating component risks to the program management office. As mentioned earlier, each component is responsible for overseeing its own PALMS implementation project, while the program management office at headquarters is responsible for overseeing the implementation projects . across the department. According to program of?cials, as part of this effort, each component is to fol-low the risk management processes documented in vendor-developed risk management plan (which is a separate plan from the HRlT$level risk management plan used by the program management office, as discussed earlier). While the PALMS vendor?developed risk management plan directed each component to track risks in a component?specific risk register, the plan did not establish criteria for when component-level risks need to be elevated to the PALMS PMO at headquarters. In September 2015, the PALMS program manager stated that all component-level risks that are rated red high-probability and high- impact risks) are reported to headquarters. However, this guidance was not documented and, as such, the PALMS PMO did not have reasonable assurance that the components were knowledgeable about which risks to Risk Management Process Area; and the Guide, Project Risk Management. - Page 43 GAO-16-253 Homeland Security elevate, and whether the components were appropriateiy elevating such risks. Program officials were unable to explain why this criterion was not documented, but in response to our concern, the program officials directed the vendor to update the PALMS risk management plan to document this'criterion; the vendor completed this update in October 2015. ln particular, the plan now specifies that all component?level risks that could impact when the PALMS system is to be deployed at each of the components should be elevated to the PALMS PMO and given a priority of high. Documenting the criteria for when risks need to be elevated to the PALMS PMO should help ensure that all appropriate risks are being elevated for review. However, until the program prioritizes its risks by determining each risk?s relative priority and overall risk level, DHS is hampered in its ability to ensure that the program?s attention and resources for risk mitigation are used in the most effective manner. Conclusions Although the HRIT investment was initiated about 12 years ago with the intent to consolidate, integrate, and modernize the department?s human resources IT infrastructure, DHS has made very limited progress in achieving these goals. minimally involved executive steering committee during a time when signi?cant problems were occurring was a key factor in the lack of progress. This is particularly problematic given that the department?s ability to efficiently and effectively carry out its mission is significantly hampered by its fragmented human resources system environment and duplicative and paper-based processes. Moreover, ineffective management of HRIT, such as the lack of an updated schedule and a life-cycle cost estimate, also contributed to the neglect this investment has experienced. Until DHS, among other things, maintains a schedule, develops a life?cycle cost estimate, tracks costs, and re?evaluates and updates the Human Capital Segment Architecture blueprint, the department will continue to be plagued by duplicative systems and an inefficient and ineffective human resources environment impacting in its ability to perform its mission. Additionally, until the PALMS program effectively addresses identified weaknesses in its project planning, project monitoring, and risk management practices and implements PALMS department?wide, performance management processes will continue to be cumbersome, time?consuming, and primarily paper-based. Further, DHS will be limited in efficiently tracking and reporting accurate, comprehensive performance Page 44 GAO-16-253 Homeland Security Recommendations for Executive Action and learning management data across the organization, and could risk further implementation delays. To ensure that the HRIT investment receives necessary oversight and attention, we are recommending that the Secretary of Homeland Security direct the Under Secretary of Management take the following two actions: . Update the exeCutive steering committee charter to establish the frequency with which executive steering committee meetings are to be held. - Ensure that the executive steering committee is consistently involved in overseeing and advising HRIT, including approving key program management documents, such as operational plan, schedule, and planned cost estimate. To address poor progress and ineffective management, we are recommending that the Secretary of Homeland Security direct the Under Secretary of Management to direct the Chief Human Capital Officer to direct the investment take the following six actions: . Update and maintain a schedule estimate for when DHS plans to implement each of the strategic improvement-opportunities. - Develop a complete life?cycle cost estimate for the implementation of HRIT. - Document and track all costs, including components? costs, associated with HRIT. . Establish time frames for re-evaluating the strategic improvement opportunities and associated projects in the Human Capital Segment Architecture Blueprint and determining how to move forward with . . Evaluate the strategic improvement opportunities and projects within the Human Capital Segment Architecture Blueprint to determine whether they and the goals of the blueprint are still valid and reflect priorities going forward, and update the blueprint accordingly. . Update and maintain the department?s human resources system inventory. Page 45 GAO-15253 Homeland Security To improve the PALMS program?s implementation of IT acquisition best practices, we are recommending that the Secretary of Homeland Security direct the Under Secretary of Management to direct the Chief Information Officer to direct the PALMS program office to take the following six actions: - Establish a time frame for deciding whether PALMS will be fully deployed at FEMA and USCG, and determine an alternative approach if the learning and/or performance management capabilities of PALMS are deemed not feasible for FEMA, TSA, or USCG. . Develop a comprehensive life?cycle cost estimate, including all government and contractor costs, for the PALMS program. . Develop and maintain a single comprehensive schedule that includes all government and contractor activities, and includes all planned deployment milestones related to performance management. . Track and monitor all costs associated with the PALMS program. . Document progress and milestone reviews, including all issues and corrective actions discussed. . Establish a comprehensive risk log that maintains an aggregation of all up?to?date riSks (including both government? and vendor?identified) and associated mitigation plans. Additionally, within the comprehensive risk log, - identify and document planned completion dates for each risk mitigation step (where appropriate), and . prioritize the risks by determining each risk?s relative priority and overall risk level. Agency Comments We received written comments on a draft of this report from the Director of Departmental GAO-OIG Liaison Office. The comments are and our Evaluation reprinted in appendix II. in its comments, the department concurred with our 14 recommendations and provided estimated completion dates for impiementing each of them. For example, by April 30, 2016, the Under Secretary of Management plans to ensure that the executive steering committee is consistently involved in overseeing and advising and the committee Page 46 GAO-16-253 Homeland Security is expected to be reviewed quarterly by the Acquisition Review Board.46 These planned actions, if implemented effectively, should help DHS address the intent of our recommendations. We also received technical comments from DHS headquarters and component officials, which we have incorporated, as appropriate. As agreed with your offices, unless you publicly announce the contents of this report earlier, we plan no further distribution until 30 days from the report date. At that time, we will send copies to the Secretary of - Homeland Security and other interested parties. In addition, this report is available at no charge on the GAO website at Should you or your staffs have any questions on information discussed in this report, please contact Carol Cha at (202) 512?4456, .ChaC@gao.gov or Rebecca Gambler at (202) 512-6912, GamblerR@gao.g0v. Contact points for our Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last page of this report. GAO staff who made major contributions to this report are listed in appendix Iii. MM Carol R. Cha Director, information Technology Acquisition Management issues Rebecca S. Gambler Director, Homeland Security and Justice Acquisition Review Board is responsible for reviewing major acquisition programs for proper management, oversight, accountability, and alignment with the department's strategic functions at acquisition decision events and other meetings as needed. Page 47 Homeland Security Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology Our objectives were to (1) evaluate the progress the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has made in implementing the Human Resources information Technology (HRIT) investment and how effectively DHS has managed the investment since completing the Human Capital Segment Architecture in August 2011, (2) describe whether DHS has justified its investment in the Performance and Learning Management System (PALMS) program, (3) determine whether PALMS is being implemented enterprise-wide, and (4) evaluate the extent to which PALMS is implementing selected information technology (IT) acquisition best practices. To address the first part of our first objective?to evaluate the progress DHS had made in implementing the HRIT investment?we compared goals, scope, and implementation time frames (as defined in the Human Capital Segment Architecture Blueprint, which was completed in August 2011) to the investment?s actual accomplishments Specifically, we compared the completed and in-progress projects against the strategic improvement opportunities and projects that were outlined in the blueprint to determine which of the improvement opportunities and projects had been fully implemented or were in?progress. We also compared planned schedule for implementing the improvement opportunities and projects against current planned schedule for implementing them as' of November 2015. Additionally, we interviewed DHS officials from the investment, Office of the Chief Information Officer Office of the Chief Human Capital Of?cer (OCHCO), and components to discuss the steps taken to implement address the strategic improvement opportunities and projects in the blueprint, and meet the goals of the investment. In addressing the second part of our first objective?to evaluate how effectively DHS managed the investment?-we analyzed documentation, such as the investment?s planned and updated completion dates, program management briefings, the blueprint, cost estimates, and budget documentation, and compared it against relevant cost and schedule best practices identified by GAO, and the Guide. These best practices included developing and maintaining a schedule estimate; Page 48 GAO-16453 Homeland Security Appendix E: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology developing a life-cycle costestimate; and tracking program expenditures.1 To determine the amount spent to date on we asked officials from DHS headquarters and each ofthe eight components to provide expenditure information on since the investment began in 2003; officials were unable to provide complete information.2 As such, we were unable to identify the total amount spent on the investment and discuss this limitation earlier in the report. We also analyzed human capital investment guidance, including the 2010 Deputy Secretary memorandum that prohibited component spending on enhancements to existing human resources systems or acquisitions of new human resources solutions, unless those expenditures have been approved by OCHCO or and compared it to the components? current investments in human resources systems, such as those listed in DHS's fiscal year 2016 human capital portfolio. Additionally, we interviewed officials from the OCHCO, and eight components to obtain additional information on how reduced or will reduce duplicative human resources systems. To describe whether DHS justified its investment in the PALMS program, we analyzed documentation, such as the program?s business case and the documented analysis of alternatives that was conducted to identify recommended approaches for pursuing a commercial off-the?shelf learning management system. We used this information to determine the various alternative solutions that DHS assessed for delivering enterprise? wide performance and learning management capabilities. Additionally, 'we reviewed program management briefings provided to "the Executive 1GAO, GAO Cost Estimating and Assessment Guide: Best Practices for Deveioping and Managing Capital Program Costs, (Washington, DC: March 2009); GAO Scheduie Assessment Guide: Best Practices for Project Scheduies, GAO-164396 (Washington, DC: Dec. 22, 2015); Software Engineering institute, Maturity Modei? integration for Acquisition Version 1.3 (Pittsburgh, Pa.: November 2010); and the Project Management institute, lnc., A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowiedge Guide), Fifth Edition, (Newton Square, Pa.: 2013). is a trademark of the Project Management institute, inc. 2The eight components included US. Customs and Border Protection, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Federal Law Enforcement Training Center, US. immigration and Customs Enforcement, Transportation Security Administration, US. Citizenship and immigration Services, US. Coast Guard, and US. Secret Service. 3DHS Enterprise Human Resources Processes, Peopie, and Technciogy Memorandum, dated January 15, 2010. Page 49 GAO-16-253 Homeland Security Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology Steering Committee that outlined, for example, the proposed solution and rationale for such a solution. We also interviewed appropriate DHS and PALMS officials for further information regarding the process DHS used to conduct the analysis of alternatives and other steps the department took to determine its preferred solution, including determining whether DHS could use existing shared services that were being used by other federal agencies. To determine whether PALMS is being implemented department?wide, we analyzed the program?s acquisition plan and original schedule for implementing the system department-wide, and compared it against actual program status documentation and the program?s current implementation scheduie. We also obtained and analyzed information from DHS officials, the PALMS headquarters program management office and components on each component?s implementation of PALMS, including identifying which PALMS capabilities each component planned to implement, the number of planned PALMS users, and their reported causes for why certain components were not currently planning to implement PALMS. To evaluate the extent to which PALMS implemented selected lT acquisition best practices, we analyzed the program?s acquisition documentation and compared it to relevant project planning, project monitoring, and risk management best practices?including and Guide practices, and best practices identified by GAO.4 Specifically, we analyzed program documentation, including the acquisition plan, requirements management plan, risk management plan, cost and schedule estimates, program management review briefings, meeting minutes, risk logs, and risk mitigation plans to determine the extent to which the program?s acquisition processes were consistent with the best practices. Additionally, we interviewed officials from HRIT, PALMS, OCHCO, and eight components to obtain additional information on the program?s risk management, project planning, and project monitoring processes. To assess the reliability of the data that we used to support the findings in this report, we reviewed relevant program documentation to substantiate evidence obtained through interviews with agency of?cials. We Guide, and GAO-OQ-SSP. Page 50 . GAO-1B-253 Homeland Security Appendix 1: Objectives, Scope, and _i'u?lethodoiogy determined that the data used in this report were sufficiently reliable, with the exception of expenditure information provided by the investment and selected risk data provided by the PALMS program. We discuss limitations with these data in the report. We have also made appropriate attribution indicating the sources of the data. - We conducted this performance audit from March 2015 to February 2016 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. Page 51 Homeland Security Appendix Comments from the Department of Homeland Security Carol R. Cha Director, information Technology Acquisition US. Government Accountability Of?ce 44] Street, NW Washington, DC 20543 'Re: Draft Report GAO-16-253, SE Human Resources Infonnation Technology I Dear Ms Cha: Thank you for the opportunity to 1' Department ofIriomeiand Security (DHS) appreciates Accountability Of?ce?s work in planning an this report. It is important to note that the Department is already shortcomings. For example, on Decem (ARE) reviewed the I-IRIT Po 2010 baseline and the status of the 15 Strategic Impro for leadership to provide direction to the Portfo Secretary for Managementhhief Acquisition Of?cer DHS Of?ce of the Chief Information O?i Officer (OCHCO), Office of th and Risk Realignment of HRIT resources and function Re-establisiunent of the HRIT updated charter and designated co-chairs; Documentation requirements for the 3105; Next steps for the and 0 Quarterly Program Reviews to the ARB. January 21, 2016 Management Issues nvestment Is Needed? eview and comment on this draft report. The US. Human Resources Information Technology (HRIT) investment and addreszs the her 21, 2015?, the Acquisition Review Board rlfoiio for the purpose of identifying Decision Memorandum enumerating ARE decisions an eer (0 C10), 0 Chief Financial Of?eer (OCFO), and Of?ce ofProgram Management (FARM). These actions include: Executive Steering Committee (133C) with an Department Security Washington, DC in?ll! Homeland Securlty 9' in g; ,@gl CURITY: Oversight of Neglected the 11.8. Government conducting its review and issuing airing actions'to evaluate the progress since the vement Opportunities (3105), and he going forward. The Under suhscquently signed an Acquisition directing speci?c actions to the ?ier: ofthe ChieF'I?Iuman Capital 5 to Page 52 Homeland Security- Appendix 11: Comments from the Department of Homeland Security The draft report contained 14 recommendations with which the Deparhnent concurs. Speci?cally, GAO recormnended that the Secretaryr of Homeland Security direct the Under Secretary for Management (U SM) to: Recommendation 1: Update the BRIT ESC charter to establish the frequency with which BRIT ESC meetings are to be held. Response: Concnr. The USM will ensure that the HRIT ESC charter is updated to establish Quarterly meetings ofthc BRIT ESC. Estimated Completion Date (ECD): February 29, 2016. Recommendation 2: Ensure that the HRIT BBC is consistently involved in oVerseeing and advising BRIT, including approving key program management documents, such as HRIPS operational plan, schedule, and planned cost estimate. Response: Concur. The USM will ensure that the ESC is consistently involved in overseeing and advising BRIT, including approving hey program mmragemeut documents, such as operational plan, schedule, and planned cost estimate. The BRITESC will be reviewed quarterly by the ARB, under the direction of the Deputy Under Secretary,' for Management. ECD: April 30, 2016. Recommendation 3: Direct the Chief Human Capital Of?cer to direct the HRH investment to update and maintain a schedule estimate for when DHS plans to implement each of the strategic improvement opportunities. Response: Cancer. The DHS Chief Information Of?cer (CID) will update and maintain 1, a schedule estimate for when it plans to implement each of the strategic improvement Opportunities, Furlher details will be provided after the realignment of the BRIT mvesmieut has occurred. ECD: April 30, 2016. Recommendation 4: Direct the Chief Human Capital Of?cer to direct the HR1T investment to derelop a complete life-cycle cost estimate for the implementation of BRIT. Response: Concur. The CID will direct development of a complete life-cycle cost estimate for the implementation of the HRIT EEC?approved strategic improvement opportunities within I-IRIT. ECD: June 30, 2016. Recommendation 5: Direct the Chief Human Capital Of?cer to direct the BRIT investment to document and track all costs, including components? costs, associated with Page 53 Homeland Security Appendix II: Comments from the Department of Homeland Security Response: Concur. The CID will direct the HRi'i? investment to document and track all costs associated with HRJT, including eomponents? costs. ECD: October 31,2016. Recommendation 6: Direct the Chief Human Capital Of?cer to direct the HRIT investment to establish time ?ames for rc-evaluating the strategic improvement opportunities and associated projects in the Human Capital Segment Architecture Blueprint and determining how to move forward with BRIT. Response: Coneur. The CIO will direct the HRIT investment to establish timei?rarnes for re?evaiuatin the strategic opportunities and associated projects in the 1Human Capital Segment Architecture and determine how to move forward with ECD: February 29, 2016 Recommendation 7: Direct the Chief Human Capital Of?cer to direct the 1-1le investment to evaluate the strategic improvement opportunities and projects with the Human Capital Segment Architectures Blueprint to determine whether they and the goals of the blueprint are still valid and re?ect HRIT priorities going 'tbrward, and update the blueprint accordingly. Response: Conenr. The CIO will direct investment to evaluate the strategic improvementopportunities and projects with the Human Capital Segment Architectures Blueprint to determine whether they and the goals ot?thc blueprint are stiil valid and re?ect BRIT priorities going forward, and update the bine print accordingly. ECD: April 30,2016. Recommendation 8: Direct the Chief Human Capital Officer to direct the HRIT investment to update and maintain the department?s human resources system inventory. Response: Coneur. The C10 will direct the BRIT investment to update and maintain the Deparlment?s human resources system inventory. ECD: October 31, 2016. Recommendation 9: Direct lire Chief Information Of?cer to direct the For ["ormancc and Learning Management System (PALMS) program of?ce to establish a time frame for deciding whether PALMS will be fully deployed at. FEMA and USCG, and determine an alternative approach if PALMS is deemed not feasible for FEMA, TSA or USCG. Response: Concur. The DHS DCIO PALMS Program Office will establish a time frame for a deployment decision of PALMS for the components speci?ed. ICE is in the process of learning management implementation and is scheduled to be completed on April 5, 2016, The ECD for FEMA, TSA and USCG is April 30, 2016. Page 54 Homeland Security Appendix II: Comments from the Department of Homeland Security Recommendation 10; Direct the Chief Information Of?cer to direct the PALMS program of?ce to develop a comprehensive life- cycle cost estimate, in eluding all govemment and contractor costs, for the PALMS program. Response: Concur. The OCIO PALMS Program Office will provide an updated life cycle cost estimate for all government and contractor costs based on DHS ARE requirements for aLevel 3 program. 1391): May 30, 2016. Recommendation 11: Direct the Chief Information Of?cer to direct 1he PALMS program of?ce to develop and maintain a single comprehensive schedule that includes 'all government and poniractor activities,'and includes all planned deployment milestones related to perfonnance management. Resp onse: Concur. The 0010 PALMS Program Of?ce will develop and maintain a single comprehensive schedule that includes all government and contractor activities, and includes all planned deployment milestones related to performance management. ECD: May 30, 2016. - Recommendation 12: Dircet?ie Chief Infonnation Of?cer to direct the PALMS program of?ce to track and monitor all costs associated with the PALMS program Response: Cancer. The 0010 PALMS Program Of?ce will track and monitor all costs associated with the PALMS program, ECD: March 30, 2016. . Recommendation 13: Direct the Chief Information Officer to direct the PALMS program office to documentI?ALMS?s progress and milestone reviews, including all issues and corrective actions discussed. Response: Conant. The 0010 PALMS Program Of?ce will document progress and milestone reviews, including publishing meeting notes= and all issues and corrective actions discussed. ECD: February 29, 2016. 3 Recommendation 14: Direct ?ie Chief Information Officer to direct the PALMS program Of?ce to establish a comprehensive risk log that maintains an aggregation of all up?todate risks?(including both government and vendor?identi?ed) and associated mitigation plans Additionally, within the comprehensive risk log, a Identify and document planned completion dates for each risk mitigation step 1 (when: appropriate} I Prioritize. the risks by determining each risk?s relative priority and overall risk I level. 5 Page 55 Homeland Security Appendix II: Comments from the Department of Homeland Security Response: Coneur. The OCIO PALMS Program Of?ce will establish a comprehensiVe risk log that maintains an aggregation of all up-to-date risks (including both government and vendor-identi ?ed) and associated mitigation plans, as Well as the additional requirements identi?ed within the comprehensive risk log. ECD: anuary 29, 2016. Again, thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the draft report. Technical comments were previously provided under separate cover. Please feel free to Contact me ifyou have any questions. We look forward to working with you in the ?tturc. Sincerely, ell? Jit H4 Crumpaeker, CIA, CFE Director Departmental LiaiSon Office Page 56 GAO-16-253 Homeland Security Appendix GAO Contacts and Staff AcknOwIedgments Carol R. Cha at (202) 512?4456 or ChaC@gao.gov, or GAO Contacts . Rebecca 8. Gambler at (202) 512?6912 or GamblerR@gao.gov Staff In addition to the contacts named above, the following staff also made key contributions to this report: Shannin O?Neill, Assistant Director; Acknowledgments Christopher Businsky; Rebecca Eyler; Javier lrizarry; Emily Kuhn; and David Lysy. . (100073) page 57 GAD-1B-253 Homeland Security ., - The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation, and GAO MISSIOH 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. 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 Obtammg COPIES Of cost is through website Each weekday GAO Reports and afternoon, GAO posts on its website newly released reports, testimony, - t- and correspondence. To have GAO e?mail you a list of newly posted GS lmony products, go to and select ?E?mail Updates.? Order by Phone The price of each GAO publication reflects actual cost of production and distribution and depends on the number of pages in the publication and whether the publication is printed in color or black and white. Pricing and ordering information is posted on website, Place orders by calling (202) 512?6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or TDD (202) 512-2537. Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card, MasterCard, Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional information. - Connect with GAO on Facebook, Flickr, Twitter, and YouTube. WIth GAO Subscribe to our RSS Feeds or Email Updates. Listen to our Podcasts and read The Visit GAO on theweb at wwgaogov. Contact: To Report Fraud, Waste and Abuse in Website: E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov Federal Programs Automated answering system: (800) 424?5454 or (202) 512-7470 - Katherine Siggerud, Managing Director, siggerudk@gao.gov, (202) 512? CongreSSlonal 4400, us. Government Accountability Office, 441 Street NW, Room Relations 7125, Washington, DC 20543 PUbiiC Affairs Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov, (202) 512-4800 U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 Street NW, Room 7149 Washington, DC 20548 or M3 Please Print on Recycled Paper. January 20, 2016 DIG-1649 Mg DHS OIG HIGHLIGHTS .5. if . xi Oversight of Its Workforce Training A r? ??93 Needs Improvement What We Found DHS does not have adequate oversight of its workforce training. DHS lacks reliable training cost information and data needed to make effective and ef?cient management decisions. In addition, it does not have an effective governance structure for its training oversight, including clearly de?ned roles, responsibilities, and delegated authorities. Finally, DHS has not adequately addressed. 29 different recommendations to improve training efficiencies made since 2004 by various working groups. As a result, DHS cannot ensure the most ef?cient . use of resources. DHS Response In its response to our draft report, DHS reported that it is committed to consistent oversight and transparency in order to ensure unity of effort, and encourage ef?ciency, effectiveness, and accountability. Accordingly, DHS agreed with our report recommendations. OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL Department of Homeland Security Washington, DC 20528 January 20, 2016 MEMORANDUM FOR: The Honorable Russell C. Deyo Under Secretary for Management FROM: John Roth FIRM Inspector eral SUBJECT: Oversight of its Workforce Training Needs Improvement Attached for your action is our ?nal report, Oversight of its Workforce Training Needs Improvement. We incorporated the formal comments from the Department in the ?nal report. The report contains three recommendations aimed at improving the Department?s tracking and reporting of training information, and oversight and management of its workforce training. Your of?ce concurred with all recommendations. Based on information provided in your response to the draft report, we consider recommendations 1 through 3 open and resolved. Once your of?ce has fully implemented the recommendations, please submit a formal closeout letter to us within 30 days so that we may close the recommendations. The memorandum should be accompanied by evidence of completion of agreed? upon corrective actions and of the diSposition of any monetary amounts. Please send your response or closure request to OIGAuditsFollovmp?ioig.dhsgov. Consistent with our responsibility under the Inspector General Act, we will provide copies of 'our report to congressional committees with oversight and appropriation responsibility over the Department of Homeland Security. We will post the report on our website for public dissemination. Please call me with any questions, or your staff may contact Mark Bell, Assistant Inspector General for Audits, at (202) 254-4100. Attachment Hams-:6 o?x. . OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL ?31.115223?? Department of Homeland Security Table of Contents Background 3 Results of Audit 3 DHS Lacks Reliable Cost Information to Conduct Effective Oversight of Training 4 DHS Lacks an Effective Governance Structure for Training Oversight 6 DHS Has Not Addressed Recommendations from Previous Reviews '7 9 Appendixes Appendix A: Objective, Scope, and Methodology 12 Appendix B: DHS Comments to the Draft Report 14 Appendix C: DHS Training Costs 16 Appendix D: Previous DHS Workforce Training Recommendations 1'7 Appendix E: Of?ce of Audits Major Contributors to This Report 19 Appendix F: Report Distribution 20 Abbreviations CBP US. Customs and Border. Protection DHS Department of Homeland Security FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency FLETC Federal Law Enforcement Training Centers FY ?scal year -- GAO Government Accountability Of?ce ICE US. Immigration and Customs Enforcement NPPD National Protection and Programs Directorate OCFO Of?ce of the Chief Financial Officer OCHCO Of?ce of the Chief Human Capitol Of?cer OIG Office of Inspector General OPM Of?ce of Personnel Management PALMS Performance and Learning Management System TSA Transportation Security Administration USCIS US. Citizenship and Immigration Services US. Secret Service OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL Department of Homeland Security Background The Homeland Security Act of 2002 created the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), merging 22 Federal agencies. Since its formation, DHS has faced challenges in integrating and consolidating legacy agencies? support structures, including multiple training facilities and programs. Some of training includes preparedness, law enforcement, and leadership development. In fiscal year (FY) 2014, DHS requested more than $1.4 billion and in FY 2015, it requested $1.1 billion to provide training to both employees and external stakeholders, such as state and local ?rst responders. As of June 2015, the following 9 DHS components operated 31 training centers across the United States.1 a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) - Federal Law Enforcement Training Centers (FLETC) 0 National Protection and Programs Directorate (NPPD) . Transportation Security Administration (TSA) - US. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) - US. Coast Guard 0 US. Customs and Border Protection - US. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) - US. Secret Service In 2003, the US. Government Accountability Of?ce (GAO) identified the integration of DHS and Human Capital Management as a high?risk area. In a 2015 update to the High?Risk Series, GAO continued to emphasize the need for improved management integration, human capital management, and ?nancial reporting. DHS has undertaken several initiatives since 2004 to identify training efficiencies, including integrating and consolidating some of its training infrastructure. However, additional actions are necessary to improve the oversight of workforce training. Results of Audit DHS does not have adequate oversight of its workforce training. DHS lacks reliable training cost information and data needed to make effective and ef?cient management decisions. In addition, it does not have an effective . governance structure for its training oversight, including clearly de?ned roles, responsibilities, and delegated authorities. Finally, DHS has adequately addressed 29 different recommendations to improve training efficiencies made since 2004 by various working groups. As a result, DHS cannot ensure the most efficient use of resources. 1 This audit focused on those DHS components that operate training centers. oig. dhs. gov 3 16-19 OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL Department of Homeland Security DHS Lacks Reliable Cost Information to Conduct Effective Oversight of Training DHS does not have reliable training cost data and information to make informed management decisions. Multiple prior audits of DHS have reported weaknesses with the reliability of data at DHS. Additionally, DHS made multiple attempts to determine DHS?wide training costs for FYs 2012?14, but the results were unreliable. This caused GAO to note in a 2014 report2 that DHS needed to develop a methodology to capture training costs. During our audit, we attempted to determine total DHS training costs for FYs 2014 and 2015. We obtained budget data from the DHS Congressional Budget Justification and training data reported to the Of?ce of Personnel Management (OPM). When we requested DHS training costs from the DHS Office of the Chief Financial Officer (OCFO), it could not readily provide the data. The OCFO did not have access to components? financial systems; rather, it relied on data calls to provide us the training costs although it could not validate the data. We found signi?cant discrepancies between the total amounts reported, as shown in table For instance, in FY 2014, Congress provided more than $1.4 billion for DHS training, but DHS only reported $1.9 million in training costs to and as of August 2015 the OCFO could only account for $267.6 million in training expenditures for FY 2014. Appendix provides additional training costs for DHS components for FYs 2014 and 2015. FY2014 FY2015 i 'k 'k Enacted Request 2015 HFY 2014 $172015 $1,412.7 $1,138.3 i $267.6 1 $180.5 $1.9 $1.3 Source: Office of Inspector General (OIG) compiled from DHS and OPM data. 1"October 1, 2014, through June 30, 2015. Federal regulations require agencies to maintain training records and costs, including payments made for travel, tuition, and fees. OPM also requires Federal agencies to report accurate and complete training data every month. In an effort to comply with the OPM regulation, DHS has tasked at least three contractors to compile training data from nine different systems maintained by various components. However, the data being submitted to OPM has been 2 DHS Training: Improved Documentation, Resource Tracking, and Performance Measurement Could Strengthen Efforts, September 10, 2014. dhs. gov 4 16? 19 3" OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL Department of Homeland Security inaccurate. According to DHS Of?ce of the Chief Human Capitol Officer (OCHCO) personnel, DHS does not have access to components? financial data and relies solely on contractors to meet its reporting requirements. In addition to submitting incomplete and inaccurate training data to 0PM, DHS also is not providing oversight and quality assurance of that data. We reviewed submission to 0PM and determined that DHS reported less than one percent of the funds appropriated for training in FY 2014. We also found that DHS has not been reporting any training data for CBP, FEMA, and For example, according to the its contractor has been submitting training data to contractor However, 0PM did not have record of any training data reported for since February 2014. According to contractor, there have been problems with data files; however, neither DHS nor were aware of this issue prior to our audit. To further assess the accuracy of training costs reported to 0PM, we judgmentally reviewed training data for August 20 14 and January 20 15 from the USCIS, TSA, and NPPD, and determined that the data they reported to 0PM was inaccurate. For example, in August 2014 the USCIS reported to 0PM that it spent $23,893 for training. However, when we received data from USCIS for the same month, it reported that it spent $435,286. We also found discrepancies for TSA and NPPD as shown in table 2. .. . if" $23,893 1 3341123931 $0 $20,866,811le ll $126,411 ll $8,699 Source: 01G created from DHS and 0PM data. Based on our review of the same three components? January 2015 data reported to 0PM, DHS was still reporting inaccurately. For example, TSA did not report any training costs to 0PM for January 2015; however, in response to our data request, TSA reported more than $23 million in training costs. There were also discrepancies for NPPD and USCIS as shown in table 3. 5 16-19 OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL Department of Homeland Security it. $193,831 JV $193,37i LTSA 1L $0 jf$23,709,471 5L $6,785 $43,523 Ij _ $36,743 Eurce: 01G created from DHS and 0PM data. Although DHS has taken steps to improve the reliability of its training data, further action is needed. In May 2013, DHS awarded a blanket purchase agreement to create an enterprise?wide learning management system. The initial launch date for the Performance and Learning Management System (PALMS) was December 2013. However, there have been multiple delays and PALMS was still not fully deployed during our audit. DHS now estimates that PALMS will be fully operational by 2017. Having reliable data is essential to DHS to fully meet its reporting requirements and effectively oversee its training funding. I DHS Lacks an Effective Governance Structure for Training Oversight In June 2012, DHS delegated the authority for training oversight to both OCHCO and DHS components without establishing a clear governance structure to provide systematic oversight. According to OCHCO personnel, the draft directive to improve this structure was last updated in August 2015 but has been in the approval process since 2010. In the meantime, DHS and its components must continue to rely on inadequate and con?icting management directive and delegation of authority documents. According to Management Directive 3210, Training, the Under Secretary for Management, through OCHCO, has the responsibility for the oversight of training. This includes, but is not limited to, the establishment, operation, maintenance, and evaluation of training for DHS employees. The Under Secretary for Management is also responsible for training policies and establishing priorities. However, DHS Delegation number 03000, Delegation for Human Capital and Human Resources splits these same training responsibilities between OCHCO and component leadership. Specifically, OCHCO, through its chief learning of?cer, has authority over departmental learning and development, but not over component mission~specif1c training. Although still in draft form, the chief learning officer updated management directive on training, and the update is intended to clarify these responsibilities across-DHS. This draft directive establishes authority, oig. dhs. gov 6 OIG- 16? 19 OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL Department of Homeland Security responsibilities, and policies to manage workforce and organizational development. - DHS components also lack a uni?ed process to govern workforce training, which hinders component leadership from having comprehensive oversight of that training. Although we determined that and the Federal Protective Service had adequate oversight of their training, the remaining six of the eight components?3 training areas we reviewed lacked sufficient oversight of all training: - Office of Training and Development does not oversee all of the Of?ce of Air and Marine?s training. Furthermore, the Office of Air and Marine?s training 'office does not have oversight of the Unmanned Aviation System training. I U. S. Coast Guard?s Force Readiness Command, Training Division does not oversee training at the Coast Guard Academy. a National Training Directorate does not oversee training in the U.S. Fire Academy. a Office of Training and Workforce Engagement does not have oversight of ?eld?level training at the airports. - Training and Career Development Division does not oversee all component field-level training. - Of?ce of Training and Development does not have oversight over the training at the Fort Benning, GA, training center. The lack of effective governance structure further hinders ability to adequately oversee its workforce training, which decreases opportunities for ef?ciencies. DHS Has Not Addressed Recommendations from Previous Reviews Over the last decade, DHS has conducted multiple reviews and working groups have made numerous recommendations to improve the integration of its training and development programs, as shown in ?gure 1. 3 Includes Federal Protective Service, but not NPPD. 7 OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL Department of Homeland Security - DHS Training Facility Study 2004 (15 recommendations) - DHS Enterprise Learning 85 Development Capability Study 2010 (13 recommendations) . Training Facilities Infrastructure Team (No recommendations) a) - DHS Training Facilities Consolidation Working Group 2014 (1 recommendation) A, i, - Government?owned Training Facility Review Working Group 2015 (In Progress) Source: GIG-created based on DHS documents. As illustrated in figure 1 and detailed in appendix D, collectively from these reviews, 29 recommendations have been made. The investment of signi?cant resources into these working groups should have resulted in the implementation of improved processes, oversight, and management of DHS workforce training. However, there is little evidence DHS has tracked or implemented any of these recommendations. In some instances, the 2010 Training Facility Study working group (20 10 working group) made recommendations similar to those in the 2004 Enterprise Learning and Development Capabilities Study working group (2004 working group). For example, the 2004 working group recommended DHS assess potential uses of the FLETC Charleston and study training capacity across DHS. The 2010 working group made a similar recommendation for DHS to optimize the use of existing DHS training facilities. Other similarities in the recommendations the two working groups made included issues such as improving efficiencies, clarifying policies and procedures, standardizing training, and improving training tracking. DHS continues to initiate working groups to improve training management without taking action on prior recommendations. In response to the Secretary?s Integrated Planning Guidance, DHS convened a Training Facilities Infrastructure Team in April 2014 to identify options to consolidate and reduce training campus infrastructure. This team collected data related to DHS oig. dhsgov 8 010? 16?19 z?giik. OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL Department of Homeland Security training facilities but did not make any recommendations. Then, in August 2014, DHS created a FLETC?ledTraining Facilities Consolidation working group in response to a request from Representative Jeff Duncan. Representative Duncan wrote a letter urging DHS to consider consolidation of training facilities and programs. The Training Facilities Consolidation working group made one recommendation in October 2014 to terminate the lease of an ICE Training Academy in Dallas, TX, and consolidate it into a DHS?owned facility by the end of FY 20 15. Although personnel from the Office of the Chief Readiness Support Of?cer and OCFO conCurred with the working group?s recommendation, the Under Secretary for Management still had not made a decision by the end of our ?eldwork. In April 2015, DHS and FLETC decided to disband the Training Facilities Consolidation working group, and in June 2015, DHS assembled yet another working group the Government-owned Training Facility Review working group under the co?leadership of the Of?ce of the Chief Financial Officer and the Office of the Chief Readiness Support Of?cer to evaluate DHS?owned training facilities. DHS has overlooked opportunities for known efficiencies and continues to create working groups. This lack of action hinders ability to improve oversight of its workforce training and ensure the most cost?efficient use of resources. Recommendations We recommend that the Under Secretary for Management: Recommendation 1: Develop and implement a process to accurately capture and report training information across DHS. Recommendation 2: Establish an effective governance structure at DHS and component levels with clear guidance and authority for training and development. Recommendation 3: Evaluate past working group recommendations and create an implementation plan for recommendations that will improve the management of DHS training. DHS. Comments and 01G Analysis In its response to our draft report, DHS concurred with all three of our report recommendations. A summary of response and our analysis follows. We have included a copy of the management comments in their entirety in . appendix B. DHS also provided technical comments to our draft report, which we incorporated as appropriate. oigdhs. gov 9 16? 19 some?. Mg}: OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL Department of Homeland Security DHS Comments: DHS reported that it is committed to consistent oversight and transparency in order to ensure unity of effort, and encourage efficiency, effectiveness, and accountability. One way the Department is doing this is by strengthening the DHS accounting system to provide more consistency and transparency in managing and reporting the costs of training at all levels of the Department. DHS Comments to Recommendation DHS concurred with our report recommendation and stated that DHS cannot easily obtain reliable and repeatable data on training costs. The DHS OCHCO has worked with the DHS OCFO to improve the consistent use of accounting codes to more accurately and fully capture training costs in the budgeting and reconciliation processes. OCFO staff has provided training codes from the DHS Accounting Classification System and are currently working with OCHCO to conduct an analysis of how accurately and consistently these codes are being used. This work serves as the basis for joint efforts to develop and implement new guidelines concerning the use of these codes, with the end goal of providing visibility into the true cost of training at DHS. Estimated completion date: October 31, 2016. OIG Analysis. We consider proposed corrective action to be responsive to the recommendation. The recommendation is considered open and resolved and will remain open pending the completion of the corrective action and submission of adequate supporting documentation. DHS Comments to Recommendation DHS concurred with the recommendation and stated that the draft policy, Employee Training and Learning Development, establishes authority, responsibilities, and policies to manage workforce and organizational development. Upon final issuance of this DHS?wide directive and accompanying instruction, OIG should be able to consider this recommendation closed. Estimated completion date: June 30, 2016. OIG Analysis. We consider proposed corrective action to be responsive to the recommendation. The recommendation is considered open and resolved and will remain open pending the completion of the corrective action and submission of adequate supporting documentation. DHS Comments to Recommendation DHS concurred with the recommendation and agreed that the past studies? recommendations should be examined to determine which are out of date, which have been or are being addressed, and which remain unaddressed. A newly established study team assessing DHS?wide operational education and training programs will work to 10 OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL Department of Homeland Security produce a detailed analysis of the status of the listed items and will determine a way forward for those recommendations being worked and those which remain unaddressed. Estimated completion date: February 29, 2016. OIG Analysis. We consider proposed corrective action 'to be responsive to the recommendation. The recommendation is considered open and resolved and will remain open pending the completion of the corrective action and submission of adequate supporting documentation. 11 OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL Department of Homeland Security Appendix A Objective, Scope, and Methodology The DHS Of?ce of Inspector General was established by the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (Public Law 107-296) by amendment to the Inspector General Act of 1 978. We conducted an audit to determine whether oversight of its workforce training ensures the most cost?effective use of resources. To achieve our audit objective, we interviewed of?cials in the DHS Directorate for Management, -- National Protection and Programs Directorate (Federal Protective Service], and the Of?ce of Intelligence and Analysis. We also conducted interviews with training of?cials at DHS headquarters, FLETC, and DHS operational components including USCIS, CBP, US. Coast Guard, FEMA, ICE, TSA, and We conducted site visits to DHS headquarters and the following DHS components? training centers: . Rowley Training Center, Laurel, MD . CBP Advanced Training Center, Harpers Ferry, WV . FLETC Training Center, GA . FLETC Training Center, Cheltenham, MD - FEMA United States Fire Academy, Emmitsburg, MD . FEMA Emergency Management Institute, Emmitsburg, MD . OCHCO Learning and Development Institute, Washington, DC . Office of the Chief Procurement Officer, Homeland Security Acquisition Institute, Washington, DC . Of?ce of Intelligence and Analysis, Intelligence Training Academy, Washington, DC Additionally, we obtained and reviewed public laws, executive orders, DHS directives, strategic plans, congressional budget requests, DHS ?nancial statements, OPM cost reported data relevant to our objective, DHS Training Facilities Consolidation Working Group data, and Federal real property records. - To determine training costs for FYs 2014 and 2015, we obtained and analyzed DHS training data reported to OPM. To verify the accuracy and completeness, we performed limited data reliability tests. We judgmentally selected data for August 2014 and January 2015 from three representative components based on training costs reported. To test this data, we obtained training information directly from the three components for the same 2 months and compared them with data reported to OPM. oig.dhs.gov 12 16? 19 OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL Department of Homeland Security As a result of the incomplete data DHS reported to 0PM, we requested the training cost amounts from Of?ce of the OCFO. Due to system limitations, Of?ce of the OCFO sent a data call to the components for the requested information, and provided the information received to the audit team. We performed limited data reliability testing by comparing the 0PM and OCFO reported data with enacted budget amounts. We conducted this performance audit between March and September 2015 pursuant to the Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended, and according to generally accepted government auditing standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based upon our audit objectives. We believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based upon our audit objectives. 13 fr-?g??g?fb r?l OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL Department of Homeland Security Appendix DHS Comments to the Draft Report Departmental? Homeland Security DC 20528 Homeland Securlty December 2, 2015 WMORANDUM FOR: John Roth Inspector General FROM: Jim 11. Crumpackcr, CIA, CFE . Director Departmental GAO-016 Liaison .Jf?ce SUBJECT: 01G Draft Report: Oversight of its Workforce Training Needs lmprovemcnt? (Project No. 15707 1 Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this draft report. The US. Department of Homeland Security (Di-l3) appreciates the Of?ce of Inspector General?s (01G) work in planning and conducting its review and issuing this report. DI-IS has a wide variety of missions, each with unique skill requirements law enforcement, baggage screening, intelligence, cyber security, emergency response, canine search, protection, water rescue, and more our training is in large part delivered by Components, which are closest to the needs of the employees performing these vital missions. This approach has ensured relevancy and applicability of training. D118 is committed to consistent oversight and transparency in order to ensure unity of effort, and encourage ef?ciency, effectiveness, and accountability. One way the Department is doing this is by strengthening the DHS accounting systems to provide more consistency and transparency in. managing and reporting the costs of training at all levels of the The draft report contained three recommendations with which the Department concurs. Speci?cally OIG recommended that the Under Secretary for Management: Recommendation I: Deveiop and implement a process to accurately capture and report training information across DHS. Response: Concur. cannot easily obtain reliable and repeatable data on training costs. In response to previous U.S. Government Accountability Of?ce reports, the DI-IS Of?ce of the Chief Human Capital Of?cer (OCHCO) has worked with the DHS Of?ce of oig.dhs.gov 14 OIG- 16-19 OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL Department of Homeland Security the Chief Financial Of?cer (OCFO) to improve the consistent use of accounting codes to more accurately and fully capture training costs in the budgeting and reconciliation processes. OCFO staff have provided training codes from the DHS Accounting Classi?cation System and are currently working with OCHCO to conduct an analysis of how accurately and consistently these codes are being used. This work serves as the basis forjoint efforts to develop and implement new guidelines concerning the use of these codes, with the end goal of providing improved visibility into the true cost ot?training at DHS. Estimated Completion Date (ECD): October 31, 2016. Recommendation 2: Establish an effective gOVernance structure at DHS and component levels with clear guidance and authority for training and development. Response: Concur. As the draft report notes on pages 6?7, draft policy Employee Training Learning and Development, . .establishes authority responsibilities, and policies to manageworlcforce and organizational development.? Upon ?nal issuance of this DHS-wide directive and accompanying instruction, OIG should be able to consider this recommendation closed. ECD: June 30, 201.6. Recommendation 3: Evaluate past working group recommendations and create an implementation plan for recommendations that will improve the management of training. Response: Concur. OCHCO agrees that the past studies? recommendations should be examined to determine which are out of date, whieh have been addressed, which are currently being worked on, and which remain unaddressed. A newly established study team assessing DHS-wide operational education and training programs will work to produce a detailed analysis of the status of the listed items and will determine a way forward for those recommendations which are being worked and are unad dressed. ECD: February 29, 2016. Again, thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this draft report. Technical comments were previously provided under separate cover. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. We look forward to working with you in the future. . 15 16?19 OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL Department of Homeland Security Appendix DHS Training Costs .. . gqugg?e? 1?36 . $362,190 $246,290 $45,137 337,260 30 3.0 USCG 325,239 306,766 104,490 74,026 0 0 FLETC 258,730 259,595 3,745 1,548 49 45 FEMA 233,654 102,269 25,141 19,863 0 0 172,343 162,440 43,094 10,904 0 0 60,498 60,972 8,478 8,506 0 ICE No line item in budget request 10,074 3,628 0 8 FPS No line item in budget request 12,997 12,803 808 586 USCIS No line item in budget request 8,868 9,862 31 24 DHS HQ No line item in budget request ?4,553 ??197 OIG No line item in budget request 436 449 842 194 Domestic Nuclear Detection Of?ce No line item in budget request 1 12 29 66 46 Science and Technology No line item in budget request 490 267 194 $1,412,713 1,138,332 $267,615 $180,517 $1,289 *October 1, 2014, through June 30, 2015 data consists of Management, Office 0 data does not specify what components are included in this category 101010. 0198113900 16 Health Affairs, and Analysis and Operations OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL Department of Homeland Security Appendix Previous DHS Workforce Training Recommendations DHS Training Facility Study Recommendations [October 29, 2004Consider feasibility of reorganizing DHS training along functional lines. Set policies and standards to unify DHS organizational elements. . Identify the core course requirements for DHS law enforcement employees. - Implement a National DHS Training Plan that applies across all DHS training organizations. Conduct a National DHS Training Conference to allow organizational elements to meet and learn about training capabilities within DHS. . Establish a working group to study requirements for an executive development program to address leadership training needs for DHS managers and executives. Consolidate canine training within DHS. . Align the Noble Training Center mission to the Center of Domestic Preparedness? (CDP) mission and consolidate Noble and CDP facilities and missions. Assess potential uses of FLETC Charleston Training Center; study training capacity across DHS. Assess methods and effectiveness of all recruit training at DHS training facilities. Study cost effectiveness of alternative training sources. Increase use of technology?based training delivery. 13. Increase use of technology-based training management. 14. 15. Develop an interoperable Distance Learning Training Network. Explore additional alternative training sites and facilities for scenario? based exercises. DHS Enterprise Learning 82; Development Capability Study Recommendations [May 18, 2010} 1. Establish a DHS Training Institute toprovide DHS-standard, DHS- centric resident (instructor?led, classroom), satellite, and distance training. . Standardize the DHS instructional systems design approach for resident [instructor?led classroom), distance, and blended training. . Establish DHS satellite and or intermittent training sites. Standardize the DHS approach for evaluating externally provided training. Launch standardization of professional training in a prototype set of disciplines. 17 k?g OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL .. . Department of Homeland Security 6. Coordinate senior level external training. 7. Optimize the use of existing DHS training facilities. 8. Optimize the use of existing DHS training competencies. 9. Optimize the use of existing DHS training resources. 10. Develop DHS performance measures for training integration. 11. Measure DHS workforce training. 12. Include DHS training integration in executive performance management evaluations. 13. Engage training staffs as a continuous resource for department personnel. DHS Training Facilities Consolidation Working Group Recommendation (October, 2014: 1. The working group recommended that DHS end the lease for the Dallas, TX, ICE Training Academy facility at the conclusion of FY 2015. 18 16-19 OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL Department of Homeland Security Appendix Of?ce of Audits Major Contributors to this Report Brooke Bebow, Director LaParacina Williams, Audit Manager Johnson Joseph, Lead Auditor Virginia Feliciano, Auditor LaTrina McCowin, Auditor Enrique Leal, Auditor Beth Windisch, Program Analyst Kevin Dolloson, Communications Analyst Garrick Greer, Independent Referencer 19 I OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL Department of Homeland Security Appendix Report Distribution Department of Homeland Security Secretary Deputy Secretary Chief of Staff General Counsel Executive Secretary Director, GAO Liaison Of?ce Assistant Secretary for Office of Policy Assistant Secretary for Of?ce of Public Affairs Assistant Secretary for Office of Legislative Affairs Of?ce of Management and Budget Chief, Homeland Security Branch DHS OIG Budget Examiner Congress Congressional Oversight and Appropriations Committees US. House of Representatives, Committee on Homeland Security, Subcommittee on Oversight and Management Ef?ciency Congressman Jeff Duncan orig. dhs.gov 20 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND COPIES 'To view this and any oflour other reports, please visit our website at: For further information or questions, please contact Office of Inspector General Public Affairs at: Follow us on Twitter at: @dhsoig. OIG HOTLINE - To report fraud, waste, or abuse, visit our website at and click on the red "Hotline" tab. If you cannot access our website, call our hotline at (800) 323?8603, fax our hotline at (202) 254?4297, or write to us at: Department of Homeland Security Office of Inspector General, Mail Stop 0305 Attention: l-Iotline 245 Murray Drive, SW Washington, DC 20528-0305 The White House Office of the Press Secretary For Immediate Release January 25, 2017 Executive Order: Enhancing Public Safety in the Interior of the United States EXECUTIVE ORDER ENHANCING PUBLIC SAFETY IN THE INTERIOR OF THE - UNITED STATES By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) (8 U.S.C. 1101 et seq.), and in order to ensure the public safety of the American people in communities across the United States as well as to ensure that our Nation's immigration laws are faithfully executed, I hereby declare the policy of the executive branch to be, and order, as follows: Section 1. Purpose. interior enforcement of our Nation's immigration laws is critically important to the national security and public safety of the United States. Many aliens who illegally enter the United States and those who overstay or otherwise violate the terms of their visas present a significant threat to national security and public safety. This is particularly so for aliens who engage in criminal conduct in the United States. Sanctuary jurisdictions across the United States willfully violate Federal law in an attempt to shield aliens from removal from the United States. These jurisdictions have caused immeasurable harm to the American people and to the very fabric of our Republic. Tens of thousands of removable aliens have been released into communities across the country, solely because their home countries refuse to accept their repatriation. Many of these aliens are criminals who have served time in our Federal, State, and local jails. The presence of such individuals in the United States, and the practices of foreign nations that refuse the repatriation oftheir nationals, are contrary to the national interest. Although Federal immigration law provides a framework for Federal-State partnerships in enforcing our immigration laws to ensure the removal of aliens who have no right to be in the United States, the Federal Government has failed to discharge this basic sovereign responsibility. We cannot faithfully execute the immigration laws of the United States if we exempt classes'or categories of removable aliens from potential enforcement. The purpose of this order is to direct executive departments and agencies (agencies) to employ all lawful means to enforce the immigration laws ofthe United States.- Sec. 2. Policy. it is the policy of the executive branch to: I Ensure the faithful execution of the immigration laws of the United States, including the against all removable aliens, consistent with Article ll, Section 3 of the United States Constitution and section 3331 of title 5, United States Code; Make use of all available systems and resources to ensure the efficient andfaithful execution of the immigration laws of the United States; Ensure that jurisdictions that fail to compiy with applicable Federal law do not receive Federal funds, except as mandated by law; Ensure that aliens ordered removed from the United States are removed; and Support victims, and the families of victims, of crimes committed by removable aliens. Sec. 3. Definitions. The terms of this order, where applicable, shall have the meaning provided by section 1101 of title 8, United States Code. Sec. 4. Enforcement of the immigration Laws in the interior of the United States. in furtherance of the policy described in' section 2 of this order, i hereby direct agencies to employ all lawful means to ensure the faithful execution of the immigration laws of the United States against all removable aliens. Sec. 5. Enforcement Priorities. in executing faithfully the immigration laws ofthe United States, the Secretary of Homeland Security (Secretary) shall prioritize for removal those aliens described by the Congress in sections 212(a)(2), and 235, and 237(a)(U.S.C. 1182(a)(2), and 1225, and 1227(a)(2) and as well as removable aliens who: Have been convicted of any criminal offense; Have been charged with any criminal offense, where such charge has not been resolved; (0) Have committed acts that constitute a chargeable criminal offense; Have engaged in fraud or willful misrepresentation in connection with any official matter or application before a governmental agency; Have abused any program related to receipt of public benefits; Are subject to a final order of removal, but who have not complied with their legal obligation to depart the United States; or In the judgment of an immigration officer, otherwise pose a risk to public safety or national security. Sec. 6. Civil Fines and Penalties. As soon as practicable, and by no later than one year after the date of this order, the Secretary shall issue guidance and promulgate regulations, where required by law, to ensure the assessment and collection of all fines and penalties that the Secretary is authorized under the law to assess and collect from aliens unlawfully present in the United States and from those who facilitate their presence in the United States. Sec. 7. Additional Enforcement and Removal Officers. The Secretary, through the Director of US. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, shall, to the extent permitted by law and subject to the availability of appropriations, take all appropriate action to hire 10,000 additional immigration officers, who shall complete relevant training and be authorized to perform the law enforcement functions described in section 287 ofthe WA (8 U.S.C. 1357). Sec. 8. Federal?State Agreements. It is the policy of the executive branch to empower State and local law enforcement agencies across the country to perform the functions of an immigration officer in the interior of the United States to the maximum extent permitted by law. In furtherance of this policy, the Secretary shall immediately take appropriate action to engage with the Governors of the States, as well as local officials, for the purpose of preparing to enter into agreements under section 287(g) of the WA (8 U.S.C. 1357(g)). To the extent permitted by law and with the consent of State or local officials, as appropriate, the Secretary shall take appropriate action, through agreements under section 287(g) ofthe INA, or otherwise, to authorize State and local law enforcement officials, as the Secretary determines are qualified and appropriate, to perform the functions of immigration officers in relation to the investigation, apprehension, or detention of aliens in the United States underthe direction and the supervision of the Secretary. Such authorization shall be in addition to, rather than in place of, Federal performance of these duties. To the extent permitted by law, the Secretary may structure each agreement under section 287(g) of the INA in a manner that provides the most effective model for enforcing Federal immigration laws for that jurisdiction. Sec. 9. Sanctuary Jurisdictions. It is the policy of the executive branch to ensure, to the fullest extent of the law, that a State, or a political subdivision of a State, shall comply with 8 U.S.C. 1373. in furtherance of this policy, the Attorney General and the Secretary, in their discretion and to the extent consistent with law, shall ensure thatjurisdictions that willfully refuse to comply with 8 U.S.C. 1373 (sanctuaryjurisdictions) are not eligible to receive Federal grants, except as deemed necessary for law enforcement purposes by the Attorney General or the Secretary. The Secretary has the authority to designate, in his discretion and to the extent consistent with law, ajurisdiction as a sanctuary jurisdiction. The Attorney General shall take appropriate enforcement action against any entity that violates 8 U.S.C. 1373, or which has in effect a statute, policy, or practice that prevents or hinders the enforcement of Federal law. To better inform the public regarding the public safety threats associated with sanctuary jurisdictions, the Secretary shall utilize the Declined Detainer Outcome Report or its equivalent and, on a weekly basis, make public a comprehensive list of criminal actions committed by aliens and any jurisdiction that ignored or otherwise failed to honor any detainers with respect to such aliens. The Director of the Office of Management and Budget is directed to obtain and provide relevant and responsive information on all Federal grant money that currently is received by any sanctuary jurisdiction. Sec. 10. Review of Previous immigration Actions and Policies. The Secretary shall immediately take all appropriate action to terminate the Priority Enforcement Program (PEP) described in the memorandum issued by the Secretary on November 20, 2014, and to reinstitute the immigration program? known as "Secure Communities" referenced in that memorandum. The Secretary shall review agency regulations, policies, and procedures for consistency with this order and, if required, publish for notice and comment proposed regulations rescinding or revising any regulations inconsistent with this order and shall consider whether to withdraw or modify any inconsistent policies and procedures, as appropriate and consistent with the law. .To protect our communities and betterfacilitate the identification, detention, and removal of criminal aliens within constitutional and statutory parameters, the Secretary shall consolidate and revise any applicable forms to more effectively communicate with recipient law enforcement agencies. Sec. 11. Department of Justice Prosecutions of immigration Violators. The Attorney General and the Secretary shall work together to develop and implement a program that ensures that adequate resources are devoted to the prosecution of criminal immigration offenses in the United States, and to develop cooperative strategies to reduce violent crime and the reach of transnational criminal organizations into the United States. Sec. 12. Recalcitrant Countries. The Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of State shall cooperate to effectively implement the sanctions provided by section 243(d) of the WA (8 U.S.C. 1253(d)), as appropriate. The-Secretary of State shall, to the maximum extent permitted by law, ensure that diplomatic efforts and negotiations with foreign states include as a condition precedent the acceptance by those foreign states of their nationals who are subject to removal from the United- States. Sec. 13. Office for Victims of Crimes Committed by Removable Aliens. The Secretary shall direct the Director of US. immigration and Customs Enforcement to take all appropriate and lawful action to establish within US. immigration and Customs Enforcement an office to provide proactive, timely, adequate, and professional services to victims of crimes committed by removable aliens and the family members of such victims. This office shall provide quarterly reports studying the effects of the victimization by criminal aliens present in the United States. Sec. 14. Privacy Act. Agencies shall, to the extent consistent with applicable law, ensure that their privacy policies exclude persons who are not United States citizens or lawful permanent residents from the protections of the Privacy Act regarding personally identifiable information. Sec. 15. Reporting. Except as otherwise provided in this order, the Secretary and the Attorney General shall each submit to the President a report on the progress of the directives contained in this order within 90 days of the date of this order and again within 180 days of the date of this order. Sec. ?16. TranSparency. To promote the transparency and situational awareness of criminal aliens in the United States, the Secretary and the Attorney General are hereby directed to collect relevant data and provide quarterly reports on the following: the immigration status of all aiiens incarcerated under the supervision of the Federal Bureau of Prisons; the immigration status of all aliens incarcerated as Federal pretrial detainees under the supervision of the United States Marshals Service; and the immigration status of all convicted aliens incarcerated in State prisons and local detention centers throughout the United States. Sec. 17. Personnel Actions. The Office of Personnel Management shall take appropriate and lawful action to facilitate hiring personnel to implement this order. Sec. 18. General Provisions. Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect: the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or (ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals. This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations. This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person. DONALD J. TRUMP THE WHITE HOUSE, January 25, 2017'. Twitter instagram Facebook Contact Us Home Briefing Room From the News Room Latest News Video Gailery Live Events From the Press Office Speeches Remarks Press Briefings Statements Releases Nominations Appointments Presidential Actions Legislation Disclosures Issues Top Issues America First Energy Plan America First Foreign Poiicy Bringing Back Jobs And Growth Making Our Military Strong Again Standing Up For Our Law Enforcement Community Trade Deals That Work For All Americans The Administration The Administration President Donald J. Trump Vice President Mike Pence . First Lady Melania Trump Mrs. Karen Pence The Cabinet Executive Offices Council of Economic Advisers Council on Environmental Quaiity Office of Management and Budget Office of National Drug Control Poiicy Of?ce of Science and Technology Policy See All Special Events The 58th Presidential Inauguration I Participate Join Us Tours Events Jobs with the Administration internships White House Fellows Share Your Thoughts We the People Petitions Contact the White House Get involved Obamacare: Share Your Story Getting Americans Back to Work Support Empowering Female Leaders President Trump Stands With Israel Support the Repeal and Replacement of Obamacare 1600 Penn History Grounds Presidents First Ladies The Vice President's Residence Office Eisenhower Executive Office Building Camp David Air Force One Our Government The Executive Branch The Legislative Branch The Judicial Branch The Constitution Federal Agencies Commissions Elections Voting State Local Government USA.gov Privacy Policy Copyright Policy The White House Of?ce of the Press Secretary For immediate Release January 25, 2017 Executive Order: Border Security and Immigration Enforcement Improvements EXECUTIVE ORDER BORDER SECURITY AND IMMIGRATION ENFORCEMENT IMPROVEMENTS By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and theiaws of the United States of America, including the immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101 et seq.) the Secure Fence Act of 2006 (Public Law 109?367) (Secure Fence Act), and the illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (Public Law 104?208 Div. C) (llRiRA), and in order to ensure the safety and territorial integrity of the United States as well as to ensure that the Nation's immigration laws are faithfully executed, hereby order as follows: Section 1. Purpose. Border security is critically important to the national security of the United States. Aliens who illegally enter the United States without inspection or admission present a significant threat to national security and public safety. Such aliens have not been identified or inspected by Federal immigration officers to determine their admissibility to the United States. The recent surge of illegal immigration at the southern border with Mexico has placed a significant strain on Federal resources and overwhelmed agencies charged with border security and immigration enforcement, as well as the local communities into which many of the aliens are placed. Transnational criminal organizations operate sophisticated drug? and human-trafficking networks and smuggling operations on both sides of the southern border, contributing to a significant increase in violent crime and United States deaths from dangerous drugs. Among those who illegally enter are those who seek to harm Americans through acts of terror or criminal conduct. Continued iliegai immigration presents a clear and present danger to the interests of the United States. Federal immigration law both imposes the responsibility and provides the means for the Federal Government, in cooperation with border States, to secure the Nation?s southern border. Although Federal immigration law provides a robust framework for Federal-State partnership in enforcing our immigration laws and the Congress has authorized and provided appropriations to secure our borders the Federal Government has failed to discharge this basic sovereign responsibility. The purpose of this order is to direct executive departments and agencies (agencies) to deploy all lawful means to secure the Nation?s southern border, to prevent further illegal immigration into the United States, and to repatriate illegal aliens swiftly, consistently, and humanely. Sec. 2. Policy. it is the policy of the executive branch to: secure the southern border of the United States through the immediate construction of a physical wall on the southern border, monitored and supported by adequate personnel so as to prevent illegal immigration, drug and human trafficking, and acts of terrorism; - detain individuals apprehended on suspicion of violating Federal or State law, including Federal immigration law, pending further proceedings regarding those violations; (0) expedite determinations of apprehended individuals? claims of eligibility to remain in the United States; remove those individuals whose legal claims to remain in the United States have been lawfully rejected, after any appropriate civil or criminal sanctions have been imposed; cooperate fully with States and local law enforcement in enacting Federal-State partnerships to enforce Federal immigration priorities, as well as State monitoring and detention programs that are consistent with Federal law and do not undermine Federal immigration priorities. Sec. 3. Definitions. "Asylum officer" has the meaning given the term in section 235(b)(1)(E) of the (8 U.S.C. 1225(b)(1)). ?Southern border? shall mean the contiguous land border between the United States and Mexico, including all points of entry. (0) ?Border States? shall mean the States of the United States immediately adjacent to the contiguous land border between the United States and Mexico. Except as otherwise noted, "the Secretary" shall refer to the Secretary of Homeland Security. "Wall" shall mean a contiguous, physical wall or other similarly secure, contiguous, and impassable physical barrier. "Executive department" shall have the meaning given in section 101 of title 5, United States Code. ?Regulations" shall mean any and all Federal rules, regulations, and directives lawfully promulgated by agencies. "Operational control" shall mean the prevention of all unlawful entries into the United States, including entries by terrorists, other unlawful aliens, instruments of terrorism, narcotics, and other contraband. Sec. 4. Physical Security of the Southern Border of the United States. The Secretary shall - immediately take the following steps to obtain complete operational control, as determined by the Secretary, of the southern border: ln accordance with existing law, including the Secure Fence Act and take all appropriate steps to immediately plan, design", and construct a physical wall along the southern border, using appropriate materials and technology to most effectively achieve complete operational control of the southern border; ldentify and, to the extent permitted by law, allocate all sources of Federal funds for the planning, designing, and constructing of a physical wall along the southern border; Project and develop long?term funding requirements for the wall, including preparing Congressional budget requests for the current and upcoming fiscal years; and Produce a comprehensive study of the security of the southern border, to be completed within 180 days of this order, that shall include the current state of southern border security, all geophysical and topographical aspects of the southern border, the availability of Federal and State resources necessary to achieve complete operational control of the southern border, and a strategy to obtain and maintain complete operational control of the southern border. Sec. 5. Detention Facilities. (3) The Secretary shall take all appropriate action and allocate all legally available resources to immediately construct, operate, control, or establish contracts to construct, operate, or control facilities to detain aliens at or near the land border with Mexico. The Secretary shall take all appropriate action and allocate all legally available resources to immediately assign asylum officers to immigration detention facilities for the purpose of accepting asylum referrals and conducting credible fear determinations pursuant to section 235(b)(1) of the INA (8 U.S.C. 1225(b)(1)) and applicable regulations and reasonable fear determinations pursuant to applicable regulations. The Attorney General shall take all appropriate action and allocate all legally available resources to immediately assign immigration judges to immigration detention facilities operated or controlled by the Secretary, or operated or controlled pursuant to contract by the Secretary, for the purpose of conducting proceedings authorized Under title 8, chapter 12, subchapter ll, United States Code. Sec. 8. Detention for illegal Entry. The Secretary shall immediately take all appropriate actions to ensure the detention of aliens apprehended for violations of immigration law pending the outcome of their removal proceedings or their removal from the country to the extent permitted by law. The Secretary shall issue new policy guidance to all Department of Homeland Security personnel regarding the appropriate and consistent use of lawful detention authority under the including the termination of the practice commonly known as "catch and release," whereby aliens are routinely released in the United States shortly after their apprehension for violations of immigration law. Sec. 7. Return to Territory. The Secretary shall take apprOpriate action, consistent with the requirements of section 1232 of title 8, United States Code, to ensure that aliens described in section 235(b)(2)(C) of the (8 U.S.C. 1225(b)(2)(C)) are returned to the territory from which they came pending a formal removal proceeding. Sec. 8. Additional Border Patrol Agents. Subject to available appropriations, the Secretary, through the Commissioner of US. Customs and Border Protection, shall take all appropriate action to hire 5,000 additional Border Patrol agents, and all appropriate action to ensure that such agents enter on duty and are assigned to duty stations as soon as is practicable. Sec. 9. Foreign Aid Reporting Requirements. The head of each executive department and agency shall identify and quantify all sources of direct and indirect Federal aid or assistance to the Government of Mexico on an annual basis over the past five years, including all bilateral and multilateral development aid, economic assistance, humanitarian aid, and military aid. Within 30 days of the date of this order, the head of each executive department and agency shall submit this information to the Secretary of State. Within 80 days of the date of this order, the Secretary shall submit to the President a consolidated report reflecting the levels of such aid and assistance that has been provided annually, over each of the past five years. I Sec. 10. Federal-State Agreements. it is the policy of the executive branch to empower State and local law enforcement agencies across the country to perform the functions of an immigration officer in the interior of the United States to the maximum extent permitted by law. in furtherance of this policy, the Secretary shall immediately take appropriate action to engage with the Governors of the States, as well as local officials, for the purpose of preparing to enter into agreements under section 287(g) of the (8 U.S.C. 1357(g)). To the extent permitted by law, and with the consent of State or local officials, as appropriate, the Secretary shall take appropriate action, through agreements under section 287(g) of the or otherwise, to authorize State and local law enforcement officials, as the Secretary determines are qualified and appropriate, to perform the functions of immigration officers in relation to the investigation, apprehension, or detention of aliens in the United States under the direction and the supervision of the Secretary. Such authorization shall be in addition to, rather than in place of, Federal performance of these duties. To the extent permitted by law, the Secretary may structure each agreement under section 287(g) of the INA in the manner that provides the most effective model for enforcing Federal immigration laws and obtaining operational control over the border for that jurisdiction. Sec. 11. Parole, Asylum, and Removal. it is the policy of the executive branch to end the abuse of parole and asylum provisions currently used to prevent the lawful removal of removable aliens. The Secretary shall immediately take all appropriate action to ensure that the parole and asylum provisions of Federal immigration law are not illegally exploited to prevent the removal of otherwise removable aliens. The Secretary shall take all appropriate action, including by promulgating any appropriate reguiations, to ensure that asylum referrals and credible fear determinations pursuant to section 235(b)(1) of the NA (8 U.S.C. 1125(b)(1)) and 8 CFR 208.30, and reasonable fear determinations pursuant to 8 CFR 20831, are conducted in a manner consistent with the plain language of those provisions. Pursuant to section of the the Secretary shall take appropriate action to apply, in his sole and unreviewable discretion, the provisions of section and (ii) of the tothe aliens designated under section The Secretary shall take appropriate action to ensure that parole authority under section 212(d)(5) of the (8 U.S.C. 1182(d)(5)) is exercised only on a case?by?case basis in accordance with the plain language ofthe statute, and in all circumstances only when an individual demonstrates urgent humanitarian reasons or a significant public benefit derived from such parole. The Secretary shall take appropriate action to require that all Department of Homeland Security personnel are properly trained on the proper application of section 235 of the William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008 (8 U.S.C. 1232) and section 462(g)(2) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (8 U.S.C. to ensure that unaccompanied alien children are properly processed, receive appropriate care and placement while in the custody of the Department of Homeland Security, and, when appropriate, are safely repatriated in accordance with law. Sec. 12. Authorization to Enter Federal Lands. The Secretary, in conjunction with the Secretary of the interior and any other heads of agencies as necessary, shall take all appropriate action to: permit all officers and employees of the United States, as well as all State and local officers as authorized by the Secretary, to have access to all Federal lands as necessary and appropriate to implement this order; and enable those officers and employees of the United States, as well as all State and local-officers as authorized by the Secretary, to perform such actions on-Federal lands as the Secretary deems necessary and appropriate to implement this order. Sec. 13. Priority Enforcement. The Attorney General shall take all appropriate steps to establish prosecution guidelines and allocate appropriate resources to ensure that Federal prosecutors accord a high priority to prosecutions of offenses having a nexus to the southern border. Sec. 14. Government Transparency. The Secretary shall, on a basis and in a publicly available way, report statistical data on aliens apprehended at or near the southern border using a uniform method of reporting by all Department of Homeland Security components, in a format that is easily understandable by the public. Sec. 15. Reporting. Except as otherwise provided in this order, the Secretary, within 90 days of the date of this order, and the Attorney General, within 180 days, shall each submit to the President a report on the progress of the directives contained in this order. Sec. 16. Hiring. The Office of Personnel Management shall take appropriate action as may be necessary to facilitate hiring personnel to implement this order. Sec. 17.? General Provisions. Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect: the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or (ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals. This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations. This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person. DONALD J. TRUMP THE WHITE HOUSE, January 25, 2017. Twitter lnstagram Facebook Contact Us Home Briefing Room From the News Room Latest News Video Gallery Live Events From the Press Office Speeches 8! Remarks Press Briefings Statements Releases Nominations 8L Appointments Presidential Actions Legislation Disclosures Issues Top issues America First Energy Plan America First Foreign Policy Bringing Back Jobs And Growth Making Our Military Strong Again Standing Up For Our Law Enforcement Community Trade Deals That Work For All Americans The Administration The Administration President Donald J. Trump Vice President Mike Pence First Lady Melania Trump Mrs. Karen Pence The Cabinet Executive Offices Council of Economic Advisers Council on Environmental Quality Office of Management and Budget Office of National Drug Control Policy Office of Science and Technology Policy See All Special Events The 58th Presidential inauguration Participate Join Us Tours Events Jobs with the Administration internships i White House Fellows I Share Your Thoughts We the People Petitions Contact the White House Get involved Obamacare: Share Your Story Getting Americans Back to Work Support Empowering Female Leaders President Trump Stands With israel Support the Repeal and Replacement of Obamacare 1600 Penn History Grounds Presidents First Ladies The Vice President?s Residence Office Eisenhower Executive Office Building Camp David Air Force One Our Government The Executive Branch The Legislative Branch The Judicial Branch The Constitution Federal Agencies Commissions Elections Voting State Local Government USAgov Privacy Policy Copyright Policy (6) Chic In brmation zcer US. Office of Personnel Management Responsible for overseeing the operation of information technology (IT) practices and systems supporting the Federal civilian workforce, such as hiring systems (U SAJOBS), retirement services systems, background investigation systems, etc., as well as all network and administrative IT systems supporting the operations of the agency. Acting Depug Assistant Secretary of Defense [or Warrior Care Policy US. Department of Defense, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Healthcare Responsible for developing policies and overseeing operations of the Military Departments? Wounded, Ill, and Injured Programs, affecting the transition of military members to the Veterans Administration. Established and oversaw the program for caregivers to military members and their families. Principal Director. Civilian Personnel Polig/ Deputv Chief Human Cagital Of?cer US. Department of Defense, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Readiness Responsible for developing policies and overseeing operations ofDoD?wide Human Resources (HR) programs, from strategy to separation, including budget, contracts, and oversight of DOD-wide HR IT programs. DirectorL Defense Civilian Personnel Advisory Services, Human Resources Information Technology US. Department of Defense, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Readiness Responsible for developing and operating IT systems used DOD-wide for civilian personnel management, including compliance with HR and IT policies, such as HR workforce planning systems, transaction processing systems, learning management, performance management, and HR data analytics and reporting systems. Director. Logistics Innovation US. Department of the Navy, Deputy Chief of Naval Operations Responsible for developing the Navy?s readiness and logistics program, approximately $45 billion annually. Deyu Assistant for Administration US. Department of the Navy, Under Secretary of the Navy Responsible for service excellence in human capital management, ?nancial management, facilities and services, information technology, charitable campaigns, and special programs to the Department of the Navy Secretariat enterprise. Associate CZn?et Information Qf?cer [or Information Technology Oversig In and Chiei Information O?zcer US. Department of Transportation, Of?ce of the Secretary of Transportation Responsible for information technology (IT) strategic planning assuring alignment with the department?s mission, establishing and maintaining enterprise architecture, managing existing IT investments using standard life cycle management methodologies and earned value management, and assessing organizational compliance. Chief Information Of?cer and Special Assistant to the Associate Administrator for Administration U.S. Department of Transportation, Maritime Administration Responsible for information technology (IT) strategic planning assuring alignment with the department?s mission, establishing and maintaining enterprise architecture, managing existing IT investments using standard life cycle management methodologies and earned value management, and assessing organizational compliance. Acting Director for Information Technology/Deputy Chief Information Of?cer U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration Responsible for four divisions: 1) Planning Division, 2) Project Management Division, 3) Systems Development Division, and 4) Systems Operations Division. Director for Enteryrise Application Management U.S. Department of the Navy, Program Executive Of?ce for IT Responsible for reducing DOT functional business systems and ensuring operation within the Navy/Marine Corps Intranet (NMCI) environment. Director for Acquisition Program Management and Oversi ht U.S. Department of the Navy, Program Executive Of?ce for IT Exercised acquisition management oversight authority for enterprise?level Acquisition Category I and programs, making recommendations to Milestone Decision Authorities (MDA) and OMB. Communications O?zcer U.S. Department of the Navy, Electronic Acquisition for the 2151 Century Developed a comprehensive communication strategy (commercial publications, trade-show booths, Internet videos, etc.) to promote implementation of DON-wide acquisition business processes and automated systems. Warn Manager Program Manager U.S. Department of the Navy, Tactical Aircraft Mission Planning Systems and Common Helicopter Aviation Mission Planning System Responsible for design and delivery of a real-time virtual battle?eld picture, including weaponry and troops. EDU CATION 0 Classes leading to MS. in Operational Research, Geo University 0 BS. in Computer Science, George Mason University, ADDITIONAL SKILLS CERTIFICATIONS 0 Certi?ed Acquisition Professional at Level 3 in Program Management End?to~End Hiring: Talent Acquisition End-to?End Hiring: Workforce Planning I rate gic . prove em 0 p? ortu it'll es (SlOs) 1.1 Identify current usage of USA Staf?ng and Monster Federal across DHS components, compare contracts, prices, and functionality and assess alternative approaches {one tool, both, expanded functions, POCs, etc.}. Ensure focus on standardized data and processes. Establish single Interagency Agreement (1AA) for USA Staffing Establish single contract for Monster Federal - Identify enhancements for USA Staffing and Monster Federal 2.1 Provide manpower models and systems to formally document DHS?wide staffing requirements and authorized (funded) positions for all DHS Components. A resulting database will provide a ?system of record? that documents current and future authorized positions to facilitate end-to-end hiring, while linking personnel expenditures to the major department-wide missions and organizations they support. - Automate data interchange for vacant positions and 20 additional position management data fields in Automate manpower models registry . Evaluate shared service solutions for position management Business Leads: Angela Greer, Mike Williams, and Americo Yabar, HCBS PM Lead: Alvin Holt, HCBS 1 Business Lead: Sid Evans, SWPA PM Lead: Neil Singh, HCBS End-to-End Hiring: Security Classificatio n/ ackground Investigation 3.1 Document the business processes within each Component to ensure integration of hiring systems with the single DHS Integrated Security Management System develop and implement information exchanges to connect the systems used to process manual data entry associated with transferring information on transactions, and increase the speed to onboard personnel to meet occupation hiring timeframes. Connect HR processing systems to the integrated Security Management System Business Lead: Andre Davis, NPPD PM Lead: Amir Dastouri, OCIO Learning Management 4.1 Finish PALMS implementation underway, work with Chief Learning Officer Council (CLOC) to ensure reporting, and other DHS future requirements for all Components. Develop and implement information exchanges to connect the systems needed. Work to purchase Capability in FY18, as needed. Complete PALMS/Learning Management Module implementation - Transition PALMS/Learning Management Module into Operations and Support identify potential shared service solutions forfollow?on learning management capabilities May 17, 2017 Business Lead: Jess Soto, PM Lead: Kimberly Thorpe, HCBS Page 1 Data Management 8i. Sharing Enterprise HC Reporting and Analysis Op?portu nities (SIOs) 5.1 Develop common model and standardized information exchange to capture the appropriate ?time?tloire? information for each of the DHS Components, implement the exchange of data from Components into the Human Capital Analytics Intelligence System (AXIS), create and test reports for tracking the time?to~hire across all DHS Components, implement a production system for reporting to OMB, and other oversight bodies. - Auto mate time-to-hire data interchange from Components to EIE Business Lead: David Ashley, SWPA and Mike Williams, HCPP PM Lead: Neil Singh, HCBS On-boarding Process Off- boarding Process 6.1 Document the performance expectations, business processes, data requirements, and systems used for on?boarding and off?boardingemployees and contractors at each DHS Component. Identify improvement initiatives, to include design and implementation of information exchanges to connect the systems used to facilitate the'processes. Initial focus will be on the security process and the use of Access Lifecycle Management (ALM) to ensure that once an Enter on Duty data is assigned a DHS employee will have a DHS PIV card email account, and access to systems, such as PALMS upon arrival at and that access is terminated during closeout procedures as employees leave DHS. Automate information exchanges between HR transaction processing systems and Access Lifecycle Management Business Lead: Donna Seymour, SWPA and Denascia Salley, HRMS PM Lead: Amir Dastouri, OCIO Performance Management 7.1 Finish PALMS pilot underway at HQ. Work to implement capability in FY18. Evaluate pilot of PALMS/Performance Management Module at HQ identify potential shared service solutions forfollow~on performance management capabilities Business Leads: Bob Lauria, HCPP and Steve Church, HRMS PM Lead: Yvette Wilson, HCBS HR Document Management? Case Management 8.1 Consolidate available data from current systems to meet the reporting needs of the department and Components. - Consolidate data from Components to produce DHS report 8.2 Establish requirements and identify appropriate tracking systems, including document management systems if feasible, that Components can acquire if needed. Ensure data integrity from each system and continue reporting requirements. - implement automated management solution - Business Lead: Casey Allen, HCPP PM Lead: Neil Singh, HCBS Payroll Action Processing 9.1 Plan and complete implementation of CBP migration to in Migrate CBP to May 17, 2017 Business Lead: Kat Druitt, CBP and Melanie Nini, HCBS PM Lead: Michael George, CBP and Neil Singh, HCBS Page 2 Mahoney, Michael (5) From: Edwards, Roland Sent: Friday, June 30, 2017 10:41 AM To: Mahonev. MichaelJ Subject: (5), (6) Attachments: Seymour DCW 0min - Thanks Roiand Edwards Deputy Chief Human Capital Of?cer Office of the-Chief Human Capital Officer Department of Homeland Security ?With honor and integrity, we will [he An-zericxm people, our homeland, and our values: . r. .x .a *4 .VMF . .. -, .. z? 3.,45 -. . In" . 7min 35) EU: u?b?f35713fz-?H?' rffr?xla! $393azif 71 ?rm-{mil a?if ANIszid-?ls-i?: 3:110; Mm 5355!? MM, If: cw ??tfii'? ura??m lrlebaa?i?e Wing?pram ..-., . .. t. -. - fetidwf' H?wl??gg 1,0; HMS M) !o Hire-uni: fixer-HO?? 1.: reply tr; (we I . ?upHighhu (11.11.; Lgtf??fg? (lif?jfe-D If?? :?H?Cfl'akn?fl Mahoney, Michael 1 1 1 From: Mahoney, Michael Sent: Friday, June 30, 2017 2:59 PM To: Edwards Roland Cc: Holden Kimberlv Subject: (b Attachments: 20170630145449399pdf Roland, The signed approval is ~mike From: Edwards, Rolandb Sent: Friday, June 30, 2017 10:41 AM TO. Mahongu Mir?hnpl 1 Good morning (5) Thanks, Roland Edwards Deputy Chief Human Capital Of?cer Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer land Securit ?'14 it}? honor and inlegrirv, we will safeguard the 112212221222? our han-zcland, and our values 222' 2?22 {92"92202 J'ioffc 137:2} 9- 22:23.5! mints 2: :22. 52.22121- :22 my, 2 22:2 *?i-?nanfz; 922222;. 22 Jed 22.22142}; {he $0228; 02 2 222700.992?: 2.22 22J. 97 2222:: {infom? Juan .222 may 2122-: 2! 29.2.2222; {mt/'7 arty ?2er (NJ, pronoun 22'? "2 3621223 J?f?fbb?i?ii?f} {227.23- If ?on 05222223212, 72999-222912; 02202, 2222 {Hereby o?ind- 2227? #3391212. Jm-Jri {12:15 *4 22'72-3999229. 222.519 'eJ" 2?9 tam; 2222223 or poly 223 me n. Jammy - ?22? 9.3.0- 29922: 12'; em 22:99.30 UNITED STATES OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT Washington, DC 20415 Employee Services Mr. Angela Bailey Chief Human Capital Of?cer JUN 3 0' 2017 US. Department of Homeland Security . Of?ce of the Chief Human Capital Of?cer 245 Murray Lane, SW Washington, DC 20528 Dear Ms. Bailey: The US. Office of Personnel Management (0PM) approves your June 29, 2017, request to the Acting Director to waive the dual compensation reduction (salary offset) waiver fc (5) Vs are granting your request for a period not to exceed June 30, 2018. This waiver enables The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to retain the services the position of Executive Director, Human Capital Business Solutions (HCBS). In this position, (b 6 Jill continue her work on the project of standing-up the HBCS and guiding it through a variety of operational challenges during its initial year of operation. The agency's request meets the criteria for approval of a waiver of dual compensation reduction, as stated in sections 8344(i) or 8468(f) (as appropriate) of title 5, United States Code, and section 553.201 of title 5, Code of Federal Regulations. Speci?cally, based on information you have provided, 0PM is approving your request based on 5 CFR 553.201(e) ?Exceptions based on the need to retain a particular individual." The criteria for approving a waiver in this case are met by the following information. (I) The critical nature of the project. (6) is needed to continue her work on the stand- up of the HCBS. The HCBS implements the program strategy, structure, and requirements of Human Resources Information Technology (HRIT) programlb) (6) vill establish the organizational foundation, including the development of standard operating procedures, for the HCBS in years to come. To accomplish this, she is tasked with several implementation projects lasting 3 to 6 months over the next calendar year. These include: assessing existing talent and identifying HCBS skills gaps during over'the next 3 months; identifying and negotiating enhancements to existing human resources (HR) systems and evaluating shared service solutions over a 6 month period; and developing a strategy to help ensure connectivity of multiple HR systems across DHS during a subsequent 3 month period. These projects are important because the establishment of the HCBS and its viability moving forward are necessary for successful human resources management at a time when large-scale hiring efforts are underway at DHS in reSponse to recent Executive Orders titled: ?Border Security and immigration Enforcement Improvements,? and ?Enhancing Public Safety in the Interior of the United States.? Losing 6 this juncture could delay the refocus and Recruit. Retain and Honor a World~Class Workforce to Serve the American People r- 1" Ms. Angela Bailey . 2 redesign of work of the HCBS, as well as program accountability and communications across many business lines and stakeholders within DHS. (2) Candidate ?5 unique qualifications. (6) many of years of service include leadership stints as at several agencies, including the Department of Defense as well as its components. She has operational as well as policy experience which includes: integrating IT systems, developing policies and overseeing IT operations for Federal personnel management systems, and managing Department-wide HR programs (including budget, contracts, and oversight of large-scale information technology programs). This level of experience has provided (6) ith the breadth of knowledge necessary for successful implementation of the HCBS during its first year. (3) Need for retention.(b) (6) :t?uses continued without this waiver. DHS will losdb) (6) services unless the waiver is granted. Not retaining would have an immediate and negative impact on ability to establish HCBS in a successful manner. (4) Other staf?ng options. (6) is only the current DHS employee who possesses the mix of HR operations, IT management and operations, program management, and acquisitions management skill sets needed for successful implementation of the IICBS during its first year. DHS Stated it will begin recruitment efforts to fill the Executive Directive position and does anticipate keeping (6) beyrmd the initial start-up year speci?ed in their request. The salary offset waiver is effective from the date of the approval letter until June 30, 2018. Reemployed annuitants serve at the will of the appointing of?cial, per 5 U.S.C. 3323, You may adjust work schedules and terminate employment without substantial notice. Annuitants with a salary offset waiver are covered by Social Security and may not make retirement contributions or participate in the Thrift Savings Plan per 5 CFR 553.203. Ifyou or your staff have an uestions or need fin'ther information, lease contact (6) by email at Sincerely, (6) Kimberly A. Holden Deputy Associate Director Recruitment and Hiring .r-um 4-4., - - INTERCHANGE Mahoney. Michael 1 I I From: Holden, Kimberly A. Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2017 3:43 PM To: Mahoney, Michael Subject: FW: Interchange Agreement Extension Attachments: TSA IA Extension Request-Signedpdf Mike 14?01?your action. Thanks Kimberly A. Holden Deputy Associate Director Recruitment and Hiring Of?ce of Personnel anagement Employee Services 1900 Street, N. W. 6500AJ Washington, DC 20415 ToAgreement xtension Good Afternoon, The Department of Homeland Security, Transportation Security Administration requests to extend the current ?ve~year interchange agreement, which is set to expire on January 31, 2018. Please see the attached memo, approved by the DHS Policy Executive Director. if you have any questions about this request please, please contact me. Thank you, HR Specialist Hiring Refomi and Staf?ng Policy Human Capital Policy and Programs De artment ol?llomeland Security: HQ Visit Staffing Policy and Hiring Reform on DHS Connect Securlty Con?dentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is intended only for the person(s_) or entity(ies) to which it is addressed and contains information that may be con?dential, legally protected, privacy relevant, proprietary in nature or otherwise protected by law from disclosure. If you received this message in error, you are hereby noti?ed that reading, sharing, copying or distributing this message, or its contents, is prohibited. Please telephone or reply to me immediately and delete all copies of the message. O?ice oftire Chiq'Hzrman Capitai Of?cer U.S. Department of Homeland Security Washington, DC 20528 Homeland. Ms. Kimberly Holden . Deputy Associate Director, Recruitment and Hiring US. Of?ce of Personnel Management 1900 Street, NW Washington, DC 20415 Dear Ms. Holden: The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is requesting a ?ve-year extension of the current interchange agreement between the DHS, Transportation Security Administration (TSA), and the Of?ce of Personnel Management (0PM). The DHS TSA Interchange Agreement allows excepted employees to be non-competitively appointed to positions in the competitive civil service, and employees serving in positions in the competitive civil service to be non-competitively appointed to positions within the TSA. The agreement was established on February 1, 2005, pursuant to Section 6.7 of the Civil Service Rules. The 0PM approved previous extensions, including the current ?ve-year extension Which is set to expire on January 31, 2018. TSA was established by the Aviation and Transportation Security Act Pub. L. 10171, in November 2001, in response to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. TSA was granted broad ?exibility with regard to its personnel management system to allow for quick and effective responses to transportation security needs. Under ATSA, TSA is authorized to set the quali?cations, cOnditions and standards of employment for the TranSportation Security Of?cer (TSO) workforce, notwithstanding any other provision of law. AT SA also provided that TSA would stand up its organization using the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) personnel management system with the authority to modify and/or develop its own personnel processes consistent with 49 U.S.C. 40122, which identi?es the speci?c Title 5 provisions applicable to the non-TSO TSA workforce. The DHS Interchange Agreement with the competitive service continues to be effective in improving the recruitment and retention of excepted service employees. Since our last extension request, TSA has continued to re?ne and improve its human capital management policies and practices consistent with its statutory authority. The interchange agreement continues to provide current TSA employees with expanded career options within DHS and the Federal government. From 2014 to 2016, over 1,335 TSA employees have transferred to other competitive service Federal agencies. The interchange agreement strengthens ability to recruit from a diverse p0pulation, to include veterans who make up approximately 20 percent of the TSA workforce. The interchange agreement also provides current TSA employees with expanded career -v?p-wn options within DHS and the rest of the Federal Government where a majority of positions are in the competitive service. TSA is committed to maintaining accountability over its human capital programs. TSA policy provides for program management evaluation of human capital programs to ensure they are consistent with TSA policies, applicable business rules and merit system principles. TSA regularly conducts program management evaluations on all areas of human capital programs, including, performance management, awards, employee onboarding and separation procedures, employee relations, payroll and leave, and provides corrective measures where appropriate, to include refresher training. In addition to its internal reviews, TSA has also been subject to outside audits of its human capital programs. OCHCO and 0PM found human capitai programs complied with merit system principles and other civil service laws and regulations, including those related to prohibited personnel practices. - The interchange agreement with the DHS TSA and the OPM continues to be an important recruitment and retention tool for DHS. The interchange agreement strengthens ability to recruit from a diverse population, it helps to retain valuable knowledge, skills and eXperience by facilitating the movement of employees between the excepted service and the competitive service If you require additional information, do not Sincerely, (6) car tiv lrector ium ital Policy and Programs Enclosures Mahoney, Michael From; Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2017 8:02 AM To: Mahoney, Michael Subject: RE: Interchange Agreement Extension 'l?hauks Mike. We will work xii-(b) (6) see what else is needed. From: Mahoney, Michael (6) Sen dnesda Au ust9 20174103 PM Tab Garb) (6) Subject: FW: Interchange Agreement Extension There were no attachments to this provide to Darlene Thanks -miimmz._.m H00 Street NW Washington. DC 20229 US. Customs and . Border ProtectiOn 2 8 7.017 MEMORANDUM FOR: Angela Bailey Chief Human Capital Of?cer Department of Homeland Security THROUGH: Gwen Yandall Executive Director Hiring Policy Of?ce of Human Capital Department of Homeland Security (6) FROM: Linda L. Assistant Comn Of?ce of Human Resources Management SUBJECT: Request for Revision to the Individual Occupational Requirement for Border Patrol Enforcement Series, 1896 The purpose of this memorandum is to request, on behalf ofU.S. Customs and Border Protection (CB P), the removal of the Arti?cial Language 'l?est (ALT) and Bilingual Ability from the Individual Occupational Requirement for the Border Patrol Enforcement Series, 1896. As a result of the President?s January 26, 2017 Executive Order, Border Security and Immigration Improvements, CBP has determined that to meet current and future Agency hiring needs and obtain the skills to meet today?s demanding standards for performing the job functions, it is vital to remove the ALT and Bilingual Ability from the existing quali?cation standard in the Border Patrol Enforcement Series, 1896. CBP requests that the Of?ce of Personnel Management revise the existing quali?cations standard to remove the requirement for the ALT and Bilingual Ability for the Border Patrol Enforcement Series, 1896. Historically, Border Patrol Agents (BPAs) have begun their careers on the Southwest Border, where the Spanish language is pervasive. To ensure employees possess the necessary language skills, all BPA trainees are instructed in speaking and reading Spanish as part of their initial training. BPAs must be pro?cient in reading and speaking Spanish by the time they graduate from the Border Patrol Academy. Request for Revision to the Individual Occupational Requirement for Border Patrol Enforcement Series, 1896 Page 2 The information below details why the current individual occupational requirement quali?cation standards and selective factors no longer adequately meet the quali?cation needs of the Agency. a. Written explanation of why current standards and selective factors do not adequately meet the qualification needs of the Agency. (Please see attached reports on job analysis studies) In 2015, the Of?ce of Human Resources Management?s Personnel Research and Assessment Division and the Medical and Fitness Branch conducted a comprehensive job analysis of the BPA positions to gather information on revised quali?cations for entry- level positions and the critical elements for full performance level (journeyman level, The scope of the BPAjob analysis was-journeyman level and supervisory/managerial positions at the GS-12 through grade levels. Newly hired BPAs and those who were not yet at the GS-12 grade level were excluded, because their on?the-job experience was limited (in the case of employees at the GS-5 to grade level) or not yet at thejourneyman level to GS?ll grade levels). Because the vast majority of BPAs progress to the journeyman level a?er ?ve or fewer years on the job, it was possible to focus the study on thejoumeyman level and apply the competencies and Knowledge, Skills, and Abilities (KSAs) that are critical (including needed at entry) to the selection for BPA positions at the GS-5 to GS-7 grade levels. Based on the con?rmed ratings, 28 of the 80 competencies/KSAs were rated critical for entry-level selection purposes. More speci?cally, 27 of the 33 general competencies met or exceeded the criticality cutoff score. Meanwhile, only Teaching Others, Equipment Application, Skill in Speaking Spanish, Skill in Comprehending Spoken Spanish, Skill in Reading Spanish, and Knowledge of Spanish Grammar, Spelling, and Vocabulary did not meet the criticality cutoff score. Of the 47 technical competencies/KSAs, only one (Skill in Basic Operation of a Motor Vehicle, which involves the everyday use of vehicles such as parallel parking) met or exceeded the criticality cutoff score. A summary of the results for the general competencies is provided in the job analysis report. A link to the report is attached for your reference. The-competencies are rank ordered in terms of con?rmed importance ratings. The most critical competencies for the GS-12 journeyman-level BPA position (based on the con?rmed ratings for all rating scales) were Integrity, Decision Making, Judgment, Reading, Emotional Maturity, Ability to learn Spanish or existing pro?ciency in Spanish, Vigilance, and Ability to Communicate Effectively in English. There was an eight-way tie on importance between these competencies with a rating of three on either needed at journeyman level or better performance. Request for Revision to the Individual Occupational Requirement for Border Patrol Enforcement Series, 1896 i Page 3 The job analysis study concluded that the competencies related to Speaking Spanish were not required to be rated as needed at quali?cation entry. The study also con?rmed that the utility 0r need for this assessment is low. Nearly all applicants pass the test; the percent of applicants that pass the ALT move on to successfully complete the Spanish training at the academy at the rate of nearly 100 percent. Further, current BPAs, including those stationed in southern border sectors, have indicated that the ability to speak, understand, read, and write Spanish was not needed at quali?cation entry into the job. Selectees report immediately to the training academy and undergo approximately 20 weeks of training to develop their Spanish language ability at the required level. The study also concluded that the competencies related to the bilingual ability were not rated as needed at quali?cation entry levels. b. Approximate number of jobs in the Agency that will be covered by the proposed new quali?cation standard. Include grades, organizations, geographical locations and all series of the affected positions. As of February 14, 2017, there were approximately 19,374 positions within CBP that would be covered and affected by the proposed quali?cation standard. The grades and occupational series for the affected positions were through in the 1896 series, including both vacant and ?lled positions that reach a ?ll] performance level of up to GS-12. The proposed quali?cation stande affects U.S. Border Patrol in all geographical locations. The 19,374 positions do not include 1,996 positions necessary to meet the 21,370 positions mandated by Congress. It also does not include the additional 5,000 positions mandated by the January 25, 2017 Executive Order. c. Written explanation of what impact, if any, the proposed standard will have on current employees and on other positions within the organization. There is little risk associated with this decision. The Border Patrol Academy will continue to ensure all applicants obtain the appropriate level of pro?ciency in Spanish in order to meet graduation requirements. d. Copies of position descriptions (PDs) (entry, full-performance, and higher levels), evaluation statements, and related position classification information (Please see attached position descriptions). The classi?cation standard for the 1896 series requires BPAs to possess: a) Knowledge of statutes, regulations, instructions, and precedent-setting decisions pertaining to enforcement of immigration and naturalization laws and regulations; Request for Revision to the Individual Occupational Requirement for Border Patrol Enforcement Series, 1896 Page 4 b) Knowledge of Standard investigative techniques and law enforcement procedures to enforce immigration and naturalization laws and related Federal statutes; c) Skill in evaluating information rapidly, making timely decisions, and taking prompt and appropriate actions under 1633 than optimal conditions; d) Pro?ciency in a foreign language; and . e) An understanding of foreign cultures and customs. BPAs must be able to apply the above KSAs in the performance of their duties to detect and prevent illegal entry and smuggling of aliens, commercial goods, narcotics, weapons, or contraband into the United States and to arrest people suspected of such violations. In today?s economic climate, it is critical that BPAs possess those skills to enforce the laws that protect the Nation?s homeland by the detection, interdiction, and apprehension of those who attempt to illegally enter or smuggle any person or contraband across our Nation?s borders. Removing the ALT does not affect the link between the levels of quali?cations required for a job and the work required at a speci?c grade level in the classi?cation process. The Spanish pro?ciency testing requirement will continue to align with the current classi?cation standards as required. e. Copies of vacancy announcements used to recruit for positions Please see attached vacancy announcements for recruiting GS-5, (33-7, and GS-9 BPAs. )5 Copies ofthe results of job anahisis for entry, full-performance, and higher levels which show: The job analysis report, a link for which is attached, includes task lists for the above levels: Linkage of tasks to required knowledge, skills, abilities, or competencies. Linkage of any education identi?ed to the tasks. Individual ratings and background information on the subject matter experts (SMEs) who performed the job analysis worksheet for tasks; job analysis worksheet for competencies/KSAs; and linkage between the individual tasks and the competency/KSAS. Combined ratings of SMEs. Request for Revision to the Individual Occupational Requirement for Border Patrol Enforcement Series, 1896 Page 5 A proposed quali?cation standard and job an alysis supporting the proposed standard. Please see attached proposed Border Patrol Enforcement Series 1896 Individual Quali?cation Standard which removes the ALT and Bilingual Ability supported by thejob analysis report. it. Any additional information pertinent to revision or development of the new qualification standard. None. If you have any questions, please feel ?ee to contact me. If members of yours; staff have questions, they may contact(b) (6) Human Resources Specialist, at(b or via e-mail mm (6) Attachments Employee ervices UNTT ED STATES OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT Washington. DC 20415 APR 9-5 2017 MEMORANDUM FOR ANGELA BAILEY CHIEF HUMAN CAPITAL OFFICER DEPARTMENT OF 1.106351%er r'rv FROM: KIMBERLY A. - DEPUTY ASSOCIATE - - RECRUITMENT AND HIRING Subject: Revisions to the Quali?cation Standard for the Border Patrol Enforcement Series, 1896 The U.S. Of?ce of Personnel Management (0PM) has approved your request to revise the Border Patrol Enforcement Series, 1896 Quali?cation Standard. The letter that 0PM received from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), on the behalf of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), requested 0PM revise the Individual 'Gccupationai Requirement (10R) for the Border Patrol Enforcement Series, 1896 in support of the.President?s January 26, 2017 Executive Order, Border Security and Immigration Enforcement Improvements. Speci?cally, requested that 0PM modify the existing 10R to remove the Test Requirements (the Alternative Language Test (ALT) and the Spanish Pro?ciency Test) and Bilingual Ability provisions ?om the 1896 Quali?cation Standard. CBP provided 0PM documentation for review to support the request for the removal of the Test Requirements and Bilingual Ability provisions. 0PM completed a comprehensive review of the documentation provided by CBP including a job analysis to validate the request. In addition, 0PM met with Of?ce of Human Resources and the Personnel Research and Assessment Division to discuss the request in more detail. CBP con?rmed the ALT and Spanish Pro?ciency Test were no longer required prior to issuing certi?cate of eligibles. All Border Patrol Agents . receive training and instruction in spealdng and reading in Spanish as part of their basic training and are assessed for pro?ciency in Spanish at the completion of basic training. This memo approves a revision to the Border Patrol Enforcement IOR by deleting the Test Requirements and revising the Bilingual Ability provision. For continued employment eligibility after appointment, all Border Patrol Agents muSt meet the Spanish pro?ciency requirement by the conclusion of basic training. Therefore, the Bilingual Ability pro vision should be retained in the IOR. In addition, the Bilingual Ability should be included as a condition of employment when posting Job Opportunity Announcements (JOAs). By issuance of this memo, the revised quali?cation standard shall be e?ective immediately and applied to the GS-1896 positons Within CBP. - I appreciate the opportunity to respond to vou on this matter. If vou have questions or if we Can be of fmther assistance please contact (5) Attachment I Recruit, Retain and Honor :1 World~Class Workforce to Serve the American People Border Patrol Enforcement Series, 1896 There is no Group Coverage Qualp?icatz'on Standard for this series. Use the Individual - Occupational Requirements described below. Individual Occupational Requirements EDUCATION AND EXPERIENCE REQUBIENEENTS The following table shows the amounts of education and/or experience required. to qualify for positions covered by this standard. Requirements GRADE EDUCATION EDERIENCE General Specialized 4?year course of study 1 year equivalent to at None above high school least G34 leading to a bachelor?s degree 1 full academic year of None 1 year equivalent to at graduate education or least 68?13 law school or superior academic achievement (ES-9 . None . None 1 year equivalent to at least GS?ll None None 1 year equivalent to at least and above None None 1 year equivalent to at - . least the next lower grade level Equivalent combinations of education and experience are qualifying for grade levels for which both education and experience are acceptable. Note that academic study may be prorated to. allow combinations of education and experience that total 1 year for GS-S, e. 1 year of college study is equivalent to 3 months of general experience, 2 years of study to 6 months of general experience, and 3 years of study to 9 months of general experience. Education Undergraduate Education. Major study any ?eld. Graduate Education. Maj or study ?elds related to law enforcement, e. police science, or law school education meets the requirements for GS-7. . Education is not creditable for positions above the level. I ILHF -I 01' Experience General Experience for GS-Spositions): Experience that demonstrated the ability to: Take charge, maintain composure, and make sound decisions in stressful situations. Learn law enforcement regulations, methods, and techniques through classroom training and/or on-the-j ob instruction Gather factual information through questioning, observation and examination of documents and records These abilities may have been gained in positions such as: Interviewer in a public or private service agency who deals with requests for services or bene?ts; and who explains, interprets, and applies rules, regulations, and procedures. Claims adjuster or journalist whose work requires gathering information through public contacts. Participant in community action programs who performs wo?r such as volunteer teaching or counseling. I Building guard, prison guard, institutional police, or similar position that requires learning regulations and dealing with people. Customer relations work that requires the applicant to obtain accurate information, make logical determinations, and resolve practical problems, Specialized ExPerience 0?01" positionsabove Experience in law enforcement or other reSp onsible work that demonstrated the ability to: . Make arrests and exercise sound judgment in the u3e of ?rearms. Deal effectively with individuals or groups of persons in a courteous, tactful manner in connection with law enforcement matters. Analyze information rapidly and make prompt decisions or take prompt and appropriate law enforcement action in light of applicable laws, court decisions, and sound law enforcement procedures. Develop and maintain contact with a network of informants. These abilities may have been gained in work such as: Inspection of persons and their records to determine their eligibility to enter the United States under immigration laws. . Correctional or rehabilitation work involving criminal offenders, or residents in public or private institutions. Criminal investigation, police of?cer, or other law enforcement work that required the ability to plan and conduct investigations, plan and make arreSts, serve court orders, use ?rearms, and deal with people in a persuasive, tactful, and resourceful manner. .For positions at (38?9 and above, experience must have included interpreting and enforcing - Immigration and Naturalization Service or comparable laws, rules, and regulations. Bilingual Ability . Border Patrol Work requires the ability to speak, read, and Write in Spanish and English. All - Border Patrol Agents receive training and instruction in speahng and reading in Spanish as part of the basic training for Border Patrol Agents For continued employment eligibility after appointment, individuals must meet the Spanish pro?ciency requirement by the conclusion of basic training Ability To Use Firearms All positions require quali?cation in the use of ?rearms. Pro?ciency with standard issue ?rearms must be demonstrated for success?ll completion of training. All Agents are required to carry a handgun inthe performance of their duties, and to qualify periodically with that handgun. Valid Driver's License Applicants must possess a valid driver' 3 license at the time of appointment They must qualify to operate motor vehicles accordance with applicable government regulations after they are hired. Employment Interview Applicants for all grade levels must demonstrate a pre-employment interview that they possess the traits and characteristics important to Border Patrol Agent positions. These include judgment, problem solving, emotional stability, and interpersonal skills. Maximum Entry Age Requirements Under the authority of Public Law 100- 238, the U. S. Department of Justice has established the date imtnediately preceding one 37th birthday as the maximum age for original entry into the position of Border Patrol Agent. . Medical Requirements The duties of positions in this series involve physical exertion under rigorous environmental conditions including unpredictable exposure to loud sounds, stress, and extremes of heat and cold; irregular and protracted hours of Work over rugged terrain; patrol duties on foot, motor vehicle, and aircraft; and participation in physical training. Applicants must be in sound physical condition and of good muscular development. Vision. inocular vision is required and must test 20/40 (Snellen) Without corrective lenses Uncorrected vision must test at least 20/70 in each Vision in each must be corrected to 20/20. Near vision, corrected or uncorrected, must be suf?cient to read Jaeger Type 2 at 14 inches. Ability to distinguish basic colors by pseudoisochromatic plate test (missing no more than four plates) is required, as is normal peripheral vision. Based on the results of clinical studies of candidates who have undergone Radial Kcratotomy operations to correct vision defects, the medical techniques of Radial Keratotomy or Orthokeratoiogy will not be accepted as a means of meeting Border Patrol Agent vision requirements. Hearing. Using an audiometer for measurement, there should be no loss of 30 or more decibels in each ear at the 500, 1000, and 2000 Hz levels. Speech. Diseases or conditions resulting in indistinct speech are disqualifying. Respiratory System. Any chronic disease or condition affecting the reSpiratory system that would impair the full performance of duties of the position is disqualifying, e. conditions that result in reduced pulmonary function, shortness of breath, or painful respiration. Cardiovascular System. The following conditions are disqualifying: organic heart disease (compensated or not), hypertension with repeated readings that exceed 150 systolic and 90 diastolic without medication and peripheral vascular disease and severe varicose veins Gastrointestinal System. Chronic diseases or conditions of the gastrointestinal tract are disqualifying Medical conditions requiring long-term use of medication(s) may be disqualifying. Each case will be evaluated on a case?by?case basis prior to any employment decision Endocrine System. Systemic metabolic diseaSe that is likely to affect job performance adversely, such as uncontrolled diabetes, is disqualifying. Genito Urinary Disorders. Chronic, diseases or conditions of the genito urinary tract are disqualifying Extremities and Spine: Any deformity or disease that would interfere with range of motion or dexterity to the extent that it would affect adversely the full performance of the duties of the position is disqualifying. Hemias. Inguinal and femoral hernias with or without the use of a truss are disqualifying. Other hernias are disqualifying if they interfere with performance of the duties of the position. Nervous system. Applicants must possess emotional and mental stability with no history of a basic personality disorder. Any neurological disorder that could result in seizures, convulsions, loss of consciousness, or deereased neurological or muscular function is disqualifying. Miscellaneous. Though not mentioned speci?cally above, any other disease or condition that interferes with the full performance of duties is also grounds for medical rejection. Before entrance on duty, all applicants must undergo a pre?employment medical exarm'nation and be medically suitable to perform the full range of duties of the position ef?ciently and without hazard to themselves and others. Failure to meet any one of the required medical quali?cations will be disqualifying for appointment. These standards are considered minimum standards and will not be Waived in any case. Applicants found to havea correctable condition may be restored to any existing list of eligibles for further consideration for appointment when the disqualifying condition is satisfactorily corrected or eliminated. I