Detailed Information on the
Science and Technology: Command, Control and Interoperability Assessment

Developing a comprehensive strategic plan that includes specific actions and milestones, quantitatively defines costs and benefits and outlines specific roles and responsibilities for program partners and the programs in general.

Establishing baselines and targets for long term, annual and efficiency measures in FY 2008. Begin demonstrating results in FY 2007.

Establish partnerships and collaborations in the visualization and data-intensive computation research areas.

Conduct assessment of program and project milestones.

Conduct assessment of program and project milestones.

Collect requirements from customers and make adjustments in current and out year plans.

Developing an expenditure plan that lays out schedules, tracks data on an annual basis and ensures that the expenditures are consistent with the mission and goals of the program.

Engaging in dialogue with the GAO, IG and other independent evaluators, to the greatest extent practicable, to encourage them to develop comprehensive evaluations that will focus on: the effectiveness of the program and coordination with partners.

Conduct assessment of program and project milestones.

Develop 5 Year Research and Development Plan.

Measure: Number of proof-of-concept reconnaissance, surveillance and investigative technologies demonstrated.

Explanation:This measure identifies the number of proof-of-concept (feasibility) of technologies demonstrated that aid in the discovery, investigation, and prosecution of terrorists and criminals. Proof of concept is considered a milestone in the development of a fully functioning prototype. The targets are not cumulative and reflect the planned funding that is identified for this area of the program.

Measure: Percent of fire, emergency medical services, and law enforcement organizations that have established, at a minimum, informal interoperability agreements with other public safety organizations.

Explanation:The National Interoperability Baseline Survey will indicate the extent to which local emergency responder jurisdictions have started working with other public safety organizations. OIC is funded to perform this survey every two years.

Measure: Reduction in the cycle time for national interoperability standards development.

Explanation:According to the National Institute for Standards and Technology, it takes an average of 10 years to develop a new standard from inception to publication. OIC believes that time can be reduced by half.

Measure: Percent of eligible Federal agencies that cite or incorporate grant guidance, SoR, and PSAF within their Communications planning or procurement documents.

Explanation:

Measure: Percentage of Command, Control and Interoperability Division milestones that are met, as established in the fiscal year's budget execution plan. (New measure, added August 2007)

Explanation:The program has established a set of milestones that are necessary for achieving the goals and objectives of the program. These milestones are presented in the program's portion of the Science and Technology Directorate's fiscal year budget execution plan, which details the allocation of dollars and projected accomplishments for the year.

Measure: Percentage of Command, Control and Interoperability Division research program costs allocated for administration.

Explanation:This measure identifies the amount of research and development funding that is being used for administration which includes travel, SETA costs, IPAs, etc.

Measure: Number of requirements for technology development (for the rapid integration of threat information) generated from Federal, state and local practitioners.

Explanation:The program is gathering requirements to aid in the development and testing of technologies that can rapidly integrate threat information and provide targeted and actionable information to the various operational entities within DHS and those Federal, State, and local agencies which perform homeland security missions. The targets are not cumulative and reflect the planned funding that is identified for this area of the program.

Is the program purpose clear?

Explanation: The Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) Office for Interoperability and Compatibility (OIC) was established to strengthen and integrate interoperability and compatibility efforts through research, development, testing and evaluation, guidance, and assistance for local, tribal, and state public safety agencies. OIC is working to improve public safety response through more effective and efficient interoperable wireless communications. Interoperability refers to the ability of critical emergency response systems or products to work with other systems or products without special effort on the part of the user. Compatibility refers to the capability of two or more items or components to exist or function in the same system or environment without modification. OIC is strengthening public safety's ability to work together to protect lives and property by creating a series of programs that address critical interoperability issues related to the emergency response provider and homeland security communities in the areas of communications, equipment, and training. OIC leverages existing federal public safety and communications initiatives, such as the National Incident Management System (NIMS), and key public safety stakeholders to address the need to develop better technologies and processes for the cross-jurisdictional and cross-disciplinary coordination of existing systems and future networks. OIC harnesses other diverse Federal efforts and programs in service of the public safety community. These efforts will improve local, tribal, state, and Federal public safety preparedness and response.

Evidence: Section 7303 of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (Pub. L. No. 108-458), FY 2007 DHS Congressional Justification

Does the program address a specific and existing problem, interest, or need?

Explanation: Interoperability issues and the lack of standardized plans for emergency response have plagued the public safety community at the local, tribal, state, and Federal levels for decades. To address and improve public safety preparedness and response, the Secretary of DHS directed the Science and Technology (S&T) Directorate to create OIC to strengthen and integrate interoperability and compatibility efforts. OIC was created to address the issues of incompatible and aging communications equipment, limited and fragmented budget cycles and funding, limited and fragmented planning and coordination, limited and fragmented radio spectrum, and limited equipment standards. Due mainly to the combination of different technology standards operating on different radio frequencies, communications between and within local, tribal, state, and Federal agencies is not always assured. Achieving interoperability is an important goal of the public safety community. In the last decade, significant advances in technology and in funding to purchase communications equipment have eased, but not eliminated, problems of incompatible systems, inadequate technology in the hands of first responders, insufficient funding, and limited spectrum.

Evidence: Section 7303 of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (Pub. L. No. 108-458); FY 2007 DHS Congressional Justification, FY 2006 DHS Congressional Justification; OMB E-300 submission for SAFECOM Program; CRS Report RL32594, Public Safety Communications: Policy, Proposals, Legislation and Progress; CRS Report RL32408, Spectrum Policy: Public Safety and Wireless Communications Interference

Is the program designed so that it is not redundant or duplicative of any other Federal, state, local or private effort?

Explanation: No other effort at the Federal, state, local or private level is designed to provide the practitioner perspective on interoperability needs. The OIC serves as the overarching office within DHS to strengthen and integrate interoperability efforts that improve local, tribal, State, and Federal public safety preparedness and response. As a central clearinghouse for information about and assistance with interoperability issues, the office reduces unnecessary duplication in public safety programs and spending and identifies and promotes interoperability best practices in the public safety arena. It also leverages public safety community resources by promoting cooperation across all levels of government and coordination among Federal programs and activities related to interoperability. While other Federal programs such as the Department of Justice Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS), the DHS Interoperable Communications Technical Assistance Program (ICTAP) program, and the Department of Justice Communications Technology (CommTech) program address certain aspects of interoperable communications, OIC is the only practitioner-driven program specifically designed to integrate critical interoperability and compatibility efforts in the areas of governance, standard operating procedures, technology, training/exercises, and usage of interoperable communications. OIC was implemented in coordination with other DHS programs.

Evidence: FY 2007 DHS Congressional Justification; Interoperability Continuum Brochure http://www.safecomprogram.gov/NR/rdonlyres/5C103F66-A36E-4DD1-A00A-54C477B47AFC/0/ContinuumBrochure40505.pdf; FY 2004 Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) within DHS between the Science and Technology Directorate and the Office of State and Local Government Coordination and Preparedness; FY 2004 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the DHS and the Department of Justice; FY 2004 MOA between DHS and the Department of the Navy Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center; FY 2004 MOA between DHS Office of the Chief Financial Officer and SAFECOM; Coordinated Grant Guidance, http://www.safecomprogram.gov/SAFECOM/library/grant/1245_safecomgrant.htm; FY 2006 Homeland Security Grant Program, www.ojp.usdoj.gov/odp/docs/fy2006hsgp.pdf; H.R. Rep. No. 109-362 (Conference Report to the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005); H.R. Rep. No. 109-79 (House Report to the Homeland Security Appropriations Act of 2006); H.R. Rep. No. 109-241 (Conference Report to the Homeland Security Appropriations Act of 2006).

Is the program design free of major flaws that would limit the program's effectiveness or efficiency?

Explanation: There is not significant evidence that the program is free of major design flaws. However, OIC's practitioner-driven design enables emergency responders to communicate their needs directly to the Federal government and the rest of the emergency response community. OIC advocates a bottom-up approach which means the program relies heavily on the input and guidance of local and state public safety practitioners and experts; local, tribal, and state public safety agencies; national associations; the communications industry and academia. This input is used to define and implement solutions for the interoperability challenge. Public safety practitioners can contribute to the direction of the program through various outlets including focus groups, the Advisory Group (AdG), the Executive Committee (EC), and Industry Summit. OIC captures the input of the practitioners and shares the best practices throughout all levels of government. By leveraging the experience of the practitioners, OIC will accelerate the accomplishment of interoperable communications and enhance the contributions of practitioners and policy makers from across disciplines, jurisdictions, and all levels of government. Additionally, OIC's bottom-up model promotes program efficiency because the program does not waste resources working on projects and products that address issues that are not of high importance to end-users. By soliciting end-user input on needs and requirements and applying this information to its work, OIC further ensures that its resources target issues that are of greatest importance to the customer, the emergency response community. OIC is designed to ensure that local, tribal, and state agencies own the vast majority of the public safety communications infrastructure and to ensure that public safety communications systems provide reliable agency-specific communications that can provide reliable local interagency communications. The design makes sure that technical and functional requirements are defined at the local or tribal level, up to the state, and then to the Federal level; solutions involve a "system of systems" approach that incorporates existing technologies and allows for the development of new technologies and functionality in the future, and finally that all standards are open to allow the interoperability of equipment from a variety of technologies and vendors.

Evidence: Statement in Support of SAFECOM; Department of Homeland Security Press Release "U.S. Department of Homeland Security Launches Office of Interoperability and Compatibility; Offers States and Locales Tools for Improving Public Safety Communications Interoperability," http://www.dhs.gov/dhspublic/interapp/press_release/press_release_0530.xml; Section 7303 of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (Pub. L. No. 108-458); AdG and EC Meeting Minutes; Interoperability Continuum Brochure http://www.safecomprogram.gov/NR/rdonlyres/5C103F66-A36E-4DD1-A00A-54C477B47AFC/0/ContinuumBrochure40505.pdf

Is the program design effectively targeted so that resources will address the program's purpose directly and will reach intended beneficiaries?

Explanation: OIC is designed to ensure that activities are focused on serving the needs of the local, tribal, and state public safety organizations that represent OIC's customers. These activities are directly aligned with OIC's mission to strengthen, integrate, and accelerate interoperability and compatibility efforts to improve public safety preparedness and response. Additionally, OIC works closely with other Federal and commercial sector partners to maximize the benefit of current Federal funding to identify and promote the efforts that most quickly and effectively improve interoperability for the emergency responder community. OIC coordinates its activities through the Executive Committee (EC) and Advisory Group (AdG) - both composed of emergency response practitioners, communications industry representatives, and public safety experts - to make certain that the needs of the public safety community at large are addressed, that OIC deliverables are validated and approved by the public safety community, and that OIC is addressing the most important issues in a manner consistent with its customers' needs. Based on the input given through these groups, program priorities are identified and budgetary resources are targeted accordingly. OIC aligns its staff with the broad nature of the issues of interoperability and compatibility and the DHS program goals associated with them. The program is organized along a series of lanes devoted to assisting different aspects of interoperability and compatibility, such as Governance and Technology, and mirrors the structure of the Interoperability Continuum. For example, the technology lane focuses on communications standards, practitioner requirements, and the radio spectrum. The tools lane and the stakeholder lanes address the non-technical aspects of the solution to interoperability. Every major component of the Interoperability Continuum is addressed by some element of the OIC program structure and program investment strategy. Internally, the office is organized into teams that coordinate with OMB and other Federal partner programs, congressional relations, press matters, state and local public safety practitioner interaction, and coordination with communications industry representatives. These teams ensure that each customer and partner segment interact effectively at Federal level and prevents an internal duplication of effort.

Evidence: FY 2007 DHS Budget-in-Brief; FY 2007 DHS Congressional Justification, FY 2006 DHS Congressional Justification, H.R. Rep. No. 109-79 (House Report to the Homeland Security Appropriations Act of 2006); H.R. Rep. No. 109-241 (Conference Report to the Homeland Security Appropriations Act of 2006).

Does the program have a limited number of specific long-term performance measures that focus on outcomes and meaningfully reflect the purpose of the program?

Explanation: The program has two long-term outcome measures that reflect OIC's mission to strengthen and integrate interoperability and compatibility efforts to improve local, tribal, state, and Federal public safety preparedness and response. The long-term goals are to increase interoperable communications capacity of local, tribal, and state public safety agencies and to increase coordination among relevant Federal agencies. The measures accurately reflect OIC's goals to help the public safety community to work together more efficiently to protect lives and property and to address critical interoperability issues related to emergency response providers and homeland security communities in the areas of communications, equipment, and training.

Evidence: DHS Future Years Homeland Security Plan (FYHSP) Milestones for FY 2007, FY 2007 DHS Performance Budget Overview, OMB Milestones and Performance Metrics, Program Execution Plan.

Does the program have ambitious targets and timeframes for its long-term measures?

Explanation: OIC's goals is to have 100% of relevant Federal agencies coordinating interoperability. The target for increasing interoperable communications capacity of local, tribal, and state public safety agencies is dependent upon the results of the National Interoperability Baseline Survey results, which should be available in draft form in Summer 2006. Once completed, OIC will have a clear picture of the current state of interoperability across the nation. While these forward-looking measures have ambitious targets and timeframes,. The OIC program must also continue its existing efforts to maintain requirements, update and refine tools, and to incorporate new technologies and standards as they evolve and change until the Nation is fully interoperable

Evidence: Program Execution Plan, OMB Milestones and Performance Metrics, FY 2007 DHS Performance Budget Overview

Does the program have a limited number of specific annual performance measures that can demonstrate progress toward achieving the program's long-term goals?

Explanation: OIC developed four specific annual performance measures to support the program's first long-term goal: to increase interoperable communications capacity of local, tribal, and state public safety agencies. The program is tracking the percentage of states that have initiated or completed a statewide interoperability plan, helping to reduce the cycle time for the development of national interoperability standards, tracking the percentage of grant programs that include SAFECOM-approved grant guidance, and measuring the percentage of emergency response organizations that have established informal interoperability agreements with other public safety organizations through the National Interoperability Baseline Survey.

Evidence: OMB Milestones and Performance Metrics, 2007 FHYSP Milestones, FY 2007 DHS Performance Budget Overview

Does the program have baselines and ambitious targets for its annual measures?

Explanation: OIC has developed four annual measures listed in the Metrics section of the PART. The National Interoperability Baseline Survey represents a very ambitious undertaking since no one has ever measured the extent to which local emergency responder jurisdictions have started working with other public safety organizations. This survey, which is currently underway, will help to determine the overall level of interoperability across the nation. OIC requested funding to perform three to five statewide interoperability plans. OIC is planning to complete five plans each year, regardless of funding. Finally, OIC is pushing for a significant reduction in cycle time for national interoperability standards. Currently, the cycle time is ten years. Since standards are the heart of interoperability, a 70% reduction represents a significant step forward to providing better interoperability across the nation.

Evidence: OMB Milestones and Performance Metrics, DHS FHYSP Milestones for FY 2007, FY 2007 Performance Budget Overview

Do all partners (including grantees, sub-grantees, contractors, cost-sharing partners, and other government partners) commit to and work toward the annual and/or long-term goals of the program?

Explanation: OIC's internal contractors are held accountable for the timely and cost-effective delivery of work products. PMO staff participate in weekly project status meetings with federal program managers and submit monthly PMO achievement reports. The internal control mechanisms, such as the statements of work, task and delivery orders, and contract schedules, directly support the program's achievement of its annual and long-term goals. OIC works with the DHS Office of Grants and Training (formerly the Office of Domestic Preparedness and Office of State and Local Government Coordination and Preparedness) and the Department of Justice (DOJ) Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) to incorporate SAFECOM grant guidance into their communications and interoperability grant programs. On standards and technical activities, SAFECOM partners with the National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) and the Department of Commerce Institute for Telecommunication Services (ITS) to develop the SoR and PSAF. Both NIST and ITS are held accountable for these deliverables. OIC also collaborates with the Department of Justice Communications Technology (CommTech) program, as well as representatives from industry, non-profit organizations, and academia to provide additional knowledge and expertise. The Advisory Group and Executive Committee provide consistent feedback on the progress of the program (Advisory Group and Executive Committee meeting notes and reports); OIC provides contractors with statements of work, schedules, and program plans upon contract inception and monitors their performance to ensure the work meets the long-term and annual goals of OIC. OIC effectively collaborates with public safety practitioners and partners at the local, tribal, state, and Federal levels. OIC considers the local, tribal, and state agencies as its primary customers. The issue of interoperability is central to all public safety jurisdictions. All are committed to increasing interoperable communications. The Advisory Group (AdG) and Executive Committee (EC) provide consistent feedback on the progress of the program. AdG and EC members are required to participate in regularly-scheduled meetings and assist in the identification of important issues facing the emergency response community. At the Federal level, OIC coordinates with the Integrated Wireless Network (IWN) Program - a joint effort by DHS, Justice, and Treasury - to deliver the wireless communications services required by agents and officers of each Department to support their varied missions. OIC shares information with these other programs to evaluate the effectiveness of current interoperability efforts. OIC also collaborates with the Department of Justice Communications Technology (CommTech) program, as well as representatives from industry, non-profit organizations, and academia to provide additional knowledge and expertise.

Evidence: Contract Statements of Work; Advisory Group and Executive Committee Meeting Notes; Memoranda of Understanding between OIC and various Federal Departments and Agencies.

Are independent evaluations of sufficient scope and quality conducted on a regular basis or as needed to support program improvements and evaluate effectiveness and relevance to the problem, interest, or need?

Explanation: The OIC program is under considerable scrutiny due to the importance of the interoperability issue at all levels of government. However, there have not been a significant number of independent evaluations on this program. The GAO report published in April 2004 examined the SAFECOM program, a major component of OIC, and addressed the issue of cross-agency emergency communications. GAO recommended stronger collaboration at the Federal level. The DHS IG report reviewed DHS' progress in adopting and enforcing equipment standards for first responders - a major component of OIC's communications program and the subject of an annual performance measure - and recommends that process be expedited to better serve the state and local customers. The Annual Report Card on the Department of Homeland Security prepared by the democratic staff of the House Homeland Security Committee evaluated the overall interoperability effort by DHS and the SAFECOM program. OIC was the highest-rated program on the report card. However, the report indicated that the issue of interoperability needs to be raised to a higher level of importance; additional financial resources are required; more Federal, state, and local coordination is needed; and there needs to be improved accountability for grants. OIC is currently soliciting an independent entity to conduct program evaluations on a regular basis. These reviews will build upon the previous evaluations and will be used to improve program performance and ensure all program activities support the mission of OIC.

Evidence: GAO Report April 2004 http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d04494.pdf; DHS IG Report "A Review of DHS' Progress in Adopting and Enforcing Equipment Standards for First Responders" January 2006; "The State of Homeland Security, 2006: An Annual Report Card on the Department of Homeland Security" http://hsc-democrats.house.gov/NR/rdonlyres/C2D1000A-6559-44C9-BB61-73243EE166ED/0/2006DeptofHomelandSecurityReportCard.pdf; CRS Report RL32594: Public Safety Communications: Policy, Proposals, Legislation and Progress Updated June 8, 2005 http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/homesec/RL32594.pdf

Are Budget requests explicitly tied to accomplishment of the annual and long-term performance goals, and are the resource needs presented in a complete and transparent manner in the program's budget?

Explanation: The OIC budget request was not clearly tied to accomplishment of goals not was it transparent. OIC's budget submission requested funding for the development and identification of interoperable technology guidance through partnerships with local, tribal, state, and Federal operational end-users and enables the integration of interoperable technologies at all levels of government. OIC works closely with Members of Congress and OMB to ensure that funding requests are justified and will be used to accomplish the long-term goals of the program. In addition, the S&T Directorate through DHS develops a performance-based budget each fiscal year. The National Interoperability Baseline Assessment (Baseline) project is an example of tying budget requests to the accomplishment of long-term and annual performance goals is. The Baseline began with input from the state and local customers to develop a methodology to assess the current state of interoperability across the 55,000 emergency response jurisdictions in the United States. OIC discussed this with OMB and Congress, which led to an agreement to fund a national survey. Once completed, the Baseline will provide critical data on the current state of interoperability. This funding directly supports OIC's long-term goal to increase interoperable communications capacity of local, tribal, and state public safety agencies.

Evidence: FY 2007 President's Budget Request, Program Execution Plan, FY 2007 DHS Congressional Justification, FY 2006 DHS Congressional Justification, OMB Budget Requests, Justification

Has the program taken meaningful steps to correct its strategic planning deficiencies?

Explanation: OIC is taking steps to stregthen its deficiencies but more significant steps will be taken in the next year or so. OIC has established a governance structure consisting of an Advisory Group that meets biannually and an Executive Committee that meets quarterly. OIC frequently receives input from the public safety community and the private sector. This practitioner-driven philosophy has enabled OIC to make significant improvements to the operation and efficiency of the program and to ensure that the target audience receives greatest benefit from OIC's efforts. In addition, OIC leadership meets on a monthly basis with OMB to discuss program priorities, risks, and accomplishments. OIC is also developing the Interoperability Maturity Model. This model represents the overarching strategy on how OIC will better fulfill its mission. The PART evaluation has identified strategic planning deficiencies within OIC and the program is taking steps to address each of them.

Evidence: 2005 Advisory Group Meeting Report, 2004-2006 Advisory Group and Executive Committee Meeting Notes, OMB Monthly meetings, OMB Milestones and Performance Metrics, SAFECOM Governance Charter; http://www.safecomprogram.gov/SAFECOM/about/governance/default.htm

Does the agency regularly collect timely and credible performance information, including information from key program partners, and use it to manage the program and improve performance?

Explanation: OIC regularly collects data and tracks the performance of each of its program components through project plans and timely reporting on key deliverables to the OMB's Office of E-Government and Information Technology. In addition, OIC's established governance structure actively solicits feedback and recommendations for improving overall performance from Federal partners; local, tribal, and State emergency responders; and the telecommunications industry. The information collected from these key program partners is used to further advance OIC's mission of improving nationwide interoperability. OIC shares this performance data and milestone progress with OMB on a weekly basis and also meets monthly to validate performance goals and solicit guidance on meeting key program initiatives.

Evidence: FY 2005 Quarterly Performance Report on Future Years Homeland Security Plan (FYHSP) Milestones; OMB Milestones and Metrics; Monthly meetings with OMB Office for Information Technology and E-Government; SAFECOM Governance Structure; Advisory Group and Executive Committee meeting notes and reports; the U.S. Department of Justice's (USDOJ's) Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS).

Are Federal managers and program partners (including grantees, sub-grantees, contractors, cost-sharing partners, and other government partners) held accountable for cost, schedule and performance results?

Explanation: Following the Office of Personnel Management's (OPM's) Senior Executive Service (SES) Guidance for Performance-based Pay, the OIC Director is explicitly held accountable for achieving program performance goals. Contracting Officers and Contracting Officer's Technical Representatives (COTRs) within the Directorate are responsible for monitoring program execution and accuracy of contract administration. They are supported by OIC resource managers. The COTR and Federal program managers hold contractors fully accountable for the costs, schedule, and performance results as defined in their statements of work, through status report submissions and regular meetings. Additionally, OIC has entered into Memorandums of Agreement (MOA) with Federal partners, in which cost, schedule, and performance data requirements are clearly laid out. Accordingly, OIC program managers monitor performance against this information.

Evidence: "New Performance-Based Pay System for the Senior Executive Service" http://www.opm.gov/oca/compmemo/2003/2003-19.asp; Resource Manager's Manual; Federal Acquisition Regulation 1.602 and 2.1; OIC Project Plans; MOA between OIC and NIST/ITS

Are funds (Federal and partners') obligated in a timely manner, spent for the intended purpose and accurately reported?

Explanation: OIC adheres to the S&T Directorate's quarterly allocation execution schedule for the obligation of funds. In FY 2005, OIC committed 100% of its funds before the end of the fiscal year. Two contracts (both full & open competitions) required more time than initially planned due to large numbers of responses and, subsequently, those funds were not obligated until early FY 2006. OIC's budget outlays are consistent with the program's mission and with the OMB Office for Information Technology and E-government.

Evidence: Program Execution Plan (PEP); DHS S&T Quarterly Spend Plans; Federal Financial Management System (FFMS) Budget Execution Reports

Does the program have procedures (e.g. competitive sourcing/cost comparisons, IT improvements, appropriate incentives) to measure and achieve efficiencies and cost effectiveness in program execution?

Explanation: There is not sufficient evidence to answer yes to this question. However, OIC contracts are awarded through full and open competitions to ensure cost effectiveness. As stated in the Measures section of the PART, OIC developed an efficiency measure to track the "reduction in the cycle time for national interoperability standards development" to help simplify the interoperability standards development process. This acceleration allows OIC to work more quickly to address the needs of emergency responders and provide industry with necessary standards to bring new interoperable technologies to the public safety arena.

Evidence: President's Management Agenda and E-Gov Strategy; DHS Management Directives, Contracts (Statements of Work), OMB Milestones and Performance Metrics; Resource Managers Manual.

Does the program collaborate and coordinate effectively with related programs?

Explanation: It is not clear that this is always the case. OIC collaborates with numerous government agencies at the Federal, State, and local levels. Within DHS, OIC works closely with the Office of Grants & Training (G&T). OIC provides grant guidance that is integrated into the state block grant programs to promote interoperability improvement efforts among first responders. OIC also provides grant guidance to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) the DOJ COPS program. OIC works with G&T's Interoperable Communications Technical Assistance Program (ICTAP) and has conducted several tabletop exercises with local communities to identify gaps in interoperability planning at the local, state, and regional levels. OIC pledged financial support and staff subject matter experts to G&T in an effort to accelerate interoperability efforts in all 77 Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI) areas. Teams of OIC and G&T personnel are evaluating the Tactical Interoperability Communications (TIC) Plans in each of the 77 UASI areas. The teams are planning review exercises to be held by the end of September. OIC partners with the National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) to define and develop standards for communications equipment The Department of Commerce Institute for Telecommunication Services (ITS) is another partner that provides technical input on the Statement of Requirements (SoR) and Public Safety Architectural Framework (PSAF). The PSAF provides the rules and methodology for developing and presenting architecture descriptions. Once completed, the PSAF will highlight gaps in technology and identify areas requiring standardization for the public safety community. The SoR is a collection of the qualitative and quantitative communication needs vetted through public safety practitioners. OIC collaborates with DOJ's Communications Technology (CommTech) program to solicit additional input on the SoR. OIC works with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) on radio spectrum issues with the Public Safety and Critical Infrastructure Bureau, which is responsible for all public safety spectrum issues. OIC provides input to the Bureau on public dockets, rule-making proceedings, and also provides technical input and public safety operational expertise. In addition, OIC worked with the FCC Wireless Telecommunications Bureau in a consultative role and provided valuable input to Sections 7502a and 7502b of the 2004 Intelligence Reform Act. OIC partners both the National Governors Association (NGA) and the National Association of Counties (NACO) to extend OIC's reach into the local, tribal, and state levels to ensure interoperability information is reaching the targeted audience. OIC is working with the NGA to complete five statewide interoperability plans this year. OIC developed the Advisory Group (AdG) and Executive Committee (EC), both composed of public safety practitioners and experts, to facilitate the input of the public safety community at large. Finally, OIC works in conjunction with representatives from the telecommunications industry, non-profit organizations, and academia to provide additional support and program guidance.

Evidence: SAFECOM Grant Guidance http://www.safecomprogram.gov/NR/rdonlyres/5CFB223C-EB4E-42DE-99B3-E10F7B251A0E/0/GrantGuidanceFY06FINAL.doc; ''Statement in Support of the SAFECOM Program" Joint Letter January 2004; Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between OIC and Department of Commerce NIST and ITS Programs, MOU between OIC and DOJ COPS Program; MOU between OIC and DHS G&T.

Does the program use strong financial management practices?

Explanation: The Science and Technology Directorate's accounting services are provided by another component in the Department of Homeland Security. The Directorate and the servicing component were independently audited in FY 2005 and found to have material internal control weaknesses due to its financial control. The Science and Technology Directorate is seeking ways to improve its financial management such as developing sound financial procedures. OIC develops and implements its own financial management strategies and infrastructure supporting program execution. Strategies integrate planning, budgeting, acquisition/procurement strategy, and performance-tracking and reporting efforts to optimize program and funds management. Below are some selected tools that OIC uses for financial management: Weekly Funds Status Tool and Report. This is an informative report for OIC program managers. The report reflects the status of OIC funding. The report is distributed on a weekly basis and is used for program management and administrative oversight. The report integrates data on projected acquisitions as well as the status of in-process efforts for each program from origination to obligation, while also featuring detail on the geo-location of funds, indication of which procurements are experiencing bottlenecks in the routing process, and a tracker for when contracts expire. Procurement Schedule. This Excel-based tool tracks OIC's acquisitions schedule throughout the fiscal year. All projected acquisitions are indicated in this report. The report is updated on a monthly basis and provides guidance as to when acquisitions are expected to initiate and what type of acquisitions (e.g., interagency agreement, vendor contract, etc.) are expected throughout the year. Program Execution Plan (PEP). This document serves as an annual baseline for the program. The contents of the report are used as a baseline for program performance and execution reviews (mid-year and year-end). The PEP is used by management for planning, evaluation, and program reviews. The report contains background program information as well as specific information on program execution for the year. General information includes program mission, objectives, and program structure, whereas specific program information includes details on deliverables, milestones, resource management strategy, performance metrics and risk. Statement of Work (SOW) Best Practices Guide. This guide outlines the elements that make a strong SOW and a checklist of common errors. It was developed to reduce the back-and-forth SOW editing process. Together, these tools compose a comprehensive financial system that reports historical, current, and forecasted data for programs and budgets, program milestones and deliverables, contracts, and other activities against funding allotments and program baselines and requirements. The reports resulting from these tools are used for program reviews, data reconciliations, program management decisions, performer oversight, and to fulfill reporting requirements within and external to OIC and DHS. These reports are regularly analyzed to determine program performance, to determine whether program resources are being used in the most efficient and effective manner, and to determine whether programs are being executed in a manner consistent with OIC goals. Additionally, the OIC financial management team meets weekly to discuss the financial status of OIC. Acquisitions issues and resource management-related topics of interest are presented and discussed at these meetings. These meetings serve as a forum for acquisitions knowledge exchange and have led to the development of numerous best practices and standard processes.

Evidence: DHS FY 2005 Performance Accountability Report

Has the program taken meaningful steps to address its management deficiencies?

Explanation: When OIC was created in October 2004, there were no formal management systems in place. Since its inception, OIC has implemented management processes to track program performance, schedule, and milestones. OIC also holds regular status reviews to ensure budget targets are being met and program priorities are accurately defined. OIC meets monthly with the OMB Office for Information Technology and E-government to demonstrate adherence to schedule and performance goals. In addition, OIC created a new position, Deputy Director for Business Administration, to focus specifically on establishing and executing sound management practices.

Evidence: OMB Milestones and Performance Metrics; OMB Monthly meetings; Program Execution Plan (PEP), DHS FYHSP Milestones for 2007.

Has the program demonstrated adequate progress in achieving its long-term performance goals?

Explanation: OIC is starting to demonstrate progress in achieving its long-term performance goals related to increasing the interoperable communications capacity of local, tribal and state public safety agencies in addition to increasing interoperability coordination among relevant Federal agencies. A major component of the first long-term goal is dependent upon completion of the National Interoperability Baseline Study. OIC was created in October 2004 and is therefore a relatively new program. With help, guidance, and oversight from the OMB Office for Information Technology and E-government, OIC made great progress in assisting the public safety community.

Evidence: OMB Milestones; DHS FYHSP Milestones for FY 2007, FY 2005 DHS Performance Accountability Report

Does the program (including program partners) achieve its annual performance goals?

Explanation: OIC has established annual performance goals with targets that support its long-term performance goals. OIC is working towards achieving results. The annual performance measures track the specific OIC initiatives that help the nation's emergency responders to identify and improve their current level of interoperability. The annual measures tie into the overall mission to strengthen and integrate nationwide interoperability and compatibility efforts. The baseline measurements were established last year, and the program is poised to meet each of its targets. OIC is coordinating with the National Governor's Association to help five states complete a statewide interoperability plan by the end of the year. The grant guidance provided by OIC is integrated into the grant programs of DHS Grants & Training and Department of Justice COPS program. As new grant programs come online, OIC will ensure that its guidance will be incorporated into these new programs through continuous coordination and collaboration. OIC is also continuing to work with NIST and ITS to bring new equipment standards to the public and to reduce the time it takes to establish them. OIC is meeting the aggressive goals it has set to improve its coordination at the Federal level and is identifying other Federal programs that share a similar goal to OIC.

Evidence: OMB Milestones; DHS FHYSP Milestones for FY 2007.

Does the program demonstrate improved efficiencies or cost effectiveness in achieving program goals each year?

Explanation: Since the program was established in late 2004, OIC has collaborated with numerous Federal agencies to deliver conferences and tools to public safety agencies, government partners, and industry. These collaborations reduce risks of redundancy and duplication of effort. Furthermore, in January 2006, the Disaster Management program transitioned to OIC, further consolidating Federal efforts associated with voice and data communications interoperability. The program also performs open competitions in its procurement of services, ensuring the best value for the Federal government.

Evidence: OMB E-gov strategy http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/2003egov_strat.pdf; December 2005 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) & DHS S&T Directorate.

Does the performance of this program compare favorably to other programs, including government, private, etc., with similar purpose and goals?

Explanation: While there are no national interoperability programs in the private sector or within state and local governments, OIC does compare favorably to the performance of DHS Office for Grants and Training Department of Justice COPS program. Both programs share customers at the state and local government levels and are integral to the success of the long-term goals with the OIC. OIC has identified the unique roles of both programs and adds value where gaps exist. Grants and Training received a score of "Adequate" on its PART evaluation and the DOJ COPS program received a score of "Results Not Demonstrated." OIC deliverables are disseminated and utilized by these programs helping them to achieve their mission. The April 2004 GAO Report and the January 2006 Draft DHS IG Report compare OIC's activities to the Department of Justice CommTech (AGILE) Program and also the Public Safety Wireless Network (PSWN), a joint undertaking of the Departments of Justice and the Treasury. The interoperability effort achieved the highest score given on the "An Annual Report Card on the Department of Homeland Security" provided by the democratic staff of the House Homeland Security Committee.

Evidence: OMB E-gov strategy http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/2003egov_strat.pdf, MOU between OIC and G&T; MOA between OIC and NIST; GAO Report April 2004 http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d04494.pdf; "The State of Homeland Security, 2006: An Annual Report Card on the Department of Homeland Security" http://hsc-democrats.house.gov/NR/rdonlyres/C2D1000A-6559-44C9-BB61-73243EE166ED/0/2006DeptofHomelandSecurityReportCard.pdf; January 2006 DHS IG Report; OMB PART Assessment of DHS Grants & Training, OMB PART Assessment of DOJ COPS Program;

Do independent evaluations of sufficient scope and quality indicate that the program is effective and achieving results?

Explanation: The DHS Inspector General (IG) Report of January 2006 states that progress is being made in the area of standards development, but much data is yet unknown regarding the requirements to overcome interoperability challenges. The GAO report published in April 2004 offered specific guidance on how the program could more affectively achieve its objectives. OIC has already implemented several of the recommendations from this report. The recommendations address the most apparent deficiencies where the opportunity to improve performance is the greatest, including stable funding and increased collaboration with other Federal agencies. Many of these solutions are practical measures and are achievable. The Annual Report Card on the Department of Homeland Security 2006 was highly complimentary of the design, approach, and grassroots methodology of OIC. Additionally, OIC is identifying an appropriate to conduct an independent program evaluation on a regular basis. The evaluations will be used to improve program performance and ensure all activities support the overall mission of OIC.

Evidence: President's Management Agenda, GAO Report April 2004; DHS Draft IG Report "A Review of DHS' Progress in Adopting and Enforcing Equipment Standards for First Responders" January 2006, "The State of Homeland Security, 2006: An Annual Report Card on the Department of Homeland Security" http://hsc-democrats.house.gov/NR/rdonlyres/C2D1000A-6559-44C9-BB61-73243EE166ED/0/2006DeptofHomelandSecurityReportCard.pdf;