Detailed Information on the
Federal Emergency Management Agency: Grants and Training Office Technical Assistance Program Assessment

Ensure the program incorporates and addresses new and evolving national guidance and doctrine (i.e. National Information Sharing Strategy, National Preparedness Guidelines, etc.)

Develop a plan to ensure Technical Assistance Programs inform future DHS training opportunities and exercises.

Conduct an evaluation of internal procedures to track program performance.

Clarify the underlying problems that the program is trying to solve.

Develop an FY06 spending plan and FY07 Budget that more clearly identify program resources, with linkages to performance.

Develop long-term performance measures focused on outcomes.

Measure: Percentage of technical assistance services linked to statewide homeland security strategies

Explanation:This measure reflects linkage of technical assistance program development efforts based on the goals and objectives listed in Homeland Security Strategies and reflects technical assistance as aligned to stakeholder requirements.

Measure: Percent of jurisdictions reporting that technical assistance contributed to their ability to meet DHS grant reporting requirements.

Explanation:Technical assistance deliveries seek to facilitate jurisdictional efforts to successfully fulfill mandated DHS requirements. This measure will gauge the effectiveness of technical assistance programs in support of this mission by polling recipients about the efficacy of the relevant technical assistance delivery.

Measure: Average satisfaction with TA services provided to State and local jurisdictions.

Explanation:For this annual performance measure, "average satisfaction" is based on analysis of required evaluation forms filled out at the conclusion of each service delivery. Satisfaction is rated on the following scale: 1 - Unsatisfactory 2 - Satisfactory 3 - Very Satisfactory 4 - Not Sure The Technical Assistance Program has never received an "unsatisfactory" rating for any service deliveries. The average satisfaction data is calculated based on the following formula for each service delivery: (total "very satisfactory" ratings) + (total "satisfactory" ratings) / (total number of evaluations) = average satisfaction

Measure: The average cost of a technical assistance service

Explanation:This calculation takes into consideration all costs associated with individual service delivery to include: technical assistance provider time, travel, and supplies. Cost per delviery is being reduced through increased emphasis on Level I and II services and regional deliveries.

Measure: Average response time to technical assistance requests

Explanation:The "average response time" to technical assistance requests is defined as the total time elapsed from receipt by the relevant preparedness officer to ultimate scheduling. This process includes preparedness officer review, technical assistance manager review, submission of a work order from the TA manager to the TA provider, submission of work order and budget, approval of work order and budget, and finally, coordination to schedule the delivery.

Measure: Number of technical assistance requests fulfilled.

Explanation:The number of requests fulfilled increased significantly in FY2004 due to the reorganization of the program as a stand-alone entity within ODP that same year. This change was marked by an infusion of additional funding and an accompanying expansion of roles/responsibilities. The FY2005 target also represents a significant improvement due to the formal addition of services (Domestic Preparedness Equipment Technical Assistance Program, Terrorism Early Warning Group Expansion Technical Assistance, etc.) that were formally managed by other ODP entities.

Measure: Percent of technical assistance deliveries that increase a jurisdiction's preparedness capability level.

Explanation:This measure will use pre-technical assistance delivery and post-technical assistance delivery analyses to determine the percent of all deliveries that increase a jurisdiction's capability level.

Is the program purpose clear?

Explanation: The Technical Assistance Program develops and enhances State and local preparedness strategies related to chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, and explosives (CBRNE) terrorism as well as other hazards. Services to grantees include information resources on preparedness capabilities; stand-alone tools including performance samples, models, and templates on various capabilities; and on-site assistance, as requested by grantees.

Evidence: ?? Public Law 108-334 Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act of 2005 (October 18, 2004) section 1309-10 ?? FY2004 Conference Report on Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act of 2004 Report: 108-280, Title III (September 23, 2003) ?? Information Bulletin #129 (August 2004) ?? Office for Domestic Preparedness (ODP) Guidelines for Homeland Security Prevention & Deterrence (June 2003) ?? Office of State and Local Government Coordination and Preparedness (SLGCP) Fact Sheet (September 2004) ?? State Homeland Security Assessment and Strategy Toolkit (February 2003) ?? Technical Assistance Catalog (August 6, 2004) ?? Interim National Preparedness Goal (March 31, 2005) ?? National Preparedness Guidance (April 27, 2005)"

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

Explanation: The Technical Assistance Program does not address a specific problem, interest, or need. It's services are designed to be flexible, responding to a wide range of homeland security planning assistance requests from Federal, state, and local agencies. In providing these services, the TAP does seek to ensure that state and local homeland security plans and strategies are aligned with DHS objectives.

Evidence: ?? Public Law 108-334 Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act of 2005 (October 18, 2004) section 1309-10 ?? FY2004 Conference Report on Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act of 2004 Report: 108-280, Title III (September 23, 2003) ?? Information Bulletin #129 (August 2004) ?? Office for Domestic Preparedness (ODP) Guidelines for Homeland Security Prevention & Deterrence (June 2003) ?? Office of State and Local Government Coordination and Preparedness (SLGCP) Fact Sheet (September 2004) ?? State Homeland Security Assessment and Strategy Toolkit (February 2003) ?? Technical Assistance Catalog (August 6, 2004)"

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

Explanation: There numerous means by which State and local jurisdictions may receive technical assistance and plannig guidance on homeland security, including private sector initiatives. However, the ODP Technical Assistance Program has a unique niche as part of the DHS effort to enhance standard preparedness capabilities across all jurisdictions. It is designed to ensure that State and local jurisdiction use consistent best practices aligned with the National Preparedness Goal.

Evidence: ?? State Homeland Security Strategies (December 31, 2003) ?? Urban Area Homeland Security Strategies (November 30, 2003) ?? HSPTAP Delivery Protocols (August 10, 2004) ?? HSPTAP Design and Development Protocols (August 10, 2004) ?? FY04 and FY05 Training and Exercise Improvement Plans ?? HSPTAP Strategic Plan (June 2004) ?? Technical Assistance Catalog (August 6, 2004) ?? Technical Assistance Technical Assistance Work Plans (Appendix B, HSPTAP Delivery Protocols - August 10, 2004)"

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

Explanation: The Technical Assistance Program's design supports effectiveness and efficiency. It is able to prioritize service delivery based on explicit need, greatest impact, and national goals. It retains multiple delivery mechanisms to meet the varied needs of ODP grantees. While ODP grantees could use grant funds to secure similar services directly from the private sector, DHS oversight of TAP service providers enables a national network of consistent best practices for preparedness capabilities.

Evidence: ?? State Homeland Security Strategies (December 31, 2003) ?? Urban Area Homeland Security Strategies (November 30, 2003) ?? FY2004 and FY2005 Training and Exercise Improvement Plans ?? HSPTAP Delivery Protocols (August 10, 2004) ?? HSPTAP Design and Development Protocols (August 10, 2004) ?? HSPTAP Strategic Plan (June 2004) ?? Technical Assistance Catalog (August 6, 2004)"

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

Explanation: The Technical Assistance Program is effectively targeted through its service request and delivery protocols. The allocation of training services is also based analyses of State and Urban Area Homeland Security Strategies. This data reveals national regarding capability gaps/weaknesses, ensuring design/development of the most vital services. Service requests must demonstrate a direct correlation to the corresponding State or Urban Area Homeland Security Strategy and obtain approval from the relevant State Administrative Agency or Urban Area Working Group.

Evidence: ?? State Homeland Security Assessment and Strategy Toolkit (February 2003) ?? State Homeland Security Strategies (December 31, 2003) ?? Urban Area Homeland Security Strategies (November 30, 2003) ?? HSPTAP Delivery Protocols (August 10, 2004) ?? HSPTAP Design and Development Protocols (August 10, 2004) ?? FY2004 and FY2005 Training and Exercise Improvement Plans ?? HSPTAP Strategic Plan (June 2004) ?? Technical Assistance Catalog (August 6, 2004) ?? Virtual Technical Assistance Center (in development)"

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: Through the Future Year Homeland Security Plan (FYHSP), the Technical Assistance Program has established two long-term measures for progress towards the goal of addressing weaknesses in State and Urban Area Homeland Security Strate: ??Percentage of homeland security strategies that are compliant with DHS planning requirements at the submission date. * Percentage of SAA's that meet 90% of grant management and reporting requirements by the end of the fiscal year. These measures address two of the program's key objectives, improving state and local homeland security planning and grants management.

Evidence: ?? Homeland Security Presidential Directive 8 (December 17, 2003) ?? Target Capabilities List: Version 1.1 (April 6, 2005) ?? FY05 Future Year Homeland Security Plan (FYHSP) ?? State Homeland Security Strategies (December 31, 2003) ?? Urban Area Homeland Security Strategies (November 30, 2003) ?? Technical Assistance Catalog (August 6, 2004) ?? Virtual Technical Assistance Center (in development)"

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

Explanation: As discussed in Question 2.1, the measures do not address the program's purpose. Further, the targets and timeframes are not ambitious, indicating that the Program will only address only 35 percent of weaknesses and capability areas in 2006, with increases of roughly 5% annually in the future.

Evidence: ?? FY05 Future Year Homeland Security Plan (FYHSP) ?? Office for Domestic Preparedness (ODP) Policy Directive #11 (September 7, 2004; December 27, 2004; March 25, 2005) ?? State Homeland Security Strategies (December 31, 2003) ?? Urban Area Homeland Security Strategies (November 30, 2003) ?? HSPTAP After-Action Reports (Appendix E, HSPTAP Delivery Protocols - August 10, 2004) ?? HSPTAP Technical Assistance Service Evaluations (Appendix D, HSPTAP Delivery Protocols (August 10, 2004) ?? HSPTAP Status Reports (weekly, monthly, quarterly, annually) ?? Technical Assistance Catalog (August 6, 2004) ?? Technical Assistance Request and Delivery Tracking System"

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: The Technical Assistance Program has two quantifiable annual performance measures: *The number of TA requests fulfilled; and *Average satisfaction with technical assistance services provided to State and local jurisdictions. These measures gauge the extent to which the Program has addressed planning weaknesses identified in state strategies and plans, as well as the extent of satistfaction with techncial assistance services. The average satisfaction of TA services ensures that the state and local needs have been addressed. The number of TA requests fulfilled tracks that solution packages were provided that increased or enhanced state and local target capabilities.

Evidence: ?? FY05 Future Year Homeland Security Plan (FYHSP) ?? HSPTAP After-Action Reports (Appendix E, HSPTAP Delivery Protocols - August 10, 2004) ?? HSPTAP Technical Assistance Service Evaluations (Appendix D, HSPTAP Delivery Protocols (August 10, 2004) ?? Technical Assistance Request and Delivery Tracking System ?? Technical Assistance Catalog (August 6, 2004) ?? Virtual Technical Assistance Center (in development)"

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

Explanation: 2001 serves as the baseline for both of the annual measures, though the program was not formally established until FY 2004. Future targets through 2008 reflect incremental growth in the program's size and scope. The targets for 'percentage of weaknesses' addressed are the same as the long-term goal, and the range of weakness to be addressed by TAP are unclear. The goals for 'customer satisfaction' are modest, especially as TAP services are provided free to state and local agencies.

Evidence: ?? FY05 Future Year Homeland Security Plan (FYHSP) ?? State Homeland Security Strategies (December 31, 2003) ?? Urban Area Homeland Security Strategies (November 30, 2003) ?? HSPTAP After-Action Reports (Appendix E, HSPTAP Delivery Protocols - August 10, 2004) ?? HSPTAP Technical Assistance Service Evaluations (Appendix D, HSPTAP Delivery Protocols (August 10, 2004) ?? Technical Assistance Catalog (August 6, 2004).

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: Technical assistance services are delivered by a wide variety of vendor teams that have explicit contracts with ODP. These "technical assistance Providers" (as they are known), are rigorously trained on, and required to commit to work towards, the annual and long-term goals of the program as defined by the Federal program managers. Each technical assistance provider must undergo training regarding the overall processes, protocols, and policies of the Technical Assistance Program with particular emphasis on the annual/long-term programmatic goals. This training is an annual requirement in order for technical assistance providers to earn eligibility to deliver technical assistance services on behalf of ODP. In addition, on-site deliveries conducted by technical assistance providers are monitored by Federal program managers to ensure compliance with the delivery protocols. If the technical assistance providers do not commit to and work toward these goals, their contracts are terminated.

Evidence: "?? HSPTAP Delivery Protocols (August 10, 2004) ?? HSPTAP Design and Development Protocols (August 10, 2004) ?? HSPTAP Strategic Plan (June 2004) ?? Virtual Technical Assistance Center (in development) "

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: There have been no broad independent evaluations of the Technical Assistance Program, which is mostly attributable to the program's relatively recent growth. Howevever, The Office of State and Local Government Preparedness is planning an independent evaluation of the Technical Assistance Program this year, with a contract already in place.

Evidence:  

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: Technical Assistance budget requests are moving toward a performance-based budget that will more clearly link requests to accomplishing the program's goals. The FY 2007 budget should reflect this link.

Evidence:  

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

Explanation: The constant Technical Assistance Program evaluation process provides for real-time feedback on potential deficiencies in the program's strategic plan. New components are developed and incorporated into the strategic plan to resolve these deficiencies. For example, the TA program has an independent evaluation planned and is engaging in and writing a performance-based budget for FY 2007. The TA program is also working on improved long- and short-term measures, such as the percent of TA requests filled and average cost of a technical assistance service, to justify FY07 budget requests. Performance-based budgeting will enable the TA program to target funds and resources towards those program areas found to be deficient (using the annual performance measures). Ultimately, performance-based budgeting will result in improved program performance by correcting strategic planning deficiencies

Evidence: ?? FY05 Future Year Homeland Security Plan (FYHSP) ?? Office for Domestic Preparedness (ODP) Policy Directive #11 (September 7, 2004; December 27, 2004; March 25, 2005) ?? State Homeland Security Assessment and Strategy Toolkit (February 2003) ?? State Homeland Security Strategies (December 31, 2003) ?? Urban Area Homeland Security Strategies (November 30, 2003) ?? HSPTAP Delivery Protocols (August 10, 2004) ?? HSPTAP Design and Development Protocols (August 10, 2004) ?? HSPTAP Strategic Plan (June 2004)"

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: Following each service delivery, the Technical Assistance Program collects a number of performance reports including After-Action Reports, Evaluations, and Status Reports. The process of collecting and utilizing performance information plays an important role in the design and development of TA services as well as the improvement of services after a delivery. However, it is unclear whether this data is used to track or validate improvements by the recipients of TAP services. Are state and local homeland security agencies building sustainable planning capacities, or becoming more dependent on 'free' TAP services?

Evidence: ?? FY04 and FY05 Training and Exercise Improvement Plans ?? HSPTAP After-Action Reports (Appendix E, HSPTAP Delivery Protocols - August 10, 2004) ?? HSPTAP Delivery Protocols (August 10, 2004) ?? HSPTAP Design and Development Protocols (August 10, 2004) ?? HSPTAP Technical Assistance Service Evaluations (Appendix D, HSPTAP Delivery Protocols (August 10, 2004) ?? HSPTAP Status Reports (weekly, monthly, quarterly, annually) ?? HSPTAP Strategic Plan (June 2004) ?? Technical Assistance Approval Board Reports and Minutes (June 2005) ?? Technical Assistance Catalog (August 6, 2004) ?? Virtual Technical Assistance Center (in development)"

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: No Federal manager is held accountable for keeping the Technical Assistance Program within appropriated fundings levels, and despite the absence of clear long-term goals, the program has expanded significantly. During FY05, the Program expanded significantly beyond its budgeted and appropriated funding level, supplemented by $22 million in carve-outs from other SLGCP programs, including grant funds. Annual measures focusing on the size and breadth of the Program have facilitated this trend. There appear to be few incentives for keeping total costs down, or encouraging states and locals to reduce their number of planning weaknesses. Information was not provided on the methods for tracking contractor costs, schedule, and performance.

Evidence: ?? HSPTAP Delivery Protocols (August 10, 2004) ?? HSPTAP Design and Development Protocols (August 10, 2004) ?? HSPTAP Status Reports (weekly, monthly, quarterly, annually) ?? HSPTAP Strategic Plan (June 2004) ?? Technical Assistance Catalog (August 6, 2004) ?? Technical Assistance Request and Delivery Tracking System.

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

Explanation: The Technical Assistance Program prioritizes funds each year, allocates those funds after soliciting competitive bids for priority services by selecting the most appropriate technical assistance provider. All program funds are obligated prior to the end of the fiscal year to technical assistance providers. Each fiscal year more than 90% of the funds are obligated and expended by the technical assistance providers by the end of that fiscal year. A relative small percent of funds are carried over by the technical assistance providers to the following fiscal year, mainly to provide a smooth transition to other contracts or providers. Carryover from FY05 into FY06 may be greater than prior years due to significant enhancement of TAP funding from grant program funds.

Evidence: ?? HSPTAP Delivery Protocols (August 10, 2004) ?? HSPTAP Design and Development Protocols (August 10, 2004) ?? HSPTAP Status Reports (weekly, monthly, quarterly, annually) ?? HSPTAP Strategic Plan (June 2004) ?? Technical Assistance Catalog (August 6, 2004) ?? Technical Assistance Request and Delivery Tracking System"

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: The Technical Assistance Program awards contracts based on a competitive solicitation process that ensure the best quality of providers at the best price. Evaluation criteria for the statement of work are rigorous and address quality and management control, past performance, and homeland security experience. Efficiency measures track response time and delivery costs. Measuring response time, or the total time elapsed from receipt of a request by the preparedness officer to scheduling of service, enables TA to identify gaps in service delivery and initiate steps to resolve them. Similarly, measuring delivery costs associated with the various TA service levels allows the TA program to conduct cost comparisons to determine the most efficient and cost effective method of program execution. Cost comparisons are made based on "Level of Service" designations. "Level I" and "Level II" include papers, guidelines, models, and templates that have a one-time cost for development, and can be repetitively used by all jurisdictions to meet local needs. Aggresive use of these services reduces the need for Level III on-site service delivery. These efforts will be the primary source of an average cost savings of $20,000 per delivery by 2006.

Evidence: ?? HSPTAP Delivery Protocols (August 10, 2004) ?? HSPTAP Design and Development Protocols (August 10, 2004) ?? HSPTAP Strategic Plan (June 2004) ?? Technical Assistance Catalog (August 6, 2004) ?? Technical Assistance Work Plans (Appendix B, HSPTAP Delivery Protocols - August 10, 2004) ?? Virtual Technical Assistance Center (in development) "

Does the program collaborate and coordinate effectively with related programs?

Explanation: The Technical Assistance Program coordinates and teams with several agencies and organizations to eliminate redundancy among programs, coordinate new initiatives, and broaden the service delivery system. Current partnerships include the Federal Highway Watch Association; DHS IAIP, FEMA, and SAFECOM; and DHS Federal Bureau of Investigation and COPS. Some Federal, State, local, and private entities possess existing technical assistance programs that adequately fill gaps. In these instances, the TA Program serves as the one stop shop for information sharing. Jurisdictions can rely on the Technical Assistance Program to provide information regarding programs that address all Departmental and national requirements housed in all Federal agencies. Example: The ICTAP program coordinates and collaborates fully with SAFECOM regarding technology and interoperability standards assistance, with service design, development, and delivery conducted collaboratively.

Evidence: ?? State Homeland Security Strategies (December 31, 2003) ?? Urban Area Homeland Security Strategies (November 30, 2003) ?? HSPTAP Delivery Protocols (August 10, 2004) ?? HSPTAP Design and Development Protocols (August 10, 2004) ?? HSPTAP Status Reports (weekly, monthly, quarterly, annually) ?? HSPTAP Strategic Plan (June 2004) ?? Technical Assistance Catalog (August 6, 2004) ?? Technical Assistance Request and Delivery Tracking System"

Does the program use strong financial management practices?

Explanation: There are no outstanding material weaknesses, and the Technical Assistance Program contracts are subject to strong financial management protocols. For each technical assistance service request, the technical assistance program manager provides the assigned technical assistance provider with a work order. The assigned technical assistance provider submits a detailed Technical Assistance Work Plan (which includes specific budget details) to the Technical Assistance Program Manager for approval. Once approved, the technical assistance program manager gives the technical assistance provider permission to execute the work plan. Technical assistance providers submit monthly invoices that provide explicit detail about the expenditure of funds against the approved work plan. This process allows technical assistance managers and COTR to track and manage the overall value of the contract.

Evidence: ?? HSPTAP Delivery Protocols (August 10, 2004) ?? HSPTAP Design and Development Protocols (August 10, 2004) ?? HSPTAP Status Reports (weekly, monthly, quarterly, annually) ?? HSPTAP Strategic Plan (June 2004) ?? Technical Assistance Catalog (August 6, 2004) ?? Technical Assistance Work Plans (Appendix B, HSPTAP Delivery Protocols - August 10, 2004) ?? Technical Assistance Request and Delivery Tracking System"

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

Explanation: At its inception in FY 1999, the Technical Assistance Program lacked rigorous protocols for the allocation and oversight of services. During the significant growth of FY2004, protocols and evaluation systems were developed to address these deficiencies. With the continued growth of the Technical Assistance Program, the implementation of the Virtual Technical Assistance Center (VTAC) will further enhance the ability of the Technical Assistance Program to maximize efficiency, increase delivery capacities, and rapidly respond to requests.

Evidence: ?? FY05 Future Year Homeland Security Plan (FYHSP) ?? State Homeland Security Strategies (December 31, 2003) ?? Urban Area Homeland Security Strategies (November 30, 2003) ?? HSPTAP Status Reports (weekly, monthly, quarterly, annually) ?? Technical Assistance Request and Delivery Tracking System ?? Virtual Technical Assistance Center (in development)"

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

Explanation: The TA long-term performance do not clearly demonstrate progress towards its goals, and the proposed targets are not ambitious.

Evidence: ?? Target Capabilities List: Version 1.1 (April 6, 2005) ?? State Homeland Security Strategies (December 31, 2003) ?? Urban Area Homeland Security Strategies (November 30, 2003) ?? HSPTAP Delivery Protocols (August 10, 2004) ?? HSPTAP Design and Development Protocols (August 10, 2004) ?? HSPTAP Status Reports (weekly, monthly, quarterly, annually) ?? HSPTAP Strategic Plan (June 2004) ?? Technical Assistance Request and Delivery Tracking System ?? Technical Assistance Catalog (August 6, 2004) ?? Virtual Technical Assistance Center (in development) "

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

Explanation: The TA program has met or exceeded its annual targets, and is expected to meet current annual goals. From 2001 - 2004, the number of technical assistance requests fulfilled increased from 42 to 189 (a total increase of 147 deliveries). Projections based on first and second quarter FY2005 data indicates that the Technical Assistance Program will exceed the FY 2005 target of 400 (a projected increase of 211+). Average satisfaction has also increased by 11% from 2001-2004. Projections based on first and second quarter FY2005 data indicates that the Technical Assistance Program will exceed the FY 2005 targets.

Evidence: ?? Information Bulletin #129 (August 2004) ?? State Homeland Security Strategies (December 31, 2003) ?? Urban Area Homeland Security Strategies (November 30, 2003) ?? HSPTAP After-Action Reports (Appendix E, HSPTAP Delivery Protocols - August 10, 2004) ?? FY2004 and FY2005 Training and Exercise Improvement Plans ?? HSPTAP Technical Assistance Service Evaluations (Appendix D, HSPTAP Delivery Protocols (August 10, 2004) ?? HSPTAP Strategic Plan (June 2004) ?? Technical Assistance Request and Delivery Tracking System

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

Explanation: The Technical Assistance Program has demonstrated improved efficiencies by reducing average response time by three full business days from 2002 -2004. In addition, increased cost effectiveness is demonstrated by reducing delivery cost by a total of $11,000 per service from 2001-2004. Projections based on first and second quarter FY2005 data indicates that the Technical Assistance Program will exceed the FY2005 efficiency measure targets. {need to validate data to confirm savings} Reallocations of SLGCP funding in FY05 greatly expanded the program's resources, as SLGCP determined that the program could not achieve its goals within budgeted or appropriated resources.

Evidence: " ?? FY2004 and FY2005 SLGCP Budget ?? HSPTAP Delivery Protocols (August 10, 2004) ?? HSPTAP Design and Development Protocols (August 10, 2004) ?? HSPTAP Status Reports (weekly, monthly, quarterly, annually) ?? HSPTAP Strategic Plan (June 2004) ?? Technical Assistance Approval Board Reports and Minutes (June 2005) ?? Technical Assistance Request and Delivery Tracking System ?? Virtual Technical Assistance Center (in development)"

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

Explanation: There have been no systematic comparisons of the quality of Technical Assistance Program services in comparison to similar services provided by the private sector or other Federal agencies. However, as Federal, state, and local agencies begin implementation of the National Preparedness Goal, TAP is favorably positioned to foster harmonized and systematic homeland security planning.

Evidence:  

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

Explanation: The Technical Assistance Program has not been the subject of an independent evaluation.

Evidence: