Security At Any Price?
Homeland protection isn't just Job 1 in Washington; it's more like a big old government ATM
"Whipsawed." Investigators have repeatedly questioned whether the agency is spending its money wisely. Congress's Government Accountability Office, the DHS inspector general's office, and congressional investigators have issued reports that have repeatedly highlighted a pattern of troubling spending decisions. Early on, DHS was plagued by the speed with which the department was put together after September 11 and the urgency of its mission to secure American airports, seaports, and borders. "In many ways, we were doing this whole thing with a gun to our heads," says Bob Liscouski, DHS's former assistant secretary for infrastructure protection. "We were basically being whipsawed between al Qaeda on one side and Congress with their deadlines on the other."
The tight timetables resulted in accelerated purchases of equipment that ultimately proved unable to do the job, some observers say. The machines that screen checked baggage for explosives, for instance, incorrectly flag 15 to 30 percent of all luggage, a recent news report says. Portals that check for radiation at ports and border crossings are also plagued by flaws (box, Page 28).
Former DHS Inspector General Clark Kent Ervin says the agency's performance has been marred by "several consistent, thematic problems" that show up in many contracts--including an absence of competitive bidding or insufficient oversight of the many contractor employees who work at DHS. The Transportation Security Administration overpaid Boeing by $49 million on a contract to install baggage-screening equipment, Ervin says. Boeing spokesman Fernando Vivanco insists that "the TSA, not Boeing, set the terms of the contract." And a no-bid contract had the TSA spending $461,000 on a party to celebrate the agency's first birthday.
During his almost two-year tenure as inspector general, Ervin was considered by many a junkyard dog. His replacement, Richard Skinner, has initiated another round of biting critiques. Last month, he released a report detailing "unethical and possibly illegal" expenditures made by TSA employees outfitting an operations center in suburban Virginia. Inadequately trained employees spent $500,000 on silk plants and artwork. Kitchens were outfitted with Sub-Zero refrigerators costing $3,000 each. And the belly of the building was filled with a 4,200-square-foot gym costing $300,000. "This is just déjà vu all over again," Ervin said of the revelations. "TSA is rapidly becoming the poster child for contracting dysfunction."
But some progress is evident. DHS has significantly increased its staff for contract oversight. At TSA just three years ago, for instance, a lone employee supervised performance of all of the agency's contracts. Today, 54 employees are assigned to contract-oversight duties. DHS has also established an Investment Review Board comprising top-level officials to keep an eye on, among other things, acquisitions that cost more than $100 million. But the board, says Ervin, is a "toothless tiger." A recent GAO report said the board didn't always do a good job establishing the costs of future investments and that lines of authority over procurement were still confused at DHS. But Mike Sullivan, the chief author of the GAO report, says the agency has been responsive to GAO's recommendations.
advertisement
