Agency slow in applying technology to protect federal buildings, GAO says

Federal Protective Services has made visible but limited progress in improving its risk management program -- which addresses threats to agency buildings -- and in the transfer of its programs to new authorities within the Homeland Security Department, according to a pair of recent Government Accountability Office reports.

The troubled FPS, whose primarily contractor workforce is responsible for the safety of more than 1 million federal employees and members of the public who work in and visit more than 9,000 federal facilities, has struggled to integrate a new Web-based risk assessment management program called RAMP to help it set priorities in managing guards. The agency also is in the throes of transitioning from the Immigration and Customs Enforcement bureau to the National Protection and Programs Directorate.

In March, the agency was embarrassed when an undetected improvised explosive device was discovered near the McNamara Federal Building in Detroit. In July, FPS Director L. Eric Patterson told a House subcommittee that his agency's four-year effort to develop a long-recommended centralized tool for prioritizing threats to federal buildings "was not cost-effective and has not fulfilled its original goals." FPS is now considering a new contractor.

In a report on the risk assessment system, GAO said, RAMP is "over budget, behind schedule, and cannot be used to complete [facility security assessments] and reliable guard inspections as intended. RAMP's contract award amount totals $57 million, almost three times more than the $21 million original development contract amount."

The report noted, "RAMP's costs increased, in part because FPS changed the original system requirements and the contractor had to add additional resources to accommodate the changes. FPS also has experienced delays in developing and implementing RAMP, as it is almost two years behind its original July 2009 implementation date."

GAO reviewed RAMP's progress against DHS' security standards such as the National Infrastructure Protection Plan and the Interagency Security Committee's Physical Security Criteria for Federal Facilities. It concluded that FPS had not sufficiently evaluated technological changes since the contract for RAMP was awarded and has not adequately considered alternative systems.

To accelerate the process of making RAMP usable, GAO recommends that FPS take the following steps:

  • Evaluate whether it is cost-effective to finish developing RAMP; increase the use of project management best practices by managing requirements and conducting user acceptance testing.
  • Establish a process for verifying data on federal facilities and guard training and certification before entering them into RAMP.
  • Develop interim solutions for facility and guard inspections while addressing RAMP's problems.

Steve Amitay, legislative counsel for the National Association of Security Companies, many of whose members are under contract with FPS, said in an email to Government Executive, "Effective FPS management and tracking of guard records will benefit FPS, its client agencies and security contractors. FPS security contractors have considerable expertise and working experience in the management and tracking of officer training and certification records, and contractors play a critical role in supplying and maintaining FPS guard records," he said.

But security contractors were not consulted during the development of RAMP, Amitay added, "and some of problems with RAMP noted by the GAO were apparent to security contractors from the beginning. As FPS goes forward in its post-RAMP efforts to develop an effective interactive database for tracking officer records, it behooves FPS to consult and work with its security contractor partners."

David Wright, president of the American Federation of Government Employees' National Federal Protective Service Union, which has long been vocal about RAMP's shortcomings, said he would support an investigation into criminal behavior or misconduct.

"I find it disturbing -- although not surprising -- that the GAO uncovered that the contract acquisitions process was not followed at all levels," he said. "At the very least, this constitutes nonfeasance of duties, if not malfeasance."

Wright said he is optimistic about the next version of RAMP, particularly since his union and workers have been involved. "I am concerned with the staying power of individuals in the FPS hierarchy that allowed this debacle to occur in the first place."

In a separate report on the transfer of FPS out of ICE, GAO said that "since October 2009, FPS' facility protection mission and 13 of 18 mission-support functions have transferred from ICE to NPPD; however, the transition schedule for the five remaining mission-support functions has been delayed."

Functions that have been transferred include human capital and budget formulation. Those that have not include information technology services, business continuity and emergency preparedness, facilities, personnel security and equal employment opportunity.

GAO recommended a more disciplined schedule for the transition, particularly in IT services, and DHS officials agreed. "If not properly planned and effectively implemented," the auditors said, "the transition could not only hamper FPS' ability to carry out its mission, but impede its progress in addressing its long-standing challenges."

The union told Congress in 2009 that failure to provide enough money -- and transfer money from ICE to NPPD -- would make for a slow and inefficient transition, Wright said. "Our warnings were obviously not heeded, and the GAO has spelled out the consequences," he said. "As an example, the reliance on the ICE computer network and IT staff has directly contributed to the failure of RAMP."

Stay up-to-date with federal news alerts and analysis — Sign up for GovExec's email newsletters.
FROM OUR SPONSORS
JOIN THE DISCUSSION
Close [ x ] More from GovExec
 
 

Thank you for subscribing to newsletters from GovExec.com.
We think these reports might interest you:

  • Forecasting Cloud's Future

    Conversations with Federal, State, and Local Technology Leaders on Cloud-Driven Digital Transformation

    Download
  • The Big Data Campaign Trail

    With everyone so focused on security following recent breaches at federal, state and local government and education institutions, there has been little emphasis on the need for better operations. This report breaks down some of the biggest operational challenges in IT management and provides insight into how agencies and leaders can successfully solve some of the biggest lingering government IT issues.

    Download
  • Communicating Innovation in Federal Government

    Federal Government spending on ‘obsolete technology’ continues to increase. Supporting the twin pillars of improved digital service delivery for citizens on the one hand, and the increasingly optimized and flexible working practices for federal employees on the other, are neither easy nor inexpensive tasks. This whitepaper explores how federal agencies can leverage the value of existing agency technology assets while offering IT leaders the ability to implement the kind of employee productivity, citizen service improvements and security demanded by federal oversight.

    Download
  • IT Transformation Trends: Flash Storage as a Strategic IT Asset

    MIT Technology Review: Flash Storage As a Strategic IT Asset For the first time in decades, IT leaders now consider all-flash storage as a strategic IT asset. IT has become a new operating model that enables self-service with high performance, density and resiliency. It also offers the self-service agility of the public cloud combined with the security, performance, and cost-effectiveness of a private cloud. Download this MIT Technology Review paper to learn more about how all-flash storage is transforming the data center.

    Download
  • Ongoing Efforts in Veterans Health Care Modernization

    This report discusses the current state of veterans health care

    Download

When you download a report, your information may be shared with the underwriters of that document.