A Mission-Driven Strategy for DHS
Programming and budgeting by mission area, rather than by agency-component, could strengthen the Department of Homeland Security.
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) can manage its financial resources more efficiently by integrating its program and budget planning across four department-wide mission areas, according to Booz Allen Vice President Jack Mayer. In a speech delivered at the AIAA Homeland Security Conference in Monterey, California, in September, Mayer noted that DHS generally develops requirements and invests in programs through its individual agency-components.
Mayer proposed that the process be consolidated into DHS’ four basic mission areas:
- Border Security
- Domestic Protection
- Immigration Management
- Emergency Management.
Additional mission areas, such as Cybersecurity, could also be added. Each mission area would have a “highly transparent” oversight council that would be charged with planning and programming said Mayer. The council’s membership would consist of leaders from each of the agency-components that have a role in that particular mission area. A single agency-component might be represented in more than one mission area.
Mayer proposed this charter for each council:
- Identify the mission area portfolio. What are the component programs that, together, provide mission-area capabilities? What gaps exist? What redundancies? Do the proposed programs offer the best risk profile for the mission area within the fiscal constraints?
- Develop mission area metrics. How do you measure whether the portfolio effectively and efficiently provides the required capabilities?
- Review and approve component resource allocation plans. Do the plans follow the program decisions of the councils? Will the sum of the component resource allocations fall within the fiscal guidance?
- Route cross-mission-area issues to a higher level authority, a Mission Oversight Council. Are there multiple mission-area issues that require adjudication?
The Mission Oversight Council, which would be chaired by the deputy secretary of DHS, would ensure integration of the four mission areas, Mayer said. It would address crosscutting issues and identify redundant mission capabilities.
By considering what allocations serve the overall mission of the agency, rather than the particular needs of each component, DHS will be “better able to measure and manage acceptable levels of risk, and make more relevant investments,” Mayer told the conference. “With a holistic, rather than silo-ed approach, the Department can make tradeoffs within and between various DHS missions.”
Mayer described a similar mission integration initiative that occurred several years ago at the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). Prior to the changes, the agency had been widely criticized for being out of touch with taxpayers’ needs. The IRS had been operating under a “1950s geographic matrix,” in which each of 33 offices and 10 service centers attempted, often unsuccessfully, to meet the full range of taxpayers’ needs.
An integrated IRS-Booz Allen team developed a mission-driven strategy, Mayer said. The IRS was reorganized into four new operating divisions – or mission areas – each one focused on meeting the needs of a specific type of taxpayer. That mission-driven strategy, which succeeded at the IRS, would empower DHS to make the most effective, flexible and efficient use of its limited resources, Mayer told the conference.
“Components will have a clear, unambiguous understanding of their roles and responsibilities, both within the department and among the broader stakeholder community,” Mayer said.
He added: “This mission focus will allow DHS to articulate to all its public stakeholders, including Congress and the American people, how it is investing the money it is given.”
story posted September 30, 2009
