Homeland Security Advisory Council 

Quadrennial Review Advisory Committee 

Final Report 

27 May 2010 
Executive Summary 

This report summarizes the observations and recommendations of the Homeland 

Security Advisory Council’s (HSAC) Quadrennial Review Advisory Committee 

(QRAC), which was established to provide advice to the Department of Homeland 

Security (DHS) throughout the Quadrennial Homeland Security Review (QHSR) process. 

The QRAC met nine times during the period from December 2008 through December 

2009. QRAC progress reports were made to the HSAC in public session on June 5, 2009, 

and February 3, 2010. In the nine QRAC meetings the Committee received detailed 

information from DHS leadership regarding the review process design, analysis, and 

interim conclusions; individual QRAC members provided independent feedback and 

advice throughout the course of these discussions. This document focuses on the product 

of the review, the QHSR Report, with particular emphasis on its alignment with statutory 

guidance. 

The QRAC observed that the QHSR Report describes an enterprise-level vision 

for the national homeland security enterprise and provides a necessary foundation for 

follow-on planning efforts. Given the diversity and complexity of the enterprise, the 

relative immaturity of this national mission, and the fact that this was the first-ever 

quadrennial review, the Report understandably focuses on the need for unity of purpose 

across the diverse stakeholder communities to drive the unity of effort required for 

mission success. The Report re-frames the homeland security mission and re-sets the 

strategic context through the definition of new core mission areas together with 

associated strategic outcomes, goals and objectives. In short, the Report delivers on 

critical statutory mandates, but falls short in some areas. 

Based on its review of the QHSR Report, the QRAC generated three over-arching 

recommendations: 

I. Define and operationalize the strategic framework -- Security, Resilience, and 

Customs and Exchange -- by prescribing priorities and establishing clear linkage 

to the key strategic outcomes for each core mission area and aligning subordinate 

goals and objectives; 

II. Map goals to objectives for each core mission area and key stakeholder 

communities so as to delineate their respective roles and responsibilities; and, 

III. Translate the goals and objectives for each mission area into measurable 

outcomes and establish meaningful near-, mid-, and long-term targets to drive 

alignment of the Department’s priorities, structures, systems, and resources. 

These recommendations, which are described more completely in the final section of this 

report, target areas in which the QRAC identifies critical next steps that build on the 

foundation established in the Report. 

2 
Background 

The QRAC was established as a subcommittee of the HSAC to provide 

recommendations and advice to the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security 

(DHS) during the Quadrennial Homeland Security Review (QHSR), which was mandated 

by section 707 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (as amended) (Appendix A). The 

QRAC served as an objective forum in which committee members shared independent 

advice in the form of ideas and feedback on key issues and questions that arose 

throughout the QHSR process. The QHSR culminated in a report that was delivered to 

Congress on 1 February 2010; this document provides key observations of the QRAC 

with respect to that report and the process by which it was prepared. 

The QRAC is comprised of a diverse and representative membership that brought 

a wide range of experience and expertise to the task. A committee member list is 

provided in Appendix B. 

The QRAC met nine times during the period from December 2008 through 

December 2009. Meeting agendas are summarized in Appendix C. During these 

meetings the Committee received detailed information from DHS leadership and the 

DHS Office of Strategic Plans, which administered the QHSR, regarding the review 

process design, analysis, and interim conclusions. QRAC members provided 

independent advice on working documents beginning with the Terms of Reference and 

continuing through the analysis and leadership review phases of the QHSR. The QRAC 

also participated in the public portion of the review—the “National Dialogues on the 

QHSR”—which was conducted by DHS in partnership with the National Academy for 

Public Administration. 

This document was completed subsequent to public release of the QHSR Report 

and summarizes the views of the QRAC with regard to the contents of the Report. The 

framework for this summary derives from the QHSR authorizing legislation. 

3 
QHSR Report Contents 

Statutory language delineates broad categories, ranging from threats considered to 

Departmental response, to be addressed in the QHSR Report. The QRAC observed that 

the Report focused primarily on creation of a strategic framework together with missionlevel goals and objectives to foster unity of effort across the national homeland security 

enterprise; subsequent efforts, some of which are underway, are expected to address in 

greater detail issues relating to Departmental alignment with the national homeland 

security strategy. Given the diversity and complexity of the national homeland security 

enterprise, the relative immaturity of the mission, and the limited time available for the 

QHSR process, the QRAC concluded that the QHSR Report provides a necessary 

foundation for these follow-on efforts. The paragraphs that follow summarize the QRAC 

assessment of the QHSR Report with respect to each of the categories called out in the 

statute. 

Appendix B of the QHSR Report describes 

the review process and the main body of the Report 

summarizes the results of that process. During the 

review, DHS made a concerted effort and employed a variety of mechanisms to engage 

the diverse public and private sector stakeholder communities across the national 

homeland security enterprise, as indicated by1: 

Each report...shall include — 

(A) The results of the quadrennial 

homeland security review; 

• 231 Study Group participants from 42 DHS Components/Offices; 

• 37 Interagency Policy Committee (IPC)/Sub-IPC meetings involving 294 

participants from 26 Federal departments and agencies; 

• Solicitation of 118 stakeholder associations and receipt of 43 white papers; 

• Receipt of more than 3,000 comments from participants across 3 National 

Dialogues on the QHSR; and, 

• Convening an Executive Committee of senior leadership from stakeholder 

associations to provide feedback directly to Secretary Napolitano on QHSR 

results. 

While not privy to the details of all inputs received, the QRAC concluded that the QHSR 

Report represents a synthesis of review results that is designed to “set forth a shared 

vision of homeland security in order to achieve unity of purpose”2

 across the homeland 

security enterprise. 

 

1

 QHSR Report: Figure B-1. Constituency Participation in the QHSR, page B-1. 2

 QHSR Report: Executive Summary, page vii. 

4 
 Section II of the QHSR Report addresses 

threats in the context of a description of the current 

security environment and notes that homeland 

security “must be firmly embedded in and linked to 

broader national security concerns.”3 Thus, national homeland security interests are 

linked explicitly to broader national interests, which are discussed in the Report. Specific 

threats and hazards that challenge U.S. interests are described, together with an array of 

long-term trends that shape the operating environment for the homeland security mission. 

The QRAC concluded that the QHSR Report provides a balanced description of major 

challenges, including threats, to U.S. interests from a homeland security perspective. 

The report does, however, need to further define the essential elements and governance 

requirements of a comprehensive risk management framework to enable assessment and 

prioritization of the threats described. 

(B) A description of the threats to 

the assumed or defined national 

homeland security interests that 

were examined for the purposes 

of that review;

 The bulk of the QHSR Report is devoted to 

definition of a new strategic framework for homeland 

security and delineation of critical missions together 

with priorities for each. Five strategic outcomes are 

identified for each mission; mission-level goals and 

objectives provide a basis for subsequent stakeholder development of subordinate 

strategies. The QRAC concluded that the QHSR Report describes a national strategy for 

homeland security that includes planning guidance for use by stakeholder communities 

across the homeland security enterprise; this recognition of the importance of long-term 

planning is an encouraging development for the nascent national enterprise. 

(C) The national homeland 

security strategy, including a 

prioritized list of the critical 

homeland security missions of the 

Nation;

The QHSR Report traces the roots of homeland security “to concepts that 

originated with the founding of the Republic,”4 bolstering the rationale for moving 

beyond the terrorism-centric definition and strategy put forth in the immediate aftermath 

of 9/11. The strategic framework sets forth three key concepts—Security, Resilience, 

and Customs and Exchange—as a general foundation. This construct is inclusive in that 

it acknowledges the dependencies that exist among stakeholder communities. The 

construct also makes clear the tensions that exist within and between mission 

components—e.g. secure the border while expediting and enforcing lawful trade, travel, 

and immigration. The QRAC observed that follow-on work is needed to communicate 

and operationalize this foundational construct.

In framing homeland security, the Report describes the complexity of the 

enterprise and acknowledges that “no single entity is responsible for or directly manages 

all aspects of the enterprise.”5 In doing so, the Report implicitly acknowledges the 

 

3

 QHSR Report: II. Today’s Security Environment, page 5. 

4

 QHSR Report: III. Defining and Framing Homeland Security, p. 14. 

5

 Ibid, p. 13. 

5 
distribution of responsibility that will make difficult the achievement of effort that is 

required for mission success. The QRAC observed that follow-on work is needed to 

detail and cascade enterprise-wide mission-level goals and objectives defined in the 

Report down to specific public and private sector stakeholder communities in order to 

foster unity of effort. The nature of the enterprise and the wide diversity of threats that 

must be addressed require a systems understanding of our capabilities, and how and at 

what stage they can be most effectively employed against to prevent or mitigate threats. 

The QHSR Report acknowledges that 

“hundreds of thousands of people from across the 

Federal Government, State, local, tribal, and 

territorial governments, the private sector, and other 

nongovernmental organizations are responsible for 

executing”6

 the homeland security missions. In its 

Appendix A the Report includes a summary of roles 

and responsibilities of key stakeholders across the 

enterprise; the information was derived from existing 

statutes, Presidential directives, and other authorities, 

as well as from the National Infrastructure Protection 

Plan and the National Response Framework. The 

Report does not provide a mapping of these roles 

and responsibilities to the homeland security 

missions delineated in the main body, as would be 

required to deliver the content requested in the statute. Instead, the Preface 

acknowledges that the Report is intended to provide “a basis for a deeper review of the 

many programs and budgets required to execute the full range of homeland security 

missions.”7

 The QRAC concluded that the QHSR Report represents a useful and 

necessary first step toward delivering the content requested in statute; further work is 

required to deconflict and potentially supplement existing policies and directives to 

include the mapping of roles and 

responsibilities. 

(D) A description of the 

interagency cooperation, 

preparedness of Federal 

response assets, infrastructure, 

budget plan, and other elements 

of the homeland security program 

and policies of the Nation 

associated with the national 

homeland security strategy, 

required to execute successfully 

the full range of missions called 

for in the applicable national 

homeland security strategy 

referred to in subsection (b)(1) 

and the homeland security 

mission areas outlined under 

subsection (b)(2);

(E) An assessment of the organizational 

alignment of the Department with the 

applicable national homeland security 

strategy referred to in subsection (b)(1) and 

the homeland security mission areas 

outlined under subsection (b)(2), including 

the Department’s organizational structure, 

management systems, budget and 

accounting systems, human resources 

systems, procurement systems, and 

physical and technical infrastructure;

The QHSR Report states that “an 

important “bottom-up” review of DHS was 

begun in November 2009 that will look to align 

the Department’s programmatic activities and 

organizational structure with the mission sets 

and goals identified in the QHSR. That review 

is scheduled to be completed in the first 

 

6

 QHSR Report: IV. Overview of the Homeland Security Missions, page 19. 

7

 QHSR Report: Preface, page v. 

6 
calendar quarter of 2010.”8

 The Report provides a basis for the bottom-up review, but 

because the goals and objectives are defined from an enterprise perspective it does not 

levy explicit requirements on DHS components. The QRAC concluded that a gap 

remains between the contents of the QHSR Report and the guidance required to enable 

DHS to assess organizational alignment and refine strategic priorities and benchmarks. 

The “bottom-up” review must be completed and reported out promptly so that the 

activities and structure can be aligned with mission sets and goals, or the QHSR Report 

will languish. 

The QHSR Report does not discuss the status of 

cooperation among Federal agencies, but it does 

acknowledge the need to “strengthen the ability of 

Federal departments and agencies to support homeland 

security missions.”9 The QRAC observes that in order 

to assess cooperation among Federal agencies with respect to homeland security it will 

be necessary to map the respective roles and responsibilities outlined in Appendix A of 

the Report to the missions, goals, and objectives delineated in Section V. This needs to 

be accomplished as soon as possible in order for the QHSR Report to be meaningful and 

worthwhile. 

(F) A discussion of the status of 

cooperation among Federal 

agencies in the effort to 

promote national homeland 

security;

The QHSR Report does not discuss the current 

status of inter-governmental cooperation, but it does 

highlight actions needed to continue the maturation and 

strengthening of the homeland security enterprise. 

Section VI of the report contains an array of objectives 

derived from already-known issues that impede 

achievement of unity of effort across the enterprise. The 

QRAC observes that because of the diffuse and 

persistent nature of many of the issues, follow-on work is needed to build the unity of 

purpose that is a necessary prelude to unity of effort. And a precursor to that exercise is 

sharper delineation of the respective roles and responsibilities of the entities comprising 

the homeland security enterprise. 

(G) A discussion of the status of 

cooperation between the 

Federal Government and State, 

local and tribal governments in 

preventing terrorist attacks and 

preparing for emergency 

response to threats to national 

homeland security;

The QHSR Report includes assumptions 

concerning the security environment10 that influenced 

identification and prioritization of the mission-level 

goals and objectives. It also sets forth in Section III a 

new strategic framework that includes concepts not 

(H) An explanation of any 

underlying assumptions used in 

conducting the review; and

 

8

 QHSR Report: Preface, page v. 

9

 QHSR Report: Section VI. Maturing and Strengthening the Homeland Security Enterprise, page 73. 10 QHSR Report: Section II. Today’s Security Environment, page 9. 

7 
previously considered as core to the homeland security mission space. Finally, the 

Report frames the QHSR as “the beginning of a multi-step process”11 that is required to 

help Congress “better understand the resource and organizational implications of an 

evolving strategic view of homeland security.”12 The QRAC concluded that while the 

QHSR Report does not completely address expectations levied in statute, given the 

complexity and relative immaturity of the national homeland security enterprise, the 

Report does deliver an essential prelude to the needed enterprise-wide planning efforts. 

QRAC Recommendations 

 The QHSR Report documenting the results of the first quadrennial homeland 

security review represents an important milestone in maturation of the mission and 

provides a sound foundation for the important work that must follow. Based on its 

review of the Report, the QRAC offers the below three recommendations that focus on 

areas in which the QHSR Report requires additional follow up work. 

I. Define and operationalize the strategic framework—Security, Resilience, and 

Customs and Exchange—by prescribing priorities and establishing clear 

linkage to the key strategic outcomes for each core mission area and aligning 

subordinate goals and objectives. 

The QHSR Report identifies three keys – Security, Resilience, and Customs and 

Exchange -- as the foundation for a comprehensive approach to homeland 

security, but it does not explicitly link the concepts to the outcomes, goals, and 

objectives that follow. Taken individually, these concepts aid in the formulation 

of strategies to achieve the key outcomes for each core mission area. Taken 

collectively, the concepts form a holistic framework in order to prioritize 

strategies to effectively manage risks across the diverse spectrum of threats to 

homeland security interests. While the QHSR Report makes clear the need to 

execute core missions in a way that integrates and balances these concepts, most 

goals and objectives are stated in absolute terms and leave unresolved the issue of 

measuring mission success. A unified enterprise framework is needed to underpin 

resource allocation as well as strategy execution by stakeholders distributed 

across the homeland security enterprise. 

II. Map goals to objectives for each core mission area and key stakeholder 

communities so as to delineate their respective roles and responsibilities. 

The QHSR Report delivers the basis for an enterprise-wide vision of homeland 

security that is intended to foster unity of purpose; a vital next step is the 

 

11 QHSR Report: Preface, page v. 

12 QHSR Report: Preface, page v. 

8 
delineation of key roles and responsibilities for individual goals and objectives to 

generate unity of effort. A comprehensive mapping is needed to enable 

assessment of the current state of cooperation and coordination between all public 

and private sector stakeholder communities, to identify potential gaps and/or 

conflicts in current policies and directives from an enterprise perspective, and to 

underpin follow-on planning efforts. The mapping must make clear the 

responsibilities governmental, non-governmental, and private sector entities, as 

well as those of individuals, families and communities. In addition, such a 

mapping would be of value in analyzing the results of the already underway 

“bottom-up” review of the Department of Homeland Security to assess 

departmental alignment with the goals and objectives defined in the Report. 

III. Translate the goals and objectives for each mission area into measurable 

outcomes and establish meaningful near-, mid-, and long-term targets to 

drive alignment of the Department’s priorities, structures, systems, and 

resources. 

Although responsibilities for the homeland security mission are distributed 

throughout the national enterprise, the Department of Homeland Security has a 

unique role as the federal agency charged with the mission by statute. As the 

principal author of the QHSR Report, it is incumbent on the Department to lead 

the charge toward homeland security mission success through optimal allocation 

of all available resources against prioritized mission outcomes. 

 

9 
Appendix A: QHSR Statute 

TITLE XXIV--MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS 

SEC. 2401. QUADRENNIAL HOMELAND SECURITY REVIEW. 

(a) Review Required - Title VII of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 is 

amended by adding at the end the following: 

`SEC. 707. QUADRENNIAL HOMELAND SECURITY REVIEW. 

`(a) Requirement-` 

(1) QUADRENNIAL REVIEWS REQUIRED- In fiscal year 2009, 

and every 4 years thereafter, the Secretary shall conduct a review 

of the homeland security of the Nation (in this section referred to as 

a `quadrennial homeland security review').` 

(2) SCOPE OF REVIEWS- Each quadrennial homeland security 

review shall be a comprehensive examination of the homeland 

security strategy of the Nation, including recommendations 

regarding the long-term strategy and priorities of the Nation for 

homeland security and guidance on the programs, assets, 

capabilities, budget, policies, and authorities of the Department.` 

(3) CONSULTATION- The Secretary shall conduct each 

quadrennial homeland security review under this subsection in 

consultation with--`(A) the heads of other Federal agencies, 

including the Attorney General, the Secretary of State, the 

Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of Health and Human 

Services, the Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary of 

Agriculture, and the Director of National Intelligence;`(B) key 

officials of the Department; and`(C) other relevant governmental 

and nongovernmental entities, including State, local, and tribal 

government officials, members of Congress, private sector 

representatives, academics, and other policy experts.` 

(4) RELATIONSHIP WITH FUTURE YEARS HOMELAND 

SECURITY PROGRAM- The Secretary shall ensure that each 

review conducted under this section is coordinated with the Future 

Years Homeland Security Program required under section 874.` 

(b) Contents of Review- In each quadrennial homeland security 

review, the Secretary shall--` 

10 
(1) delineate and update, as appropriate, the national homeland 

security strategy, consistent with appropriate national and 

Department strategies, strategic plans, and Homeland Security 

Presidential Directives, including the National Strategy for 

Homeland Security, the National Response Plan, and the 

Department Security Strategic Plan;` 

(2) outline and prioritize the full range of the critical homeland 

security mission areas of the Nation;` 

(3) describe the interagency cooperation, preparedness of Federal 

response assets, infrastructure, budget plan, and other elements of 

the homeland security program and policies of the Nation 

associated with the national homeland security strategy, required to 

execute successfully the full range of missions called for in the 

national homeland security strategy described in paragraph (1) and 

the homeland security mission areas outlined under paragraph (2);` 

(4) identify the budget plan required to provide sufficient resources 

to successfully execute the full range of missions called for in the 

national homeland security strategy described in paragraph (1) and 

the homeland security mission areas outlined under paragraph (2);` 

(5) include an assessment of the organizational alignment of the 

Department with the national homeland security strategy referred to 

in paragraph (1) and the homeland security mission areas outlined 

under paragraph (2); and` 

(6) review and assess the effectiveness of the mechanisms of the 

Department for executing the process of turning the requirements 

developed in the quadrennial homeland security review into an 

acquisition strategy and expenditure plan within the Department.` 

(c) Reporting-` 

(1) IN GENERAL- Not later than December 31 of the year in which 

a quadrennial homeland security review is conducted, the 

Secretary shall submit to Congress a report regarding that 

quadrennial homeland security review.` 

11 
(2) CONTENTS OF REPORT- Each report submitted under 

paragraph (1) shall include--` 

(A) the results of the quadrennial homeland security review;` 

(B) a description of the threats to the assumed or defined 

national homeland security interests of the Nation that were 

examined for the purposes of that review;` 

(C) the national homeland security strategy, including a 

prioritized list of the critical homeland security missions of 

the Nation;` 

(D) a description of the interagency cooperation, 

preparedness of Federal response assets, infrastructure, 

budget plan, and other elements of the homeland security 

program and policies of the Nation associated with the 

national homeland security strategy, required to execute 

successfully the full range of missions called for in the 

applicable national homeland security strategy referred to in 

subsection (b)(1) and the homeland security mission areas 

outlined under subsection (b)(2);` 

(E) an assessment of the organizational alignment of the 

Department with the applicable national homeland security 

strategy referred to in subsection (b)(1) and the homeland 

security mission areas outlined under subsection (b)(2), 

including the Department's organizational structure, 

management systems, budget and accounting systems, 

human resources systems, procurement systems, and 

physical and technical infrastructure;` 

(F) a discussion of the status of cooperation among Federal 

agencies in the effort to promote national homeland 

security;` 

(G) a discussion of the status of cooperation between the 

Federal Government and State, local, and tribal 

governments in preventing terrorist attacks and preparing for 

emergency response to threats to national homeland 

security;` 

(H) an explanation of any underlying assumptions used in 

conducting the review; and` 

(I) any other matter the Secretary considers appropriate.` 

12 
(3) PUBLIC AVAILABILITY- The Secretary shall, consistent with the 

protection of national security and other sensitive matters, make 

each report submitted under paragraph (1) publicly available on the 

Internet website of the Department.` 

(d) Authorization of Appropriations- There are authorized to be 

appropriated such sums as may be necessary to carry out this 

section.'. 

(b) Preparation for Quadrennial Homeland Security Review- 

(1) IN GENERAL- During fiscal years 2007 and 2008, the Secretary 

of Homeland Security shall make preparations to conduct the first 

quadrennial homeland security review under section 707 of the 

Homeland Security Act of 2002, as added by subsection (a), in 

fiscal year 2009, including--(A) determining the tasks to be 

performed;(B) estimating the human, financial, and other resources 

required to perform each task;(C) establishing the schedule for the 

execution of all project tasks;(D) ensuring that these resources will 

be available as needed; and(E) all other preparations considered 

necessary by the Secretary. 

(2) REPORT- Not later than 60 days after the date of enactment of 

this Act, the Secretary shall submit to Congress and make publicly 

available on the Internet website of the Department of Homeland 

Security a detailed resource plan specifying the estimated budget 

and number of staff members that will be required for preparation of 

the first quadrennial homeland security review.(c) Clerical 

Amendment- The table of sections in section 1(b) of such Act is 

amended by inserting after the item relating to section 706 the 

following new item: `Sec. 707. Quadrennial Homeland Security 

Review.'. 

13 
Appendix B: QRAC Membership 

Quadrennial Review Advisory Committee (QRAC) 

of the 

Homeland Security Advisory Council (HSAC) 

Department of Homeland Security 

Frank J. Cilluffo (Chair) Associate Vice President, George Washington University 

and Director, Homeland Security Policy Institute 

Norm Augustine (Co-Chair) Retired Chair and CEO, Lockheed Martin Corporation 

Ruth David (Co-Chair) President and CEO, Analytic Services, Inc. 

Joel Bagnal President, Detica, Inc.

Jim Carafano Assistant Director and Senior Research Fellow, The Heritage 

 Foundation 

Carol DiBattiste Senior Vice President Privacy, Security, Compliance and 

Government Affairs, LexisNexis Group

Louis Freeh Senior Managing Partner, Freeh Group International

Susan Ginsburg Director, Mobility and Security Program, Migration Policy 

Institute 

David Heyman Director and Senior Fellow, Homeland Security Center for 

Strategic & International Studies 

“Dutch” Leonard Professor, Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University 

Kenneth Rapuano Director for Systems & Policy, The MITRE Corporation

Jim Schwartz Fire Chief, Arlington County 

Walt Slocombe Attorney, Caplan & Drysdale, Chartered 

Ellis Stanley Director of Western Emergency Management Services, Dewberry 

Seth Stodder President and CEO, Palindrome Strategies, LLC 

Bert Tussing, Professor and Director, Homeland Defense and Security Issues, US 

Army War College

Rajeev Venkayya Director, Global Health Delivery, The Bill and Melinda Gates 

 Foundation 

Emily Walker Consultant, Former 9/11 Commission. Member, London, GB 

Lawrence Wein Professor of Management Science, Stanford University 

Joe White Senior Vice President of Chapter Operations, American Red Cross 

John“Skip”Williams Provost and Vice President for Health Affairs, School of 

Medicine, George Washington University 

Glen Woodbury Director, Center for Homeland Defense and Security, Naval Post 

Graduate School 

Staff: 

Alan Cohn Deputy Assistant Secretary, Office of Policy Strategic Plans 

Kristen McCone Policy Analyst, Office of Policy Strategic Plans 

Charles Adams QRAC Designated Federal Official 

14 
Appendix C: QRAC Meeting Agendas 

December 8, 2008 

Introductions - Jeff Stern, Executive Director of the Homeland Security 

Advisory Counsel (HSAC) 

Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), Overview for New Members - 

Georgia Abraham, DHS Committee Management Officer 

Ethics Briefing - Maureen Gilmore, Office of General Counsel, Ethics 

DHS 101 Presentation - Chad Sweet, DHS Chief of Staff (COS) 

Swearing In of New Members by DHS COS Chad Sweet 

QHSR Process and Role of the QRAC - Alan Cohn, DAS DHS Office of 

Policy/Strategic Plans (OSP) 

QHSR Overview and Discussion - Alan Cohn, DAS OSP 

February 23, 2009

Welcome - Jeff Stern, Executive Director, HSAC 

Overview of the last meeting - QRAC Chairs: Ruth David, Frank Cilluffo, Norm 

Augustine 

Update on the last two months: transition briefings and the way forward – 

Alan Cohn, DAS OSP 

Discussion on the Study Plan - Alan Cohn, DAS OSP

Committee process discussion - QRAC Chairs 

DHS Secretary Napolitano, Discussion with the QRAC 

Discussion on Mission Sets & Outcomes - Alan Cohn, DAS OSP 

Conclusion & Next Steps - Alan Cohn, DAS OSP 

May 4, 2009 

Welcome - Jeff Stern, Executive Director, HSAC 

Overview of the last meeting - QRAC Chairs 

Update on the QHSR and PSD-1 - Alan Cohn, DAS OSP 

DHS Deputy Secretary Lute, Discussion with the QRAC

Discussion on Technology Options for the QHSR - QRAC Chairs 

Terms of Reference (TOR) Discussion - Alan Cohn, DAS OSP 

Discussion of QRAC involvement in QHSR Study Groups - Alan Cohn, DAS 

OSP and QRAC Chairs 

Conclusion & Next Steps - Alan Cohn, DAS OSP 

15 
July 21, 2009 

Welcome - Alan Cohn, DAS OSP 

Overview of previous meeting - QRAC Chairs 

Update on the QHSR and In Progress Reviews - Alan Cohn, DAS OSP 

Discussion on QHSR-QDR integration and overlap - Christine Wormuth, 

Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense and 

Americas’ Security Affairs 

Briefing by National Academy of Public Administration on public outreach 

to stakeholders - Lena Trudeau, Vice President, Kathleen Harrington, Project 

Director and Dan Munz, Sr. Research Associate 

Analytic Approach Presentation - Alan Cohn, DAS OSP 

Analytic Approach Discussion - QRAC Chairs 

Conclusion & Next Steps - Alan Cohn, DAS OSP 

August 10, 2009 

Welcome and Overview of the Meeting - QRAC Chairs 

Update on QHSR: Meetings with Senior Leadership, IPR #3, Outreach 

Efforts and White House Engagement - Alan Cohn, DAS OSP 

National Dialogue - QRAC Chairs 

Briefing on the Analytic Test - Alan Cohn, DAS OSP 

Briefing by the Risk Assessment Study Group - Tina Gabbrielli, Director 

Office of Risk Management and Analysis 

Discussion on the Narrative of the QHSR - David Heyman, A/S DHS Policy 

Conclusion & Next Steps - Alan Cohn, DAS OSP 

September 10, 2009 

Welcome and Overview of the Meeting - QRAC Chairs 

Update on QHSR: IPR #4, National Dialogue, White House and Senior 

Leadership Engagement, Executive Committee Plans and Final Clearance 

Process - Alan Cohn, DAS OSP 

Analytic Test Results – Dr. Penrose Albright and Dr. Holly Dockery, Subject 

Matter Experts 

Homeland Security Planning and Capabilities Briefing - Robert Pond, USCG 

and Robert Tuohy, Homeland Security Studies and Analysis Institute, Chairs of 

the Capabilities work group 

What is Homeland Security? Setting the Strategic Principles - Alan Cohn, 

DAS OSP 

Operationalizing Resiliency - Alan Cohn, DAS OSP 

Conclusion & Next Steps - Alan Cohn, DAS OSP 

16 
October 8, 2009 

Welcome and Overview of the Meeting - QRAC Chairs 

Update on QHSR: IPR #5, National Dialogue, Revised Timeline - Alan Cohn, 

DAS OSP 

Preliminary QHSR Results Overview Brief - Alan Cohn, DAS OSP 

Discussion: Strategic Outcomes and QHSR Decision making - Alan Cohn, 

DAS OSP 

The Draft QHSR Report - Alan Cohn, DAS OSP 

Determining Homeland Security Capabilities/Force Planning - Mitch 

Crosswait, Deputy Director, Strategic Requirements 

Bottom up Review (BUR) - John Whitley, Director, Program Analysis & 

Evaluation 

Next Steps - Mitch Crosswait, Deputy Director, Strategic Requirements 

November 9, 2009 

Welcome and Overview of the Meeting - QRAC Chairs 

Update on QHSR: Senior Leadership Meetings, Revised Timeline, Executive 

Committee - Alan Cohn, DAS OSP 

Updated QHSR Results Overview Brief - Alan Cohn, DAS OSP 

Presentation on Risk Methodology - Alan Cohn, DAS OSP 

Discussion with DHS Deputy Secretary Jane Holl Lute and Assistant 

Secretary Heyman 

Roll-Out Discussion - QRAC Chairs 

Next Steps for the QRAC - QRAC Chairs and Alan Cohn, DAS OSP 

December 8, 2009 

Welcome and Overview of the Meeting - QRAC Chairs 

Update on QHSR: Revised Timeline, Executive Committee, and Clearance 

Process - Alan Cohn, DAS OSP 

Discussion of the QHSR Results - Alan Cohn, DAS OSP 

Presentation on the Final Results of Stakeholder Outreach, National 

Academy of Public Administration - Lena Trudeau, Vice President, Dan Munz, 

Sr. Research Associate 

Roll Out Discussion - QRAC Chairs and Alan Cohn, DAS OSP 

Next Steps for the QRAC - QRAC Chairs 

Roll Out Discussion with the DHS Deputy Secretary Jane Holl Lute 

17