Testimony 

Before the Subcommittee on Oversight of Government 

Management, the Federal Workforce, and the District of 

Columbia of the Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs, U.S. Senate 

United States Government Accountability Office

GAO

For Release on Delivery 

Expected at 9:30 a.m. EDT 

Thursday, July 14, 2005 HOMELAND SECURITY

Managing First Responder 

Grants to Enhance 

Emergency Preparedness in 

the National Capital Region 

Statement of William O. Jenkins, Jr. 

Director, Homeland Security and Justice Issues 

GAO-05-889T 
What GAO Found

United States Government Accountability Office

Why GAO Did This Study

Highlights

Accountability Integrity Reliability

www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-05-889T.

To view the full product, including the scope 

and methodology, click on the link above. 

For more information, contact William O. 

Jenkins, Jr., 202-512-8757 or 

jenkinswo@gao.com. 

Highlights of GAO-05-889T, a testimony 

before the Subcommittee on Oversight of 

Government Management, the Federal 

Workforce, and the District of Columbia of 

the Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs; U.S. Senate 

July 14, 2005

HOMELAND SECURITY

Managing First Responder Grants to 

Enhance Emergency Preparedness in the 

National Capital Region 

A coordinated, targeted, and complementary use of federal homeland 

security grants is important in the NCR and elsewhere. These grants are one 

means of achieving an important goal: enhancing the ability of first 

responders to prevent, prepare for, respond to, and recover from terrorist 

and other incidents with well-planned, well-coordinated, and effective 

efforts that involve a variety of first responders from multiple jurisdictions. 

To oversee and coordinate federal emergency preparedness programs 

among federal, state, local, and regional authorities in the NCR, the 

Homeland Security Act established the Office for National Capital Region 

Coordination (ONCRC) within DHS. The ongoing security risk requires a 

comprehensive, coordinated, and carefully planned approach to the 

expenditure of federal first responder grants. This requires a NCR-wide 

strategic plan, performance goals, an assessment of preparedness gaps to 

guide priority setting, and continuing assessments of the progress made in 

closing identified gaps 

This testimony summarizes our prior work and provides information on the 

implementation of the three recommendations in our May 2004 report. First, 

we recommended that DHS work with the NCR jurisdictions to develop a 

coordinated strategic plan. DHS and NCR jurisdictions have completed a 

final draft for review that has been circulated to key stakeholders. Second, 

we recommended that DHS monitor’s the plans implementation, which must 

await a final plan. To implement and monitor the future plan, data will be 

needed regarding the funding available and used for implementing the plan 

and enhancing first responder capabilities in the NCR—data that is not 

currently routinely available. The NCR, through the District of Columbia’s 

Office of Homeland Security, has a system for tracking the use of Urban 

Area Security Initiative funds in the NCR as well as other homeland security 

grant funds available to Washington, D.C. However, the NCR does not 

currently track non-Urban Area Security Initiative funds available to and 

used by other NCR jurisdictions in an automated, uniform way. Rather, it 

obtains information about those funds through a variety of means, including 

teleconferences involving senior emergency preparedness officials. Third, 

we recommended that DHS identify and address preparedness gaps and 

evaluate the effectiveness of expenditures by conducting assessments based 

on established guidelines and standards. No systematic gap analysis has 

been completed for the region; however, by March 2006, the NCR plans to 

complete an effort to use the Emergency Management Accreditation 

Program (EMAP) as a means of conducting a gap analysis and assess NCR 

jurisdictions against EMAP’s national preparedness standards. The result 

would be a report on the NCR’s compliance with EMAP standards for 

emergency preparedness and an analysis of areas needing improvement to 

address in the short- and long-term. The ONCRC has not determined how 

this effort would be integrated with DHS’ capabilities-based planning and 

assessments for first responders, pending the issuance of DHS‘ final version 

of the National Preparedness Goal in October 2005. 

After the tragic events of 

September 11, 2001, the National 

Capital Region (NCR)—the District 

of Columbia and nearby 

jurisdictions in Maryland and 

Virginia—was recognized as a 

significant potential target for 

terrorism. In fiscal years 2002 and 

2003, about $340 million in 

emergency preparedness funds 

were allocated to NCR 

jurisdictions. In May 2004, GAO 

issued a report (GAO-04-433) that 

examined (1) the use of federal 

funds emergency preparedness 

funds allocated to NCR 

jurisdictions, (2) the challenges 

within the NCR to organizing and 

implementing efficient and 

effective preparedness programs, 

(3) any emergency preparedness 

gaps that remain in the NCR, and 

(4) the Department of Homeland 

Security’s (DHS) role in the NCR. 

The report made recommendations 

to the Secretary of DHS to enhance 

the management of first responder 

grants in the NCR. We also 

reported in September 2004 (GAO04-1009) that the NCR’s 

Governance Structure for the 

Urban Area Security Initiative 

could facilitate collaborative, 

coordinated, and planned 

management and use of federal 

funds for enhancing emergency 

preparedness, if implemented as 

planned DHS agreed to implement 

these recommendations. 
Page 1 GAO-05-889T 

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee: 

I appreciate the opportunity to participate in today’s hearing on efforts to 

use federal first responder grants to effectively enhance emergency 

preparedness in the National Capital Region (NCR). We reported on this 

issue twice in 2004 and testified before the House Committee on 

Government Reform on this topic in June 2004.1

 My statement today 

highlights the major findings and recommendations of our prior work and 

provides some updated information on the status of efforts by NCR 

jurisdictions and the Department of Homeland Security’s Office for 

National Capital Region Coordination (ONCRC) to implement our 

recommendations. 

A coordinated, targeted, and complementary use of federal homeland 

security grants is important in the NCR. These grants are one means of 

achieving an important goal: enhancing the ability of first responders to 

prevent where possible, prepare for, respond to, and recover from terrorist 

and other incidents with well-planned, well-coordinated, and effective 

efforts that involve a variety of first responders from multiple 

jurisdictions. 

The Office of National Capital Region Coordinator (ONCRC) was created 

by the Homeland Security Act. 2

 It is responsible for coordinating federal, 

state, and local efforts to secure the homeland in the NCR and for 

assessing and advocating for the state, local, and regional resources in the 

NCR needed to implement efforts to secure the homeland. 

In May 2004, we reported that ONCRC and the NCR faced three 

interrelated challenges in managing federal funds in a way that maximizes 

the increase in first responder capacities and preparedness while 

minimizing inefficiency and unnecessary duplication of expenditures. 

These challenges included the lack of (1) preparedness standards; (2) a 

coordinated regionwide plan for establishing first responder performance 

 1 Homeland Security: Management of First Responder Grants in the National Capital 

Region Reflects the Need for Coordinated Planning and Performance Goals, GAO-04-433, 

(Washington, D.C.: May 28, 2004); Homeland Security: Effective Regional Coordination 

Can Enhance Emergency Preparedness, GAO-04-1009 (Sept. 15, 2004); and Homeland 

Security: Coordinated Planning and Standards Needed to Better Manage First Responder 

Grants in the National Capital Region, GAO-04-904T, June 24, 2004). 

2

P.L. 107-296 §882 

Summary 
Page 2 GAO-05-889T 

goals, needs, and priorities, and assessing the benefits of expenditures in 

enhancing first responder capabilities; and (3) a readily available, reliable 

source of data on the funds available to first responders in the NCR and 

their use. Without the standards, a regionwide plan, and data on spending, 

it will be extremely difficult to determine whether NCR first responders 

have the ability to respond to threats and emergencies with well-planned, 

well-coordinated, and effective efforts that involve a variety of first 

responder disciplines from NCR jurisdictions. 

Our May 2004 report made three recommendations to the Secretary of the 

Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which the Department agreed to 

implement. Some progress has been made in implementing these 

recommendations, but none has yet been fully implemented: 

• Recommendation 1: Work with the NCR jurisdictions to develop a 

coordinated strategic plan to establish goals and priorities to enhance first 

responder capacities that can be used to guide the use of federal 

emergency preparedness funds. 

• Actions taken: According to a DHS ONCRC official, a final draft for 

review has been completed and circulated to key stakeholders. 

According to the Director, ONCRC, the plan will feature measurable 

goals, objectives, and performance measures. 

• Recommendation 2: Monitor the plan’s implementation to ensure that 

funds are used in a way that promotes effective expenditures that are not 

unnecessarily duplicative. 

• Actions taken: This recommendation cannot be implemented until the 

final strategic plan is in place. Importantly, to establish regional 

priorities and track progress in implementing the plan, data will be 

needed regarding the funding for and use of all first-responder grants 

available to NCR jurisdictions. The NCR, through the District of 

Columbia’s Office of Homeland Security, has a system for tracking the 

use of UASI funds for the NCR and other homeland security grant 

funds allocated to Washington, D.C., such as the State Homeland 

Security Grants. However, at this time, it does not have an automated, 

uniform system to track non-UASI grant funds available and used by 

other NCR jurisdictions. Instead, the Office obtains information 

through a variety of means, including teleconferences involving senior 

emergency preparedness officials. The ONCRC recognizes the need to 

develop a more systematic means of capturing all homeland security 

grant funds available to and used through the NCR and its member 

jurisdictions. 
Page 3 GAO-05-889T 

• Recommendation 3: Identify and address gaps in emergency preparedness 

and evaluate the effectiveness of expenditures in meeting those needs by 

adapting standards and preparedness guidelines based on likely scenarios 

for the NCR and conducting assessments based on them. 

• Actions taken: No systematic gap analysis has been completed for the 

region as a whole. However, by March 2006, the NCR plans to complete 

an effort to use the Emergency Management Accreditation Program 

(EMAP) as a means of conducting a gap analysis and assessing NCR 

jurisdictions against EMAP’s national preparedness standards. The 

result would be a report on the NCR’s compliance with EMAP 

standards for emergency preparedness and an analysis of areas 

needing improvement that can be addressed in the short- and longterm. How this effort would be integrated with DHS’ capabilities-based 

planning and assessments for first responders has not yet been 

determined, pending the issuance of DHS’ final version of the National 

Preparedness Goal in October 2005. 

The NCR now has a UASI governance structure that could provide the 

regionwide coordination that is necessary for obtaining information and 

the consensus or acquiescence of many stakeholders for drafting, 

completing, and implementing a regional preparedness plan. We believe 

that completing the implementation of the recommendations in our May 

2004 report would be a major step toward developing the structure, 

processes, and data needed to assess current first responder skills and 

capabilities in the NCR and monitor the success of efforts to close 

identified gaps and achieve designated performance goals for the NCR. 

Since the September 11, 2001, attacks, the federal government, state and 

local governments, and a range of independent research organizations 

have agreed on the need for a coordinated intergovernmental approach for 

allocating the nation’s resources to address the threat of terrorism and 

improve our security. The National Strategy for Homeland Security, 

released in 2002 following the proposal for DHS, emphasized a shared 

national responsibility for security involving close cooperation among all 

levels of government and acknowledged the complexity of developing a 

coordinated approach within our federal system of government and among 

a broad range of organizations and institutions involved in homeland 

security. The national strategy highlighted the challenge of developing 

complementary systems that avoid unintended duplication and increase 

collaboration and coordination so that public and private resources are 

better aligned for homeland security. 

Background 
Page 4 GAO-05-889T 

The national strategy established a framework for this approach by 

identifying critical mission areas with intergovernmental initiatives in each 

area. For example, the strategy identified such initiatives as modifying 

federal grant requirements and consolidating funding sources to state and 

local governments. The strategy further recognized the importance of 

assessing the capability of state and local governments, developing plans, 

and establishing standards and performance measures to achieve national 

preparedness goals. In addition, many aspects of DHS’ success depend on 

its maintaining and enhancing working relationships within the 

intergovernmental system as it relies on state and local governments to 

accomplish its mission. In our view, intergovernmental and 

interjurisdictional coordination in managing federal first-responder grants 

is as important in the NCR as it is anywhere in the nation. 

As noted in our May 2004 report and June 2004 testimony, the creation of 

DHS was an initial step toward reorganizing the federal government to 

respond to some of the intergovernmental challenges identified in the 

National Strategy for Homeland Security. ONCRC was created by the 

Homeland Security Act. According to NCR emergency management 

officials we contacted during the time of our previous reviews, ONCRC 

could play a potentially important role in assisting them to implement a 

coordinated, well planned effort in using federal resources to improve the 

region’s preparedness. As we stated in the past, meeting the office’s 

statutory mandate would fulfill those key responsibilities. 

The Homeland Security Act established ONCRC within DHS to oversee 

and coordinate federal programs for, and relationships with federal, state, 

local, and regional authorities in the NCR.3

 The ONCRC’s responsibilities 

are primarily ones of coordination, assessment, and advocacy. With regard 

to coordination, the ONCRC was mandated to: 

• coordinate the activities of DHS relating to the NCR, including cooperation 

with the DHS’ Office for State and Local Government Coordination; 

• coordinate with federal agencies in the NCR on terrorism preparedness to 

ensure adequate planning, information sharing, training, and execution of 

the federal role in domestic preparedness activities; 

• coordinate with federal, state, local, and regional agencies and the private 

sector in NCR on terrorism preparedness to ensure adequate planning, 

 3

P.L. 107-296 §882 

The Role of DHS’ 

Office of National 

Capital Region 

Coordination in 

Enhancing Regional 

Preparednedness 
Page 5 GAO-05-889T 

information sharing, training, and execution of domestic preparedness 

activities among these agencies and entities; 

• serve as a liaison between the federal government and state, local, and 

regional authorities, and private sector entities in the NCR to facilitate 

access to federal grants and other programs.4

ONCRC also has responsibilities related to resource and needs 

assessments and advocating for needed resources in the NCR, including: 

• assessing and advocating for resources needed by state, local, and regional 

authorities in the NCR to implement efforts to secure the homeland; and 

• submitting an annual report to Congress that (1) identifies resources 

required to fully implement homeland security efforts in the NCR, (2) 

assesses progress in implementing homeland security efforts in the NCR, 

and (3) includes recommendations to Congress regarding additional 

resources needed to fully implement homeland security efforts in the NCR. 

(According to the ONCRC, the first annual report is now with the Office of 

Management and Budget for review). 

We recognize that ONCRC’s missions and tasks are not easy. The overall 

job of promoting domestic preparedness in a large area with a huge 

federal presence is daunting. The NCR is a complex multijurisdictional 

area comprising the District of Columbia and surrounding county and city 

jurisdictions in Maryland and Virginia. Coordination within this region 

presents the challenge of working with numerous jurisdictions that vary in 

size, political organization, and experience in managing large emergencies. 

As we noted in our May 2004 report on the management of funds in the 

NCR, effectively managing first responder grant funds requires the ability 

to measure progress and provide accountability for the use of the funds. 

To do this, it is necessary to: 

1. Develop and implement strategies for the use of the funds that identify 

key goals and priorities; 

2. Establish performance baselines; 

 4

The Office for National Capital Region Coordination was also mandated to provide state, 

local, and regional authorities in NCR with regular information, research, and technical 

support to assist the efforts of state, local, and regional authorities in NCR in securing the 

homeland; and develop a process for receiving meaningful input from state, local, and 

regional authorities and the private sector in NCR to assist in the development of the 

federal government’s homeland security plans and activities. 
Page 6 GAO-05-889T 

3. Develop and implement performance goals and data quality standards; 

4. Collect reliable data; 

5. Analyze those data; 

6. Assess the results of that analysis; 

7. Take action based on those results; and 

8. Monitor the effectiveness of actions taken to achieve the designated 

performance goals. 

This strategic approach to homeland security includes identifying threats 

and managing risks, aligning resources to address them, and assessing 

progress in preparing for those threats and risks. 

At the same time, it is important to recognize that the equipment, skills, 

and training required to prepare for and respond to identified terrorist 

threats and risks may be applicable to non-terrorist risks as well. For 

example, the equipment, skills, and training required to respond effectively 

to a discharge of lethal chlorine gas from a rail car is much the same 

whether the cause of the discharge is an accidental derailment or a 

terrorist act. 

As we reported in May 2004, in fiscal years 2002 and 2003, the 

Departments of Homeland Security, Justice, and Health and Human 

Services awarded about $340 million through 16 first-responder grants to 

NCR jurisdictions to enhance regional emergency preparedness. Of these 

funds, $60.5 million were from the UASI grant, designated for regionwide 

needs. The remaining funds, about $279.5 million, were available to local 

jurisdictions for a wide variety of needs, such as equipment and training, 

and local jurisdictions determined how these funds were to be spent. 

Local jurisdictions used or planned to use money from those grants to buy 

equipment and to implement training and exercises for the area’s first 

responders, as well as improve planning for responding to a terrorist 

event. We have not reviewed how funds were spent since the issuance of 

our May 2004 report; however, spending could not be based on a 

coordinated plan for enhancing regional first responder capacities and 

preparedness because such a plan does not yet exist, although one is being 

prepared. 

Our May 2004 Report 

Showed the Need to 

Improve Management 

of First-Responder 

Grants in the NCR 
Page 7 GAO-05-889T 

In May 2004, we reported that ONCRC and the NCR faced 3 interrelated 

challenges in managing federal funds in a way that maximizes the increase 

in first responder capacities and preparedness while minimizing 

inefficiency and unnecessary duplication of expenditures. These were the 

lack of (1) preparedness standards; (2) a coordinated regionwide plan for 

establishing first responder performance goals, needs, and priorities, and 

assessing the benefits of expenditures; and (3) readily available, reliable 

source of data on the federal grant funds available to first responders in 

the NCR and their use. Without the standards, a regionwide plan, and data 

on available funds and spending, it will be extremely difficult to determine 

whether NCR first responders have the ability to respond to threats and 

emergencies with well-planned, well-coordinated, and effective efforts that 

involve a variety of first responder disciplines from NCR jurisdictions. 

Moreover, without such data, it is not clear how the ONCRC can fulfill its 

statutory mandate to assess and advocate for resources needed by state, 

local, and regional authorities in the NCR to implement efforts to secure 

the homeland. 

During our review we could identify no reliable data on preparedness gaps 

in the NCR, which of those gaps were most important, and the status of 

efforts to close those gaps. The baseline data needed to assess those gaps 

had not been fully developed or made available on a NCR-wide basis. We 

also noted that at the time our May 2004 report was released, DHS and 

ONCRC appear to have had a limited role in assessing and analyzing first 

responder needs in NCR and developing a coordinated effort to address 

those needs through the use of federal grant funds. ONCRC has focused 

principally on developing a plan for using the UASI funds—funds that 

were intended principally for addressing region wide needs. In its 

comments on a draft of our May 2004 report, DHS said that a governance 

structure approved in February 2004 would accomplish essential 

regionwide coordination. We agree that this structure has the potential to 

accomplish essential regionwide coordination, but it is not clear how it 

can do so effectively without comprehensive data on funds available for 

enhancing first responder skills and capabilities in the NCR, their use, and 

their effect on meeting identified performance goals. 
Page 8 GAO-05-889T 

To help ensure that emergency preparedness grants and associated funds 

are managed in a way that maximizes their effectiveness, our May 2004 

report included three recommendations to the Secretary of the 

Department of Homeland Security. As discussed in more detail below, 

some progress has been made in implementing these recommendations, 

but none has yet been fully implemented. 

• Recommendation 1: Work with the NCR jurisdictions to develop a 

coordinated strategic plan to establish goals and priorities for enhancing 

first responder capacities that can be used to guide the use of federal 

emergency preparedness funds. 

• Actions taken: According to an ONCRC official, a final draft for review 

has been circulated to key stakeholders. According to the Director, 

ONCRC, the plan will feature measurable goals, objectives, and 

performance measures. 

• Recommendation 2: Monitor the strategic plan’s implementation to ensure 

that funds are used in a way that promotes effective expenditures that are 

not unnecessarily duplicative. 

• Actions taken: Monitoring implementation of the strategic plan cannot 

be accomplished absent a plan. Importantly, to monitor the plan’s 

implementation, data will be needed on funds available and spending 

from all first responder grants available to jurisdictions in the NCR, 

such as the State Homeland Security Grant Program. The NCR, 

through the D.C. Office of Homeland Security, has a system for 

tracking the use of UASI funds in the NCR and other homeland security 

grant funds available to D.C., such as the State Homeland Security 

Grants. However, at this time, it does not have an automated, uniform, 

system to track non-UASI grant funds available and used by other NCR 

jurisdictions. Information on the projects funded in NCR jurisdictions 

by funds other than UASI is obtained through the monthly meetings 

and weekly conference calls of the Senior Policy Group and full-day 

quarterly meetings of jurisdictions in the Mid-Atlantic area, sponsored 

by the Office of Domestic Preparedness (ODP). These meetings 

provide contacts for obtaining information, as needed, on grant 

allocations and expenditures in jurisdictions both within and outside 

the NCR in the mid-Atlantic region. The ONCRC recognizes the need to 

develop a more systematic means of capturing all homeland security 

grant funds available and used through the NCR. 

• Recommendation 3: Identify and address gaps in emergency preparedness 

and evaluate the effectiveness of expenditures in meeting those needs by 

adopting standards and preparedness guidelines based on likely scenarios 

for NCR and conducting assessments based on them. 

Recommendations in 

Our May 2004 Report 

Not Yet Fully 

Implemented 
Page 9 GAO-05-889T 

• Actions taken: To date, no systematic gap analysis has been completed 

for the region as a whole. The NCR plans to use the Emergency 

Management Accreditation Program (EMAP) as a means of conducting 

a gap analysis and assessing NCR jurisdictions against EMAP’s 

standards for emergency preparedness—an effort expected to be 

completed by March 2006. How this effort would be integrated with 

DHS’ capabilities-based planning and assessments for first responders 

has not yet been determined, pending the issuance of DHS’ final 

version of the National Preparedness Goal in October 2005. 

At the national level, DHS’ efforts to develop policies, guidance, and 

standards that can be used to assess and develop first responder skills 

and capabilities have included three policy initiatives: (1) a national 

response plan (what needs to be done to manage a major emergency 

event); (2) a command and management process—the National 

Incident Management System—to be used during any emergency event 

nation-wide (how to do what needs to be done); and (3) a national 

preparedness goal (how well it should be done). Since our May 2004 

report, DHS, as part of developing the national preparedness goal, 

developed 15 scenarios (12 terrorist events, a flu pandemic, a 

hurricane, and an earthquake) of “national significance” that would 

require coordinated federal, state, and local response efforts; the 

critical tasks associated with these scenarios; and the capabilities—in 

terms of planning, training, equipment, and exercises—that first 

responders would need to develop and maintain to effectively prepare 

for and respond to major emergency events. The 300 critical tasks and 

36 capabilities were intended as benchmarks first responders could use 

to assess their relative level of preparedness and capacity to prevent, 

mitigate, respond to, and recover from major emergency events, 

including terrorist attacks. Because no single jurisdiction or agency 

would be expected to perform every task, possession of a target 

capability could involve enhancing and maintaining local resources, 

ensuring access to regional and federal resources, or some 

combination of the two. 

The January 25, 2005 proposal for the EMAP assessment program does 

suggest one way in which the NCR may include the DHS scenarios, 

critical tasks, and capabilities in the EMAP assessment project. The 

proposal states: “Should the NCR or local jurisdictions within the 

region desire to conduct (a) hazard identification, risk assessment, and 

impact analysis activities, and/or (b) capabilities assessment against 

catastrophic scenarios using federally provided technical assistance 

during the period of this project, EMAP representatives will coordinate 
Page 10 GAO-05-889T 

with local and regional personnel to ensure that assessment activities 

and products are complementary.” 

The need for comprehensive, coordinated emergency planning and 

preparedness is important in the National Capital Region. As we noted in 

the recent past, the ongoing security risk to the NCR requires a 

comprehensive, coordinated, and carefully planned approach to the 

expenditure of federal first responder grants. This requires a regionwide 

strategic plan, performance goals, an assessment of preparedness gaps to 

guide priority setting, and continuing assessments of the progress made in 

closing identified gaps. The NCR has completed a draft strategic plan and 

has established a process for assessing existing preparedness gaps. But it 

still needs to develop a means of routinely obtaining reliable data on all 

funds available for enhancing emergency preparedness in the NCR and 

their uses. It is important to know how all first responder funds are being 

spent in the NCR for setting priorities and assessing the results of funds 

spent. The NCR has selected the EMAP emergency preparedness 

standards as its performance standards for the region, but it will be 

necessary to integrate the EMAP standards with the set of 36 performance 

capabilities for first responders that DHS has developed as part of its 

National Performance Goal. 

The NCR, in common with jurisdictions across the nation, faces the 

challenge of implementing DHS requirements for its three key policy 

initiatives—the National Incident Management System, National Response 

Plan, and the National Preparedness Goal. Successfully accomplishing all 

of these things will require a sound strategic plan; effective coordination; 

perseverance; and reliable data on available funds, their use, and the 

results achieved. As we noted in our September 2004 report, the NCR’s 

UASI Governance Structure represents a positive step towards instituting 

a collaborative, multijurisdictional, regionwide, planning structure. Fully 

implementing the recommendations in our May 2004 report would, in our 

view, be a major step toward developing the structure, processes, and data 

needed to assess current first responder skills and capabilities in the NCR 

and monitor the success of efforts to close identified gaps and achieve 

designated performance goals for the NCR. 

That concludes my statement, Mr. Chairman. I would be pleased to 

respond to any questions you or other members of the Committee may 

have. 

Concluding 

Comments 
Page 11 GAO-05-889T 

For questions regarding this testimony please contact William O. Jenkins, 

Jr. on (202) 512-8777. Ernie Hazera also made key contributions to this 

testimony. 

Contacts and 

Acknowledgments 

(440436) 
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the 

United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without further 

permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain copyrighted images or 

other material, permission from the copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to 

reproduce this material separately. 
The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and 

investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its 

constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and 

accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO 

examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; 

and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help 

Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO’s 

commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of 

accountability, integrity, and reliability. 

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost 

is through GAO’s Web site (www.gao.gov). Each weekday, GAO posts 

newly released reports, testimony, and correspondence on its Web site. To 

have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products every afternoon, go 

to www.gao.gov and select “Subscribe to Updates.” 

The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2 each. 

A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of 

Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or 

more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. Orders 

should be sent to: 

U.S. Government Accountability Office 

441 G Street NW, Room LM 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 

TDD: (202) 512-2537 

Fax: (202) 512-6061 

Contact: 

Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm 

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470 

Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, JarmonG@gao.gov (202) 512-4400 

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

Paul Anderson, Managing Director, AndersonP1@gao.gov (202) 512-4800 

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

GAO’s Mission 

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony 

Order by Mail or Phone 

To Report Fraud, 

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs 

Congressional 

Relations 

Public Affairs 

PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER