Testimony 

Before the Subcommittee on Oversight of Government 

Management, the Federal Workforce, and the District of 

Columbia; Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs, U.S. Senate 

United States Government Accountability Office

GAO 

For Release on Delivery 

Expected at 2:30 p.m. EST 

Wednesday, March 29, 2006 HOMELAND SECURITY

The Status of Strategic 

Planning in the National 

Capital Region 

Statement of William O. Jenkins, Jr. 

Director, Homeland Security and Justice Issues 

GAO-06-559T 
What GAO Found

United States Government Accountability Office

Why GAO Did This Study

Highlights

Accountability Integrity Reliability

www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-06-559T.

To view the full product, including the scope 

and methodology, click on the link above. 

For more information, contact William 

Jenkins, Jr., 202-512-8757, 

jenkinswo@gao.gov. 

Highlights of GAO-06-559T, 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 

March 29, 2006

HOMELAND SECURITY

The Status of Strategic Planning in the 

National Capital Region 

Among its other statutory responsibilities, the Office of National Capital 

Region Coordination is charged with coordinating with NCR agencies and 

other entities to ensure adequate planning, information sharing, training, and 

execution of domestic preparedness activities among these agencies and 

entities. In May 2004 and again in July 2005, we recommended that the 

ONCRC complete a regional strategic plan to establish goals and priorities 

for enhancing first responder capacities that could be used to guide the 

effective use of federal funds. 

Although work has continued on a NCR strategic plan for the past 2 years, a 

completed plan is not yet available. According to NCR officials, completion 

of the plan requires integrating information and analyses from other 

documents completed or nearly completed, and a plan may not be available 

before September or October of 2006. 

The NCR’s strategic planning should reflect both national and regional 

priorities and needs. The majority of the individual documents ONCRC 

provided to us as representing components for its strategic plan were 

developed in response to Department of Homeland Security fiscal year 2006 

grant guidance to support the NCR’s fiscal year 2006 grant application. It is 

appropriate and necessary that the NCR address national priorities, but the 

NCR’s strategic plan should not be primarily driven by these requirements. It 

should integrate national and regional priorities and needs. 

 

A well-defined, comprehensive strategic plan for the NCR is essential for 

assuring that the region is prepared for the risks it faces. A November 18, 

2005, NCR PowerPoint presentation describes the NCR’s vision, mission, 

goals, objectives, and priority initiatives. That presentation includes some 

elements of a good strategic plan, including some performance measures, 

target dates, and cost estimates. A completed NCR strategic plan should 

build on the current elements that the NCR has developed and strengthen 

others based on the desirable characteristics of a national strategy that may 

also be useful for a regional approach to homeland security strategic 

planning. As it completes its strategic plan, the NCR could focus on 

strengthening (1) initiatives that will accomplish objectives under the NCR 

strategic goals, (2) performance measures and targets that indicate how the 

initiatives will accomplish identified strategic goals, (3) milestones or 

timeframes for initiative accomplishment, (4) information on the resources 

and investments for each initiative, and (5) organizational roles, 

responsibilities, and coordination, and integration and implementation plans. 

The Subcommittee asked GAO to 

provide comments on the National 

Capital Region’s (NCR) strategic 

plan. GAO reported on NCR 

strategic planning, among other 

issues, in May 2004 and September 

2004, testified before the House 

Committee on Government Reform 

in June 2004, and testified before 

the Subcommittee on Oversight of 

Government Management, the 

Federal Workforce, and the District 

of Columbia in July 2005. 

In this testimony, we addressed 

completion of the NCR strategic 

plan, national and regional 

priorities, and strengthening any 

plan that is developed. 

What GAO Recommends

Although we include no new 

recommendations in this 

statement, GAO continues to 

recommend that the ONCRC work 

with the NCR jurisdictions to 

quickly complete a coordinated 

strategic plan to establish and 

monitor the achievement of 

regional goals and priorities. 
Page 1 GAO-06-559T 

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee: 

I appreciate the opportunity to be here today to discuss the National 

Capital Region’s (NRC) strategic planning. The NCR is an area comprising 

the District of Columbia and surrounding counties and cities in the states 

of Maryland and Virginia. The NCR is the only area in the nation that has a 

statutorily designated regional coordinator—the Office of the National 

Capital Region Coordination (ONCRC) under the Department of 

Homeland Security (DHS). 

One ONCRC mandate is to coordinate with NCR agencies and other 

entities to ensure adequate planning, information sharing, training, and 

execution of domestic preparedness activities among these agencies and 

entities. We reported on NCR strategic planning, among other issues, in 

May 2004 and September 2004, testified before the House Committee on 

Government Reform in June 2004, and testified before your committee in 

July 2005.1

 In our previous work, we provided recommendations regarding 

NCR strategic planning and the preparation of a strategic plan. 

My statement today provides our preliminary observations on documents 

provided by ONCRC that describe current NCR strategic planning efforts. 

Specifically, I will comment on completion of the strategic plan, the 

impact of federal homeland security grant program requirements on NCR 

strategic planning, and observations on strengthening any plan that is 

developed. 

We have only recently received new documentation related to the NCR’s 

strategic plan and its development from the ONCRC and have not had an 

opportunity to review them fully. Consequently, my remarks are 

necessarily preliminary and are based on our limited review and analysis 

of the documents. We did our work in accordance with generally accepted 

government auditing standards. 

 1

 GAO, 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: Coordinated Planning 

and Standards Needed to Better Manage First Responder Grants in the National Capital 

Region, GAO-04-904T (Washington, D.C.: June 24, 2004); Homeland Security: Effective 

Regional Coordination Can Enhance Emergency Preparedness, GAO-04-1009 

(Washington, D.C.: September 15, 2004); Homeland Security: Managing First Responder 

Grants to Enhance Emergency Preparedness in the National Capital Region, 

GAO-05-889T (Washington, D.C.: July 14, 2005). 
Page 2 GAO-06-559T 

In May 2004 and again in July 2005 we recommended that the Secretary of 

Department of Homeland Security 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—a recommendation that the 

department agreed to implement. Although work has continued on a NCR 

strategic plan for the past 2 years, a completed plan is not yet available to 

guide decision making such as assessment of NCR’s strategic priorities 

and funding needs and aid for NCR jurisdictions in ascertaining how the 

NCR strategic plan complements their individual or combined efforts. 

ONCRC officials have explained that integration of additional information 

such as from an Emergency Management Accreditation Program (EMAP) 

assessment has delayed completion of a strategic plan.2

 ONCRC officials 

provided us several individual documents that they stated constituted the 

basic elements of the NCR’s strategic plan. According to the ONCRC, one 

of the documents, a November 18, 2005, NCR Plenary Session PowerPoint 

presentation (updated from a November 15 document), contains the core 

elements of the NCR’s strategic plan—the mission, vision, guiding 

principles, long-term goals, and objectives. According to ONCRC officials, 

an initial strategic plan will not be available until at least September or 

October 2006. 

NCR strategic planning should reflect both national and regional priorities 

and needs. The November 18 PowerPoint presentation presents the NCR’s 

goals, objectives, and initiatives, including those considered priorities. If 

the NCR’s homeland security grant program funding documents prepared 

for DHS are used extensively in NCR strategic planning, a NCR strategic 

plan might primarily reflect DHS priorities and grant funding—national 

priorities—and not regionally developed strategic goals and priorities. The 

majority of the individual documents ONCRC represented as the basic 

elements of the NCR’s strategic plan were developed in response to DHS 

homeland security grant program funding. Under the DHS funding 

guidance, the homeland security strategy of applicants for funding must 

incorporate DHS’s National Preparedness Goal and related target 

 2

 The Emergency Management Accreditation Program is a voluntary assessment and 

accreditation process for state/territorial, tribal, and local government emergency 

management programs. Among other things, EMAP is intended to provide a structure for 

identifying areas in need of improvement and a methodology for strategic planning and 

justification of resources. EMAP uses national emergency management standards along 

with peer assessment teams to evaluate a program’s activities. These standards are based 

on the National Fire Protection Association 1600 standard covering functional areas such 

as program management and hazard identification and risk assessment. 

Summary 
Page 3 GAO-06-559T 

capabilities. According to DHS, the strategy is to provide a strategic plan 

for the use of related federal, state, local, and private resources within a 

state and/or urban area before, during, and after threatened or actual 

domestic terrorist attacks, major disasters, and other emergencies. NCR 

initiatives developed to implement NCR’s strategic goals and objectives 

presented in ONCRC documents are not all addressed in the DHS grant 

program funding documents and would require implementation and 

funding by NCR jurisdictions acting individually or in combination with 

others. Our preliminary work did not include an assessment of 

jurisdictional efforts to implement the NCR initiatives. 

A complete NCR strategic plan based on the November 18 PowerPoint 

presentation should build on current elements and strengthen others 

based on our six characteristics for a national strategy that may be useful 

for a regional approach to homeland security strategic planning. These 

include characteristics such as goals, objectives, activities, and 

performance measures; resources, investments, and risk management; and 

organizational roles, responsibilities, and coordination. Our limited review 

indicates that as the ONCRC fleshes out the November 18 PowerPoint 

presentation that contains the core elements of the NCR’s strategic plan, 

such strengthening could address: (1) initiatives that will accomplish 

objectives under the strategic goals, (2) performance measures and targets 

that indicate how the initiatives will accomplish identified strategic goals, 

(3) milestones or time frames for initiative accomplishment, (4) 

information on the resources and investment for each initiative, and (5) 

organizational roles, responsibilities, and coordination, and integration 

and implementation plans. 

Strategic plans developed by regional organizations can be effective tools 

to focus resources and efforts to address problems. Effective plans often 

contain such features as goals and objectives that are measurable and 

quantifiable. These goals and objectives allow problems and planned steps 

to be defined specifically and progress to be measured. By specifying goals 

and objectives, plans can also give planners and decision makers a 

structure for allocating funding to those goals and objectives. A welldefined, comprehensive strategic plan for the NCR is essential for assuring 

that the region is prepared for the risks it faces. 

Background 
Page 4 GAO-06-559T 

The Homeland Security Act established the Office of National Capital 

Region Coordination within the Department of Homeland Security.3

 The 

ONCRC is responsible for overseeing and coordinating federal programs 

for and relationships with state, local, and regional authorities in the NCR 

and for assessing, and advocating for, the resources needed by state, local 

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

homeland. One of the ONCRC mandates is to coordinate with federal, 

state, local, and regional agencies and the private sector in NCR on 

terrorism preparedness to ensure adequate planning, information sharing, 

training, and execution of domestic preparedness activities among these 

agencies and entities. 

In our earlier work, 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 

• a set of accepted benchmarks (best practices) and performance goals 

that could be used to identify desired goals and determine whether first 

responders have the ability to respond to threats and emergencies with 

well-planned, well-coordinated, and effective efforts that involve 

police, fire, emergency medical, public health, and other personnel 

from multiple jurisdictions; 

• a coordinated regionwide plan for establishing first responder 

performance goals, needs, and priorities, and assessing the benefits of 

expenditures in enhancing first responder capabilities; and 

• 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, we 

observed it would be extremely difficult to determine whether NCR first 

responders were prepared to effectively respond to threats and 

emergencies. Regional coordination means the use of governmental 

resources in a complementary way toward goals and objectives that are 

mutually agreed upon by various stakeholders in a region.4

 Regional 

coordination can also help to overcome the fragmented nature of federal 

programs and grants available to state and local entities. Successful 

 3

 6 U.S.C. 462. 

4 GAO-04-1009. 
Page 5 GAO-06-559T 

coordination occurs not only vertically among federal, state, and local 

governments, but also horizontally within regions. The effective alignment 

of resources for the security of communities could require planning across 

jurisdictional boundaries. Neighboring jurisdictions may be affected by an 

emergency situation in many ways, including major traffic or 

environmental disruptions, activation and implementation of mutual aid 

agreements, acceptance of evacuated residents, and treating casualties in 

local hospitals. 

Although work has continued on a NCR strategic plan for the past 2 years, 

a completed plan is not yet available to guide decision making such as 

assessment of NCR’s strategic priorities and funding needs and aid for 

NCR jurisdictions in ascertaining how the NCR strategic plan 

complements their individual or combined efforts. In May 2004, we 

recommended that the Secretary of DHS 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, and the department agreed to 

implement this recommendation. A related recommendation—that DHS 

monitor the plan’s implementation to ensure that funds are used in a way 

that promotes effective expenditures that are not unnecessarily 

duplicative—could not be implemented until the final strategic plan was in 

place. In July 2005, we testified that, according to a DHS ONCRC official, a 

final draft for review had been completed and circulated to key 

stakeholders. The plan was to feature measurable goals, objectives, and 

performance measures. 

ONCRC officials state that past references to a NCR strategic plan reflect 

availability of the core elements of the NCR strategic plan—the mission, 

vision, guiding principles, long-term goals, and objectives, but not a 

complete plan. They told us that these core elements, along with other 

information, will need to be compiled into a strategic planning document. 

ONCRC officials said that NCR leadership had elected to make the core 

elements available but to concentrate on preparing other planning and 

justification documents required for the fiscal year 2006 DHS grant 

process. NCR planning timelines indicate this decision was made in 

September 2005. 

Because a strategic plan was not available, ONCRC officials provided us 

with several documents, which they have said that taken as a whole, 

constitute the basic elements of NCR’s strategic plan. These documents 

include 

NCR Has Not 

Produced a Strategic 

Plan 
Page 6 GAO-06-559T 

• a November 18, 2005, NCR Plenary Session PowerPoint presentation 

containing information on NCR strategic goals, objectives, and 

initiatives; 

• a February 1, 2006, National Capital Region Target Capabilities and 

NCR Projects Work Book; 

• the March 2, 2006, District of Columbia and National Capital Region 

Fiscal Year 2006 Homeland Security Grant Application Program and 

Capability Enhancement Plan; 

• the March 2, 2006, National Capital Region Initiatives; and 

• the Fiscal Year 2006 NCR Homeland Security Grant Program Funding 

Request Investment Justification, submitted to DHS in March 2006. 

According to ONCRC officials, a complete strategic plan is awaiting 

integration of additional information that in some cases is not yet 

complete. These include an Emergency Management Accreditation 

Program (EMAP) assessment of all local jurisdictions in the NCR and 

regional-level activities, which, according to the ONCRC, is completed but 

will not be available until sometime in April; the peer review of the status 

of state and urban area emergency operations plans after Hurricane 

Katrina, whose completion is anticipated in April 2006; and the fiscal year 

2006 homeland security program grant enhancement plan for funding, 

which was completed in early March 2006. ONCRC officials estimate that 

after April 2006, it will take approximately 90 more days to integrate these 

documents and the core framework of the strategic plan, plus 

approximately 60 days for final review and coordination by the NCR 

leadership. Thus, an initial strategic plan will not be available until at least 

September or October 2006. 

NCR strategic planning should reflect both national and regional priorities 

and needs. ONCRC officials have said that the November 18, 2005, NCR 

plenary session PowerPoint presentation represents the vision, mission, 

and core goals and objectives of the NCR’s strategic plan. If the NCR’s 

homeland security grant program funding documents prepared for DHS 

are used extensively in NCR strategic planning, a NCR strategic plan might 

primarily reflect DHS priorities and grant funding—national priorities—

and not regionally developed strategic goals and priorities. 

NCR’s current goals and objectives are shown in table 1. 

NCR Strategic 

Planning Should 

Reflect Both National 

and Regional 

Priorities and Needs 
Page 7 GAO-06-559T 

Table 1: NCR Vision, Mission, Goals, and Objectives from the November 18, 2005, NCR Plenary Session PowerPoint 

Presentation 

Vision Mission 

Working together towards a safe and secure 

National Capital Region 

Build and sustain an integrated effort to prepare for, prevent, protect against, respond 

to, and recover from “all-hazards” threats or events 

Goals Objectives for each goal 

1. A collaborative culture for planning, 

decision making, and implementation 

across the NCR 

1. Enhance and continually adapt the framework for regional strategic planning and 

decision making to achieve an optimal balance of capabilities across the NCR 

2. Design and implement an integrated and iterative performance and risk-based 

regional planning process that engages appropriate NCR homeland security 

partners 

3. Establish an NCR-wide assessment process to identify and remedy gaps in 

regional, jurisdictional, and sector preparedness 

4. Develop a requirements generation and prioritization process to effectively utilize 

available public and private homeland security resources to satisfy NCR regional, 

jurisdictional, and sector preparedness 

5. Enhance the oversight and accountability process that coordinates, tracks, and 

evaluates the implementation and effectiveness of regional decisions 

6. Adopt a life cycle cost and investment approach to generate enduring and 

sustainable preparedness across the NCR 

2. An informed and prepared community of 

those who live, work, and visit within the 

region, engaged in the safety and security 

of the NCR 

1. Deliver timely, coordinated, and targeted emergency information across the NCR 

before, during, and after emergencies 

2. Raise the level of preparedness across the NCR by utilizing and enhancing 

public awareness and education campaigns 

3. Strengthen public-private-nongovernmental organization partnerships and 

communication through increased sharing of information and resources, and 

expanded participation in preparedness planning across the NCR 

4. Engage those who live, work and visit within the region in emergency 

preparedness across the NCR 

3. An enduring capability to protect the NCR 

by preventing or mitigating “all-hazards” 

threats or events 

1. Develop and sustain common, multidisciplinary standards for planning, 

equipping, training, operating, and (cross-jurisdictional) exercising to maximize 

prevention and mitigation capabilities across the NCR 

2. Strengthen the gathering, fusion, analysis, and exchange of multidiscipline 

strategic and tactical information and data for shared situational awareness 

3. Employ a performance and risk-based approach to critical infrastructure 

protection across the NCR, targeting resources where the threat, vulnerability, 

and impact are greatest 

4. A sustained capacity to respond to and 

recovery from “all-hazards” events across 

the NCR 

1. Develop, adopt, and implement integrated plans, policies, and standards to 

facilitate response and recovery 

2. Ensure the capacity to operate multilevel coordinated response and recovery 

3. Ensure adequate and effective sharing of resources 

4. Comprehensively identify long-term recovery issues 

Source: NCR Plenary Session Presentation, November 18, 2005. 
Page 8 GAO-06-559T 

The other four documents that ONCRC represents as constituting the NCR 

strategic plan were developed in response to federal requirements under 

the National Preparedness Goal and to support the NCR’s federal funding 

application. Required by Homeland Security Presidential Directive 8, the 

National Preparedness Goal is a national domestic all-hazards 

preparedness goal intended to establish measurable readiness priorities 

and targets. The fiscal year 2006 Homeland Security Grant Program 

(HSGP) integrates the State Homeland Security Program, the Urban Areas 

Security Initiative, the Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention Program, 

the Metropolitan Medical Response System, and the Citizen Corps 

Program. For the first time, starting with the fiscal year 2006 HSGP, DHS is 

using the National Preparedness Goal to shape national priorities and 

focus expenditures for the HSGP. According to DHS, the combined fiscal 

year 2006 HSGP Program Guidance and Application Kit streamlines efforts 

for states and urban areas in obtaining resources that are critical to 

building and sustaining capabilities to achieve the National Preparedness 

Goal and implement state and urban area homeland security strategies. 

All states and urban areas were required to align existing preparedness 

strategies within the National Preparedness Goal’s eight national 

priorities.5

 States and urban areas were required to assess their 

preparedness needs by reviewing their existing programs and capabilities 

and use those findings to develop a plan and formal investment 

justification outlining major statewide, substate, or interstate initiatives for 

which they will seek funding. According to DHS, these initiatives are to 

focus efforts on how to build and sustain programs and capabilities within 

and across state boundaries while aligning with the National Preparedness 

Goal and national priorities. 

It is, of course, important and necessary that the ONCRC, and other 

regional and local jurisdictions, incorporate the DHS’s National 

Preparedness Goal and related target capabilities into their strategic 

planning. The target capabilities are intended to serve as a benchmark 

against which states, regions, and localities can measure their own 

 5

 Those priorities are (1) implement the National Incident Management System and 

National Response Plan; (2) expand regional collaboration; (3) implement the interim 

National Infrastructure Protection Plan; (4) strengthen information-sharing and 

collaboration capabilities; (5) strengthen interoperable communications capabilities; (6) 

strengthen chemical, biological, radiological/nuclear, and explosive detection, response, 

and decontamination capabilities; (7) strengthen medical surge and mass prophylaxis 

capabilities; and (8) review emergency operations plans and the status of catastrophic 

planning. 
Page 9 GAO-06-559T 

capabilities. However, these national requirements are but one part of 

developing regional preparedness, response, and recovery assessments 

and funding priorities specific to the NCR. The NCR’s strategic plan should 

provide the framework for guiding the integration of DHS requirements 

into the NCR’s overall efforts. 

While the NCR strategic plan is not complete, our preliminary review of 

the NCR initiatives developed to implement NCR’s strategic goals and 

objectives presented in ONCRC documents indicates they are not 

completely addressed in the DHS HSGP documents. Using the November 

18, 2005, PowerPoint presentation as our primary framework, we 

identified whether the NCR’s 39 individual regional initiatives were 

specifically supported in whole or in part by programs or investments in 

the fiscal year 2006 HSGP documents (enhancement plan and investment 

justification) prepared for DHS. Our preliminary analysis indicates that 

regional initiatives defined under NCR strategic goals and objectives have 

some coverage—individual programs or projects—in the NCR documents 

prepared for DHS HSGP funding, but not complete coverage. We found 

that of the NCR’s 16 priority initiatives, 10 were partially addressed in the 

enhancement plan and 12 were partially addressed in the investment 

justification. Of the other 23 NCR initiatives, 8 were partially addressed in 

the enhancement plan and 12 were partially addressed in the investment 

justification. 

Implementation of regional initiatives not covered by HSGP funding likely 

would require NCR jurisdictions acting individually or in combination with 

others. Our preliminary work did not include an assessment of individual 

jurisdictional efforts to implement the NCR initiatives to determine if 

uncovered initiatives, particularly those considered priority initiatives, 

might be addressed by one or more of the NCR jurisdictions. Further work 

would be required to determine to what extent, if any, the NCR initiatives 

are addressed in other federal funding applications or individual NCR 

jurisdictional homeland security initiatives. 

As I stated earlier, ONCRC officials told us a complete NCR strategic plan 

is awaiting information from the EMAP assessment, DHS’s peer review of 

the status of emergency operations plans in the aftermath of Hurricane 

Katrina, and the fiscal year 2006 homeland security grant program 

enhancement plan for funding. This information may further emphasize 

federal priorities in the regional planning process. However, information 

from these sources should complement the region’s own assessment of 

preparedness gaps and the development of strategic goals, objectives, and 

initiatives. Officials from the District of Columbia, Virginia, and Maryland 
Page 10 GAO-06-559T 

emphasized this point when they testified before this committee in July 

2005. At that time, they said that the regional strategic plan would be a 

comprehensive document that defined priorities and objectives for the 

entire region without regard to any specific jurisdiction, discipline, or 

funding mechanisms. In our view, a NCR plan should complement the 

plans of the various jurisdictions within NCR. In the aftermath of the 

September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks and the creation of the ONCRC, we 

would have expected that the vast majority of this assessment work 

should have been completed. The NCR is considered a prime target for 

terrorist events, and other major events requiring a regional response can 

be anticipated, such as large, dangerous chemical spills. 

A complete NCR strategic plan based on the November 18 PowerPoint 

presentation could be strengthened in several ways. In earlier work we 

have identified characteristics that we consider to be desirable for a 

national strategy that may be useful for a regional approach to homeland 

security strategic planning.6

 The desirable characteristics, adjusted for a 

regional strategy, are 

• purpose, scope, and methodology that address why the strategy was 

produced, the scope of its coverage, and the process by which it was 

developed; 

• problem definition and risk assessment that address the particular 

regional problems and threats the strategy is directed towards; 

• goals, subordinate objectives, activities, and performance measures 

that address what the strategy is trying to achieve, steps to achieve 

those results, as well as the priorities, milestones, and performance 

measures to gauge results; 

• resources, investments, and risk management that address what the 

strategy will cost, the sources and types of resources and investments 

needed, and where resources and investments should be targeted by 

balancing risk reductions and costs; 

• organizational roles, responsibilities, and coordination that address 

who will be implementing the strategy, what their roles will be 

 6

 GAO. Combating Terrorism: Evaluation of Selected Characteristics in National 

Strategies Related to Terrorism, GAO-04-408T (Washington, D.C.: Feb. 3, 2004). 

A Completed NCR 

Strategic Plan Could 

be Strengthened in 

Several Ways 
Page 11 GAO-06-559T 

compared to those of others, and mechanisms for them to coordinate 

their efforts; and 

• integration and implementation that address how a regional strategy 

relates to other strategies’ goals, objectives and activities, and to state 

and local governments within their region and their plans to implement 

the strategy. 

According to the ONCRC, the November 18 PowerPoint presentation 

contains the core elements of the NCR’s strategic plan—the mission, 

vision, guiding principles, long-term goals, and objectives. Our preliminary 

review of the presentation indicates it reflects many of the characteristics 

we have defined as desirable for a strategy. The presentation includes 

some material on the purpose, scope, and methodology underlying the 

presentation; what it covers; and how it was developed. For example, the 

presentation contains a detailed timeline of key activities in the execution 

of the strategic plan and how initiatives were prioritized. Particular 

regional problems and performance gaps are described, including a 

section on regionwide weaknesses and gaps such as the lack of a 

regionwide risk assessment framework and inadequate response and 

recovery for special needs populations. These gaps are cross-referenced to 

priority initiatives. Specific goals, objectives, and initiatives are in the 

presentation, cross-referenced to the regional gaps. Some initiative 

descriptions identify if a cost is either high, medium, or low with more 

detailed cost information summarized in other places. 

Our preliminary review indicates that as the ONCRC fleshes out the 

November 18 PowerPoint presentation into an initial, complete strategic 

plan, improvements might be made in (1) initiatives that will accomplish 

objectives under the strategic goals, (2) performance measures and targets 

that indicate how the initiatives will accomplish identified strategic goals, 

(3) milestones or time frames for initiative accomplishment, (4) 

information on the resources and investment for each initiative, and (5) 

organizational roles, responsibilities, and coordination, and integration 

and implementation plans. A discussion of how these elements could be 

strengthened follows. 

A NCR strategic plan could more fully develop initiatives to accomplish 

objectives under the strategic goals. For example, the presentation 

contains several objectives that have only one initiative. A single initiative 

may not ensure that objectives are accomplished, and it may merely be 

restating the objective itself. For example, there is only one initiative 

Initiative Development to 

Match Goal Objectives 
Page 12 GAO-06-559T 

(regional strategic planning and decision making process enhancements) 

for Goal 1’s first objective (enhancing and adapting the framework for 

strategic planning and decision making to achieve an optimal balance of 

capabilities across the NCR). The initiative in large part restates the 

objective. This initiative might be replaced by more specific initiatives or 

the objective restated and additional initiatives proposed. Other objectives 

in the November 18 PowerPoint presentation provide a more complete 

picture of initiatives intended to meet the objective. For any future plan, 

these initiatives should be reviewed to determine if the current initiatives 

will fully meet the results expected of the objectives. 

A NCR strategic plan could more fully measure initiative expectations by 

improving performance measures and targets. First, in some cases, the 

performance measures will not readily lend themselves to actual 

quantitative or qualitative measurement through a tabulation, a 

calculation, a recording of activity or effort, or an assessment of results 

that is compared to an intended purpose. Additional measures might be 

necessary. For example, Goal 1, Objective 1, Initiative 1 (regional strategic 

planning and decision-making process) includes measures such as (1) the 

decision-making system is well understood by all stakeholders based on 

changed behaviors and (2) time and resources required of stakeholders in 

the region to participate in the decision-making process is more efficient. 

These could be either refined for more direct measurement or additional 

measures posed, such as specifying behaviors for assessment or what 

parts of the process might be assessed for efficiency. Other measures in 

the document might serve as examples of more direct measurement, such 

as those that assess accomplishments using percentages in Goal 2, 

Objective 4, Initiative 1 (increasing civic involvement in all phases of 

disaster preparedness). 

Second, a strategic plan could be improved by (1) expanding the use of 

outcome measures and targets in the plan to reflect the results of its 

activities and (2) limiting the use of other types of measures. ONCRC 

officials said that the performance measures in the November 18 

PowerPoint presentation had a greater emphasis on tracking outcomes, 

rather than inputs. They stated that as programs and projects are funded 

and implemented, a more thorough effort to develop associated measures 

for each will be undertaken. With regard to revising measures to reflect 

funded programs and projects, we would suggest NCR officials focus on 

measuring outcomes of programs and projects to meet strategic goals and 

objectives. 

Performance Measure and 

Target Improvements 
Page 13 GAO-06-559T 

Our preliminary analysis indicates that several measures are outcomeoriented, such as those for Goal 2, Objective 4, Initiative 1 (increase civic 

involvement in all phases of disaster preparedness) that has outcome 

measures such as the percentage of the population that has taken steps to 

develop personal preparedness and the percentage of the population 

familiar with workplace, school, and community emergency plans. 

However, the majority of the presentation’s performance measures and 

targets are process- or output-oriented and may not match the desired 

result of the initiative. For example, the Goal 1, Objective 4, Initiative 2 

(facilitating practitioner priorities into the program development process) 

desired outcomes are (1) an easily understood process for participation 

and feedback of the practitioner stakeholder communities to influence 

programmatic initiatives and priorities defined in Goal Groups 2, 3, and 4 

and (2) an awareness and increased participation in the range of resource 

opportunities. Measures for this initiative include communication across 

Emergency Support Functions (ESFs), an accountability chart, and 

governance guidance document show the feedback loop between ESFs 

and Senior Policy Group/Chief Administrative Officer (SPG/CAO) and 

Regional Working Groups. Such measures identify completed activities or 

tasks, not how well understand the process is. A fourth measure for this 

initiative—understanding/agreeing on roles, responsibility, and 

accountability—might closer to measuring the desired outcome. 

Third, many initiatives do not have performance targets. For example, 

targets are missing for all or some measures for initiatives under Goal 1, 

Objectives 1, 3, 4, and 5. Other targets are unclear. For example, one 

measure for both Goal 1, Objective 3, Initiative 1 (tasks and capabilities for 

the NCR) and Goal 1, Objective 3, Initiative 2 (gap analysis, 

recommendations, and appropriate actions) is the progress toward closing 

the gap between baseline and target capabilities. The target is “what we 

think we need to accomplish in HSPD 7/8.”7

 Any targets such as this would 

require clarification if progress toward results is to be assessed. 

A future NCR strategic plan could also be strengthened by including more 

complete time frames for initiative accomplishment, including specific 

milestones. In some cases, the time frame description is missing or is 

inconsistent with timeframes provided within performance measure 

descriptions that generally cover activities or tasks. For example, Goal 3, 

 7

 HSPD stands for Homeland Security Presidential Directive. 

Timeframes 
Page 14 GAO-06-559T 

Objective 1, Initiative 1 (region prevention and mitigation framework) has 

a time frame for fall 2006, but measures include targets in 2007. In several 

instances, measures of tasks or activities include milestones, but an 

overall time frame is not indicated. For example, Goal 3, Objective 3, 

Initiative 1 (critical infrastructure and high-risk targets risk assessments) 

and Goal 4, Objective 1, Initiative 1 (corrective action program for gaps) 

do not have timeframes identified, but measures have dates extending into 

2007 and 2009 respectively. 

Time frames should also match the initiative. In some cases, it is unclear if 

the initiative description should be expanded to encompass activities that 

appear outside the scope of the initiative as written, but result in the time 

frame for the overall initiative. For example, Goal 3, Objective 1, Initiative 

3 (health surveillance, detection, and mitigation functions plan) has an 

overall time frame of December 2010, but the 2010 date reflects 

implementation of a patient tracking system. In the list of measures, the 

plan itself is targeted for December 2008. Either the initiative description 

could be changed to include the system or the patient tracking system 

measure could be removed or revised. 

A future NCR strategic plan could provide fuller information on the 

resources and investments associated with each initiative. For example, 

each initiative in the November 18 PowerPoint presentation has a section 

for cost and cost factors. However, there is not an explanation in the 

document as to what cost categories of high, medium, or low mean in 

terms of dollar ranges. ONCRC officials told us that these descriptions 

should be considered more notional in nature, with a low usually meaning 

well under $1 million and those rated high in the tens of millions. In many 

cases, the categorization of cost for an initiative is missing from the 

November 18 PowerPoint presentation initiative sections. More specific 

cost information by initiative, such as the funded and unfunded grant 

information that is provided in a summary format, would facilitate 

decision making in comparing trade-offs as options are considered. A plan 

also could be improved by including the sources of funding for the 

anticipated costs, whether federal, state, or local, or a combination of 

multiple sources. 

Resources and 

Investments 
Page 15 GAO-06-559T 

Last, any future NCR strategic plan could expand on organizational roles, 

responsibilities, coordination, and integration and implementation plans. 

Organizational roles, responsibilities, and coordination for each initiative 

would clarify accountability and leadership for completion of the 

initiative. The plan might also include information on how the plan will be 

integrated with the strategic plans of NCR jurisdictions and that of the 

ONCRC and plans to implement the regional strategy. 

There is no more important element in results-oriented management than 

the effort of strategic planning. This effort is the starting point and 

foundation for defining what an organization seeks to accomplish, 

identifying the strategies it will use to achieve desired results, and then 

determining how well it succeeds in reaching results-oriented goals and 

achieving objectives. Establishing clear goals, objectives, and milestones; 

setting performance goals; assessing performance against goals to set 

priorities; and monitoring the effectiveness of actions taken to achieve the 

designated performance goals are all part of the planning process. If done 

well, strategic planning is not a static or occasional event, but rather a 

dynamic and inclusive process. Continuous strategic planning provides the 

foundation for the most important things an organization does each day, 

and fosters informed communication between the organization and those 

affected by or interested in the organization’s activities. 

We appreciate the fact that strategic plans, once issued, are living 

documents that require continual assessment. There is an understandable 

temptation to delay issuing a strategic plan at some point in the ongoing 

strategic planning process until the plan is considered perfect and all 

information has been collected, analyzed, and incorporated into the plan. 

However, failure to complete an initial strategic plan makes it difficult for 

decision makers to identify and assess NCR’s first strategic goals, 

objectives, priorities, measures, and funding needs, and how resources can 

be leveraged across the region as events warrant. We continue to 

recommend that the Secretary of DHS work with the NCR jurisdictions to 

quickly complete a coordinated strategic plan to establish regional goals 

and priorities. 

- - - - - 

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

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

have. 

Organizational 

Contributions and 

Integration and 

Implementation Planning 

Concluding 

Observations 
Page 16 GAO-06-559T 

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

Jr. at (202) 512-8757, email jenkinswo@gao.gov. Sharon L. Caudle also 

made key contributions to this testimony. 

Contacts and 

Acknowledgments 

(440496) 
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