GAO-07-209R Views of DHS Agriculture Specialists 

United States Government Accountability Office

Washington, DC 20548 

November 14, 2006 

The Honorable Bob Goodlatte 

Chairman 

Committee on Agriculture 

House of Representatives 

Subject: Homeland Security: Agriculture Specialists’ Views of Their Work 

Experiences After Transfer to DHS

Dear Mr. Chairman: 

The Homeland Security Act of 2002 transferred responsibility for certain port 

inspections from the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Animal and Plant 

Health Inspection Service (APHIS) to the newly created Department of Homeland 

Security’s (DHS) Customs and Border Protection (CBP).1

 Specifically, the act 

transferred the responsibility for inspecting passengers, baggage, cargo, and mail 

entering the country in airplanes, ships, trucks, and railcars for prohibited 

agricultural materials that may serve as carriers of foreign pests and diseases. USDA 

estimates that these biological invaders cost the American economy tens of billions 

of dollars annually in lower crop values, eradication programs, and emergency 

payments to farmers. 

Beginning in March 2003, more than 1,800 agriculture specialists who had formerly 

reported to USDA became CBP employees, as CBP incorporated the protection of 

U.S. agriculture into its primary antiterrorism mission. In addition to protecting U.S. 

agriculture, CBP’s mission is to detect and prevent terrorists and terrorist weapons 

from entering the United States, interdict illegal drugs and other contraband, and 

apprehend individuals who are attempting to enter the United States illegally. 

Responding to congressional concerns that the transfer of agricultural inspections to 

CBP could shift the focus away from agriculture to CBP’s other mission priorities, 

GAO reported in May 2006 on the coordination of USDA and DHS to ensure that U.S. 

 

1

Pub. L. No. 107-296, 116 Stat. 2135 (2002). The act also transferred two other agencies to CBP: the 

Department of the Treasury’s U.S. Customs Service and the Department of Justice’s Immigration and 

Naturalization Service. 
agriculture is protected from accidentally or intentionally introduced pests and 

disease.2

 In preparing this report, we surveyed a representative sample of CBP’s 

agriculture specialists on their work experiences before and after the transfer and 

included the responses to the survey’s 31 multiple-choice questions in the report. The 

survey also asked two open-ended questions: (1) What is going well with respect to 

your work as an agriculture specialist? and (2) What would you like to see changed or 

improved with respect to your work as an agriculture specialist? 

You asked us to analyze the content of the narrative responses to the open-ended 

questions contained in the survey. Specifically, you asked us to identify the common 

themes in the narrative responses and determine the percentage of agriculture 

specialists giving answers consistent with each theme. We provided your staff with a 

formal briefing on our findings on October 17, 2006. This report summarizes the 

results of that briefing, including the five most common themes for each question,3

and enclosure I presents our briefing slides.4 Enclosure II describes our scope and 

methodology. We performed our work from September through October 2006 in 

accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. 

In summary, the narrative responses to the open-ended questions suggest morale 

issues among CBP agriculture specialists. Respondents typically provided more 

examples or went into greater detail in answering our question on what needs to be 

changed or improved. This question generated a total of 185 pages of comments—

roughly 4 times more than that generated by the responses to our question on what is 

going well. Further, “Nothing is going well” was the second most frequent response 

to the question on what is going well. In addition, the narratives generally 

corroborate the responses to the relevant multiple-choice questions in the survey. 

For example, related to the specialists’ perception that the agriculture safety mission 

has been compromised, 59 percent of experienced specialists indicated that they are 

doing either somewhat or many fewer inspections since the transfer, and 60 percent 

indicated that they are doing somewhat or many fewer interceptions. Similarly, 

related to working relationships, 64 percent of these specialists indicated that they do 

not believe that CBP management respects their work. 

Consistent with workforce concerns about the current agricultural inspection 

operation, in response to our question on what is going well with their work, 

relatively few agriculture specialists reported positive feelings about their current 

situation. Specifically: 

• An estimated 18 percent of agriculture specialists cited the working 

relationship among agriculture specialists and nonagriculture inspectors and 

management as positive. These specialists cited increasing respect and 

interest by nonspecialists in the agriculture inspection mission, and the 

attentiveness of CBP management to agriculture specialists’ concerns. 

 2

GAO, Homeland Security: Management and Coordination Problems Increase the Vulnerability of 

U.S. Agriculture to Foreign Pests and Disease, GAO-06-644 (Washington, D.C.: May 19, 2006). 3

In our analysis, responses were weighted to account statistically for all specialists in the population. 

Thus, the percentages given for each theme can be generalized to the entire population of CBP 

agriculture specialists and are expressed as estimates. The margin of error at the 95 percent 

confidence level varies by theme, but does not exceed plus or minus 10 percent. 4

We also provided copies of these briefing slides to DHS and USDA. 

Page 2 GAO-07-209R Views of DHS Agriculture Specialists 
• An estimated 13 percent of agriculture specialists reported that nothing is 

going well with their work. For example, some respondents noted that the 

agriculture inspection mission has been compromised under CBP and that 

agriculture specialists are no longer important or respected by management. 

• An estimated 10 percent of agriculture specialists expressed positive 

comments about their salary and benefits, with some citing increased pay 

under CBP, a flexible work schedule, increased overtime pay, and retirement

benefits as reasons for their views. 

• An estimated 8 percent of agriculture specialists identified elements of 

classroom and on-the-job training as going well. Some observed that new 

hires are well trained and that agriculture-related classroom training at the 

Professional Development Center in Frederick, Maryland, is adequate for their 

duties. 

• An estimated 6 percent of agriculture specialists were generally satisfied with 

their jobs, reporting, among other things, that they were satisfied in their 

working relationships with CBP management and coworkers and that they 

believed in the importance of their work in protecting U.S. agriculture from 

foreign pests and disease. 

In contrast, higher proportions of agriculture specialists identified areas that should 

be changed or improved. Specifically: 

• An estimated 29 percent of agriculture specialists expressed concern about 

their working relationships with CBP’s nonagriculture inspectors and 

management. Some wrote that nonagriculture inspectors at their ports view 

the agriculture mission as less important than CBP’s other priorities, such as 

counternarcotics and antiterrorism activities. Others noted that CBP 

management is not interested in, and does not support, agriculture 

inspections. Many agriculture specialists expressed concern that CBP’s 

management structure does not encourage two-way communication, and that

management often ignores the agriculture mission in favor of other priorities.

• An estimated 29 percent of agriculture specialists were concerned that the 

agriculture mission is declining because CBP has not given it adequate 

priority. Some respondents cited as evidence of a decline the increase in the 

number of cargo items and flights that are not inspected because of staff 

shortages, scheduling decisions by CBP port management, and the release of 

prohibited or restricted products by nonagriculture CBP inspectors. 

• An estimated 28 percent of agriculture specialists identified problems with the 

CBP chain of command that impede timely actions involving high-risk 

interceptions, such as a lack of managers with an agriculture background and 

the agency’s rigid chain-of-command structure. For example, agriculture 

specialists wrote that requests for information from USDA pest identification 

Page 3 GAO-07-209R Views of DHS Agriculture Specialists 
experts must be passed up the CBP chain of command before they can be 

conveyed to USDA.

• An estimated 19 percent of agriculture specialists believed that training in the 

classroom and on the job is inadequate. For example, some respondents 

expressed concern that the Professional Development Center does not offer 

courses on DHS’s targeting and database systems, which some agriculture 

specialists use to target high-risk shipments and passengers. Also, some 

agriculture specialists wrote that on-the-job training at their ports is poor, and 

that nonspecialists do not have adequate training to recognize when to refer 

items to agriculture specialists for inspection. 

• An estimated 17 percent of agriculture specialists were concerned about a lack 

of equipment and supplies. Some respondents wrote that the process for 

purchasing items under CBP results in delays in acquiring supplies and that 

there is a shortage of agriculture-specific supplies, such as vials, gloves, and 

laboratory equipment. 

In closing, we note that morale issues, such as the ones identified above, are not 

unexpected in a merger. To this end, in anticipation of the creation of DHS, GAO 

convened a forum in 2002 to discuss lessons learned from major private and public 

sector experiences with mergers that a DHS could use to combine its various 

components into a unified department.5

 According to the forum participants, in their 

experience, productivity and effectiveness decline in the period following a merger, 

in part because employees worry about their place in the new organization. 

 

- - - - 

As agreed with your office, unless you publicly announce the contents of this report 

earlier, we plan no further distribution of it until 30 days from the date of this letter. 

We will then send copies of this report to interested congressional committees and 

the Secretaries of Agriculture and of Homeland Security. In addition, this report will 

be available at no charge on the GAO Web site at http://www.gao.gov. 

 5

See GAO, Mergers and Transformation: Lessons Learned for a Department of Homeland Security 

and Other Federal Agencies, GAO-03-293SP (Washington, D.C.: November 14, 2002) and ResultsOriented Cultures: Implementation Steps to Assist Mergers and Organizational Transformations, 

GAO-03-669 (Washington, D.C.: July 2, 2003). 

Page 4 GAO-07-209R Views of DHS Agriculture Specialists 
If you have any questions about this report or need additional information, please 

contact me at (202) 512-3841 or shamesl@gao.gov. Contact points for our Offices of 

Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last page of this 

report. Key contributors to this report are listed in enclosure III. 

Sincerely yours, 

Lisa Shames 

Acting Director, Natural Resources 

 and Environment 

Enclosures – 3 

Page 5 GAO-07-209R Views of DHS Agriculture Specialists 
Enclosure I 

DHS Agriculture Specialists’ Views about Their Jobs

 

DHS Agriculture Specialists’ Views About Their Jobs

Analysis of Narrative Responses

from GAO’s Survey of DHS Agriculture Specialists

Survey Conducted November 2005 – January 2006

Briefing for Staff of Bob Goodlatte, Chairman

House Committee on Agriculture

October 17, 2006

Page 6 GAO-07-209R Views of DHS Agriculture Specialists 
Enclosure I 

2

Introduction

The Homeland Security Act of 2002 transferred agriculture inspections at U.S.

ports of entry from USDA to DHS Customs and Border Protection (CBP). In

response to concerns that this transfer may have shifted the focus from

agriculture inspections to other DHS priorities, GAO reported on this issue in

May 2006.1

For the May 2006 report, to identify agriculture specialists’ concerns, GAO 

conducted a survey on their work experiences before and after the transfer.2

This included 31 multiple choice and 2 open-ended questions. The results of the

multiple choice questions were printed in the report. GAO did not do a content

analysis of the open-ended questions at that time. 

1Homeland Security: Management and Coordination Problems Increase the Vulnerability of U.S. Agriculture to Foreign Pests and

Disease, GAO-06-644. 2For more information on our survey methodology, see Appendix, slides 20 and 21. 

Page 7 GAO-07-209R Views of DHS Agriculture Specialists 
Enclosure I 

3

Objectives

You asked us to do the content analysis of the two open-ended 

questions from the earlier survey. Specifically, you asked us to

identify the common themes in the narrative responses, as well 

as the percentage of specialists giving answers consistent with

each theme, to each of the questions:

(1) "What is going well with respect to your work as an

agriculture specialist?"

(2) "What would you like to see changed or improved with

respect to your work as an agriculture specialist?”

We also provide observations and, where appropriate, additional

data to expand on some themes where specialists indicated that

work was going both well and poorly. 

Page 8 GAO-07-209R Views of DHS Agriculture Specialists 
Enclosure I 

4

Results in Brief—Question 1

What is going well with respect to your work as an agriculture

specialist?

• Top 5 themes identified and weighted responses:3

• Working relationships with agriculture specialists and 

nonagriculture inspectors and management (18%).

• Nothing is going well (13%).

• Salary and benefits (10%).

• Training in the classroom and on the job (8%).

• General job satisfaction (6%).

[Note: Slide 16 lists all 14 themes identified for this question.]

3 4% of responses had comments that could not be classified into one of the 14 themes. We classified them as "other.” In our

analyses, responses were weighted to account statistically for all specialists in the population. Thus, the percentages can be 

generalized to the entire population of CBP agriculture specialists. The margin of error at the 95% confidence level varies from

theme to theme but does not exceed plus or minus 10%.

Page 9 GAO-07-209R Views of DHS Agriculture Specialists 
Enclosure I 

5

Results in Brief—Question 2

What would you like to see changed or improved with respect to

your work as an agriculture specialist?

• Top 5 themes identified and weighted responses:4

• Working relationships with agriculture specialists and 

nonagriculture inspectors and management (29%).

• Priority given to the agriculture mission (29%).

• Problems with CBP chain of command (28%).

• Training in the classroom and on the job is inadequate 

(19%).

• Equipment and supplies are inadequate (17%).

[Note: Slide 17 lists all 12 themes identified for this question.]

4 18% of responses had comments that could not be classified into one of the 12 themes. We classified them as "other.” In our

analyses, responses were weighted to account statistically for all specialists in the population. Thus, the percentages can be 

generalized to the entire population of CBP agriculture specialists. The margin of error at the 95% confidence level varies from

theme to theme but does not exceed plus or minus 10%.

Page 10 GAO-07-209R Views of DHS Agriculture Specialists 
Enclosure I 

6

Q1: What is going well with respect to your work 

as an agriculture specialist?

• Working relationships with agriculture specialists and 

nonagriculture inspectors and management.

• An estimated 18% of agriculture specialists identified their

relationships with coworkers, CBP officers, and management

as one aspect of their work that is going well. For example,

some respondents noted:

• CBP officers are beginning to respect the agriculture

mission and have expressed interest in what the agriculture

specialists do.

• Agriculture officers and technicians take the canine 

program seriously.

• Management listens to concerns.

• Supervisors and coworkers have been patient with 

specialists while they complete on-the-job training.

Page 11 GAO-07-209R Views of DHS Agriculture Specialists 
Enclosure I 

7

Q1: What is going well with respect to your work 

as an agriculture specialist?

• Nothing is going well.

• An estimated 13% of agriculture specialists provided a 

generally negative response when given the

opportunity to identify what is going well with their 

work. For example, some respondents noted:

• The agriculture mission has been compromised, 

and the agriculture specialists are no longer

important or respected by management.

• There have been no positive developments since 

the merger with CBP.

Page 12 GAO-07-209R Views of DHS Agriculture Specialists 
Enclosure I 

8

Q1: What is going well with respect to your work 

as an agriculture specialist?

• Salary and benefits.

• An estimated 10% of agriculture specialists identified items 

related to salary and benefits, when asked what is going well.

For example, some respondents indicated

• increased pay (after merging with CBP),

• pay equality with CBP officers,

• flexible work schedule,

• receiving promotions to GS-11,

• ready access to annual and sick leave,

• double-time pay for overtime, and 

• retirement benefits.

Page 13 GAO-07-209R Views of DHS Agriculture Specialists 
Enclosure I 

9

Q1: What is going well with respect to your work 

as an agriculture specialist?

• Training in the classroom and on the job.

• An estimated 8% of agriculture specialists identified trainingrelated issues as aspects of their work that are going well. For

example, some respondents noted:

• New hires are well trained.

• Valuable cross-training opportunities are available in 

immigration and customs inspections and law

enforcement.

• Training is a high priority and more training is available.

• Opportunities are available for canine training.

• Training at the Professional Development Center is 

adequate.

• Cross training reinforces the common mission of

agriculture specialists and CBP officers.

Page 14 GAO-07-209R Views of DHS Agriculture Specialists 
Enclosure I 

10

Q1: What is going well with respect to your work 

as an agriculture specialist?

• General job satisfaction.

• An estimated 6% of agriculture specialists indicated that they

enjoy their job, that their job is important, or that they are 

performing an important mission. For example, some 

respondents indicated

• satisfaction with CBP management and fellow coworkers,

• the importance of their work in protecting U.S. agriculture,

and

• satisfaction with applying their skills and training to their

job.

Page 15 GAO-07-209R Views of DHS Agriculture Specialists 
Enclosure I 

11

Q2: What would you like to see changed or improved 

with respect to your work as an agriculture specialist?

• Working relationships with agriculture specialists and 

nonagriculture inspectors and management.

• An estimated 29% of agriculture specialists indicated concern

that CBP management and nonagriculture specialists lack 

respect or comprehension about the agriculture mission. For

example, some respondents noted:

• Nonagriculture inspectors view agriculture as less 

important than counternarcotics and antiterrorism

activities.

• CBP management is not interested in, and does not

support, agriculture inspections.

• CBP management is biased against specialists because 

they do not carry weapons. Several specialists also wrote 

that they believed that not carrying firearms reduced their

potential for advancement.

Page 16 GAO-07-209R Views of DHS Agriculture Specialists 
Enclosure I 

12

Q2: What would you like to see changed or improved 

with respect to your work as an agriculture specialist?

• Priority given to the agriculture mission.

• An estimated 29% of agriculture specialists indicated concern

that the agriculture mission under CBP is in decline. For

example, some respondents indicated

• an increase in uninspected cargo and flights due to a 

shortage of staff or scheduling decisions by CBP port

management,

• the release of prohibited or restricted products by CBP 

officers who are not agriculture specialists,

• delayed inspections of high-risk vessels until a day after

their arrival, rather than immediately, and

• the decision by CBP management not to conduct vessel 

inspections because of safety concerns or reluctance to

have staff work overtime.

Page 17 GAO-07-209R Views of DHS Agriculture Specialists 
Enclosure I 

13

Q2: What would you like to see changed or improved 

with respect to your work as an agriculture specialist?

• Problems with CBP chain of command.

• An estimated 28% of agriculture specialists indicated 

concern regarding miscommunication along the CBP

chain of command on agriculture issues. For example,

some respondents indicated

• a lack of managers with an agriculture background 

who have knowledge of relevant regulatory issues,

• the requirement for all information requests to be 

passed up the CBP chain of command, which 

impedes timely actions involving high-risk

interceptions, and

• CBP’s hierarchical culture, which some specialists 

said made them reluctant to voice concerns.

Page 18 GAO-07-209R Views of DHS Agriculture Specialists 
Enclosure I 

14

Q2: What would you like to see changed or improved 

with respect to your work as an agriculture specialist?

• Training in the classroom and on the job is inadequate.

• An estimated 19% of agriculture specialists expressed concern 

regarding training, including agriculture inspection training for 

specialists and nonspecialists and cross-training for specialists

on immigration and customs inspections. For example, some

respondents noted:

• The training courses at the Professional Development 

Center do not include instruction on the targeting and 

database systems used by CBP.

• On-the-job training at ports is poor.

• Training of nonspecialists in determining when to refer items

to agriculture specialists for inspection is inadequate.

• CBP canine training standards and methods are not 

appropriate for agriculture canine teams.

Page 19 GAO-07-209R Views of DHS Agriculture Specialists 
Enclosure I 

15

Q2: What would you like to see changed or improved 

with respect to your work as an agriculture specialist?

• Equipment and supplies are inadequate.

• An estimated 17% of agriculture specialists expressed 

concern over lack of funding for supplies related to agriculture

inspections, including canine inspections. For example, some 

respondents noted:

• The requirement that all purchases must be approved by 

the CBP chain of command can delay acquiring needed 

supplies.

• CBP management removed equipment from agriculture

specialists’ offices and has not provided adequate 

replacements.

• Agriculture-specific equipment – such as vials, dissecting gloves, and lab equipment – are in short supply.

• CBP has been slow in providing or has failed to provide 

funds for supplies or services for agriculture canine teams.

Page 20 GAO-07-209R Views of DHS Agriculture Specialists 
Enclosure I 

16

Themes Identified for Q1—What is going well with respect

your work as an agriculture specialist?

Source: GAO analysis of survey responses to this question. aThese percentages can be generalized to the entire population of CBP agriculture specialists. The margin of error

at the 95% confidence level varies from theme to theme but does not exceed plus or minus 10%.

Other comments 33 3.8%

Most things are going well 10 1.8%

Equipment and supplies are adequate 18 2.1%

Flexibility to do job without interference from managers 28 3.1%

Information sharing within CBP and with other agencies 25 4.2%

I have a job (neutral answer) 28 4.3%

Staffing levels are adequate or improving 26 4.8%

Access to CBP databases for targeting and timekeeping purposes 27 4.9%

Agriculture mission (inspections and interceptions) 34 5.4%

CBP’s “one face at the border” inspection policy 36 5.4%

General job satisfaction 34 5.6%

Training in the classroom and on the job 50 7.8%

Salary and benefits 54 10.0%

Nothing is going well 93 12.5%

113 17.9%

Working relationships with agriculture specialists and nonagriculture inspectors and

management

Weighted

percentage of 

responses to 

Q1a

Number of

responses

reflecting this

Theme theme

Page 21 GAO-07-209R Views of DHS Agriculture Specialists 
Enclosure I 

17

Themes Identified for Q2—What would you like to see

changed or improved with respect to your work as an

agriculture specialist?

Source: GAO analysis of survey responses to this question. aThese percentages can be generalized to the entire population of CBP agriculture specialists. The margin of error

at the 95% confidence level varies from theme to theme but does not exceed plus or minus 10%.

Other comments 117 18.2%

Opportunities for temporary assignments 37 7.1%

Return to USDA 61 8.3%

CBP policies that affect the safety of agriculture specialists 59 8.4%

CBP's overtime policy 75 10.5%

Information sharing within CBP and with other agencies 93 12.8%

Salary and benefits 97 15.5%

Staffing levels are low or inadequate 113 16.5%

Equipment and supplies are inadequate 113 17.2%

Training in the classroom and on the job is inadequate 123 18.9%

Problems with CBP chain of command 167 28.3%

Priority given to the agriculture mission 179 29.0%

190 29.2%

Working relationships with agriculture specialists and nonagriculture inspectors and

management

Weighted

percentage of 

responses to 

Q2a

Number of

responses

reflecting this

Theme theme

Page 22 GAO-07-209R Views of DHS Agriculture Specialists 
Enclosure I 

18

Observations

• In general, the narrative responses suggest morale issues among

CBP agriculture specialists.

• Although 480 respondents provided a total of 42 pages of 

comments on what is going well, 540 respondents provided a 

total of 185 pages of comments on what needs to be changed 

or improved. 

• “Nothing is going well” was the second most frequent response

to question 1 (i.e., what is going well).

• Based on the narrative responses, many specialists perceived that 

the agriculture safety mission has been compromised. Responses 

to relevant multiple choice questions in the survey also suggest

this concern. For example, many experienced agriculture

specialists indicated that they were doing either somewhat or many

fewer agriculture inspections (59%) and interceptions (60%) than 

before the transfer. 

Page 23 GAO-07-209R Views of DHS Agriculture Specialists 
Enclosure I

19

Observations

• In the narrative responses, although we estimate that many specialists view the

status of working relationships positively (18%), even more view these

relationships negatively (29%). Responses to the relevant multiple choice

question indicate that most specialists (64%) do not feel that their work is 

respected by CBP management.

• Based on the narrative responses, we estimate that only 8% of specialists view

training as adequate and 16% indicate that it is inadequate. However, responses 

to the relevant multiple choice questions suggest a general satisfaction with

training. For example, we estimate that 90% of experienced specialists 

answered either probably or definitely yes to the question, have you received

adequate training. Similarly, we estimate that most (75%) newer specialists

(hired since the transfer) would respond the same way. 

• In earlier reports, GAO noted that difficulties are not unexpected in a merger and 

might occur in a new DHS.5 GAO found that adequately addressing a wide

variety of people and cultural issues is key to successful mergers and

transformations.

5See GAO Forum: Mergers and Transformation: Lessons Learned for a Department of Homeland Security and Other Federal

Agencies, GAO-03-293SP, and Results-Oriented Cultures: Implementation Steps to Assist Mergers and Organizational

Transformations, GAO-03-669.

Page 24 GAO-07-209R Views of DHS Agriculture Specialists 
Enclosure I 

20

Appendix—Methodology 

• Surveyed CBP agriculture specialists (inspectors) on their

experiences since the transfer (Mar. 1, 2003) and their

assessment of CBP management of the agriculture

inspection mission.

• Drew a representative sample of 827 specialists from a total 

population of about 1,800 (as of Oct. 14, 2005). We

received 626 completed surveys—a response rate of 76%.

• Used a Web-based questionnaire with 31 multiple choice

questions and 2 open-ended questions. Responses to the

multiple choice questions were included in GAO-06-644.

Page 25 GAO-07-209R Views of DHS Agriculture Specialists 
Enclosure I 

21

Appendix—Methodology 

Survey respondents’ characteristics:

• 80% agriculture specialists

• 5% canine specialists

• 13% supervisory agriculture specialists6

• 71% transferred from USDA 

• 28% hired by CBP7

.

6The remaining 2% of respondents categorized themselves as “other.” 7The percentage of specialists transferred from USDA and the percentage hired by CBP do not total 100 due to rounding.

Page 26 GAO-07-209R Views of DHS Agriculture Specialists 
Enclosure II 

Scope and Methodology

To determine the areas in which Customs and Border and Patrol (CBP) agriculture 

specialists believe that work is going well and in which it needs change or 

improvement, we identified the major themes in the narrative responses that CBP 

agriculture specialists provided to the survey we conducted from November 2005 

through January 2006. We surveyed these specialists to obtain information on their 

work experiences since the transfer from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) 

and their assessment of CBP’s management, particularly with respect to the 

agriculture inspection mission. The survey contained 31 multiple-choice questions 

and two open-ended questions—“What is going well with respect to your work as an 

agriculture specialist?” and “What would you like to see changed or improved with 

respect to your work as an agriculture specialist?” 

To conduct the survey, we drew a representative sample of 827 agriculture specialists 

from a total population of about 1,800 (as of October 14, 2005). We received 626 

completed questionnaires, for a response rate of approximately 76 percent. A 

majority of the survey respondents were agriculture specialists, while the remaining 

respondents were supervisory agriculture specialists and canine specialists, with a 

few categorizing themselves as “other.” Most of the respondents (71 percent) 

transferred to CBP from USDA, while the others were hired directly by CBP (28 

percent).6

 Each sampled agriculture specialist was subsequently weighted in the 

analysis so that our results can be generalized statistically to the entire population of 

agriculture specialists. The margin of error at the 95-percent confidence level varies 

by theme, but does not exceed plus or minus 10 percent. 

In analyzing the open-ended responses that are the focus of this report, we first 

identified, through discussions among GAO team members, the major themes in the 

responses. Two team members, working independently, then identified the themes 

for each response. Where the two team members disagreed, they discussed their 

decisions until they reached agreement. Thus, there was 100-percent agreement 

between the two team members. The number of responses for each theme was then 

calculated. Finally, the work of the two team members was reviewed by a third team 

member. Results are presented on pages 21 and 22 of this report. 

We performed our work from September through October 2006 in accordance with 

generally accepted government auditing standards. 

 6

 The percentage of specialists transferred from USDA and the percentage hired by CBP do not total 

100 due to rounding. 

Page 27 GAO-07-209R Views of DHS Agriculture Specialists 
Enclosure III 

GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments

GAO Contact

Lisa Shames, (202) 512-3841 or shamesl@gao.gov 

Acknowledgments

In addition to the individual listed above, James R. Jones, Jr., Assistant Director; Gary 

T. Brown; Chad M. Gorman; Lynn M. Musser; Stephen C. Rossman; Sidney H. 

Schwartz; and Carol Herrnstadt Shulman made key contributions to this report. 

(360769)

Page 28 GAO-07-209R Views of DHS Agriculture Specialists 
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. 
GAO’s Mission 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 

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