Department of Homeland Security
 

��������������������������
 

DHS Home-to-Work Transportation
 

OIG-14-21 December 2013
 
OFFJCE OF lNSPEC."'OR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

Wrtshingwtl. 0(' 20:52K :' www.oii-t.db:i.go\' 

MEMORANDUM FOR: The Honorable Rafael Borras 

Under Secretary for Management 

Office of Management 

Michael Karau 

Acting Assistant Deputy for Mobile Assets and Personal 

Property Program Office 

C/ice C:Xaa~JX\...._t _ FROM: Carlton I. Mann 

Chief Operat ing Officer 

SUBJECT: DHS Home-to-Work Transportation 

Attached for your action is our final report, OHS Home-to-Work Transportation. We 

incorporated the formal comments from the Office of Management In the final report. 

The report contains five recommendations aimed at improving DHS' management of the 

home-to-work transportation program. Your office concurred with all five 

recommendations. DHS submitted a formal response to the draft report with a 

management decision for each recommendation and OIG approves of DH5' plan. Based 

on information provided in your response to the draft report, we consider 

recommendations 1 through 4 resolved and open, and recommendation 5 is unresolved 

and open. Once your office has fully implemented the recommendations, please submit 

a formal closeout letter to us within 30 days so that we may close the 

recommendations. The memorandum should be accompanied by evidence of 

completion of agreed-upon corrective actions. Please email a signed PDF copy of all 

responses and closeout requests to OIGAuditsfollowup@oig.dhs.gov. 

Consistent with our responsibility under the Inspector General Act, we will provide 

copies of our report to appropriate congressional committees with oversight and 

appropriation responsibility over the Department of Homeland Security. We will post 

the report on our website for public dissemination. 

Please call me with any questions, or your staff may contact Mark Bell, Acting Assistant 

Inspector General for Audits at {202) 254-4100. 

Attachment 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

Table of Contents 

Executive Summary ............................................................................................................ 1 

Background ........................................................................................................................ 2 

Results of Audit ... ............................................................................................................... 3 

Monitoring and Oversight of Home-to-Work Transportation ............................... 4 

Recommendations .................................................................................................. 8 

Management Comments and OIG Analysis ............................................................ 9 

Appendixes

Appendix A: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology ............................................ 12 

Appendix B: Management Comments to the Draft Report ............................... 14 

Appendix C: Eligibility Type As Reported on Authorization Forms .................... 16 

Appendix D: Major Contributors to This Report ................................................ 17 

Appendix E: Report Distribution ........................................................................ 18 

Abbreviations

CBP U.S. Customs and Border Protection 

CRSO Chief Readiness Support Officer 

DHS Department of Homeland Security 

FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency 

FMR Federal Management Regulation 

FY fiscal year 

GAO Government Accountability Office 

HtW home-to-work 

ICE U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement 

NPPD National Protection and Programs Directorate 

OIG Office of Inspector General 

OCAO Office of the Chief Administrative Officer 

TSA Transportation Security Administration 

U.S.C. United States Code 

USCG United States Coast Guard 

USSS United States Secret Service
 

 OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

Executive Summary

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has one of the largest motor vehicle fleets 

in the Federal Government, with more than 56,000 vehicles costing approximately 

$534 million annually. Home-to-work transportation is the use of government passenger 

carriers, including motor vehicles, by employees for transportation between their 

homes and places of work. According to DHS, home-to-work transportation is a flexible 

and powerful tool for meeting mission requirements and enhancing the overall 

responsiveness to emergency situations. Our audit objective was to determine whether 

DHS has implemented appropriate internal controls to ensure that home-to-work 

transportation is justified and used efficiently.

DHS has attempted to establish policies and procedures to ensure that its use of hometo-work transportation is effective and efficient, that data and reporting are reliable, 

and that it complies with applicable laws and regulations. However, the Department and 

the Components we reviewed do not adequately monitor and provide oversight of 

home-to-work transportation to ensure that the Components are complying with 

departmental guidance and consistently gathering timely, accurate information on 

eligibility and authorization, vehicle use, and the number of participants. 

The Department does not always ensure that home-to-work transportation applicants 

comply with eligibility requirements and that use of home-to-work transportation is 

authorized and justified. It has also not ensured that all Components using home-towork transportation have complied with the annual reporting requirement in DHS 

Manual 112-05-001 Home-to-Work Transportation. As a result, DHS does not have 

reliable and accurate data to determine whether participation is justified or to make 

informed decisions about the use of home-to-work transportation. 

We made five recommendations to the Department to implement stronger internal

controls, improve guidance on the home-to-work transportation program, and 

implement a department-wide, centralized data system to track and monitor home-towork transportation information. The Department concurred with all five

recommendations. 

www.oig.dhs.gov 1 OIG-14-21
 
 

 OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

Background 

DHS has one of the largest motor vehicle fleets in the Federal Government, with more 

than 56,000 vehicles costing approximately $534 million annually. The Department’s 

fleet is composed of government passenger vehicles used for official business to assist in 

accomplishing the missions of the Department and its Components. 

The DHS Manual 112-05-001 Home-to-Work Transportation (DHS HtW manual) defines 

home-to-work (HtW) transportation as the use of government passenger carriers (motor 

vehicles, aircraft, boats, ships, or other similar means of transportation) to transport 

employees between their homes and places of work. According to DHS, HtW 

transportation is a flexible and powerful tool for meeting mission requirements and 

enhancing the overall responsiveness to emergency situations. 

As of May 2013, DHS had more than 17,000 employees authorized to use HtW 

transportation. Table 1 shows the total number of authorized users of HtW 

transportation by Component for fiscal year (FY) 2012. 

Table 1: FY 2012 Authorized HtW Users by Component 

DHS Component 

HtW 

Authorized 

Users 

Total 

Number of 

Domestic 

Employees 

Percentage of 

workforce 

authorized to 

use HtW 

transportation

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement 

(ICE) 7,938 19,902 40%

U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) 3,081 59,103 5% 

United States Secret Service (USSS) 2,791 6,693 42%

Transportation Security Administration (TSA) 2,276 64,312 4% 

National Protection and Programs Directorate 

(NPPD) 972 2,883 34%

United States Coast Guard (USCG) 411 49,585 1% 

Federal Emergency Management Agency 

(FEMA) 3 16,512 <1% 

Remaining components with large vehicle fleets 

and no HtW 0 17,377 0% 

Total 17,472 236,367 7%

Source: OIG analysis of data from DHS Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer and Component 

Headquarters 

www.oig.dhs.gov 2 OIG-14-21
 

 OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

Title 31, United States Code (U.S.C.) § 1344 grants each Federal agency head the 

authority to determine which job positions are eligible to use HtW transportation. The 

statute authorizes the use of HtW transportation for certain high level officials. It also 

provides the DHS Secretary with the ability to authorize HtW for employees engaged in: 

(1) performance of fieldwork; (2) intelligence, counterintelligence, protective services, 

and criminal law enforcement duties; (3) an emergency; (4) compelling operational 

consideration; or (5) clear and present danger. DHS has combined some of these 

eligibility categories. The DHS HtW manual reflects the legal framework by requiring 

DHS employees to select one of five eligibility categories: (1) legislative; (2) fieldwork; 

(3) intelligence, counterintelligence, protective services, or criminal law enforcement; 

(4) highly unusual circumstances; and (5) contingency determinations. 

During our audit, the Office of the Chief Administrative Officer (OCAO) was merged with 

the Office of the Chief Readiness Support Officer (CRSO). DHS’ Mobile Assets and 

Personal Property Program Office, which is under the CRSO, assists Components with 

fleet management policy and oversight and is charged with ensuring that Components 

comply with Federal and departmental fleet management and HtW policies, laws, and 

regulations. In November 2010, the Mobile Assets and Personal Property Program Office 

issued the DHS HtW manual, which sets forth procedures and requirements for DHS’ 

HtW transportation, including guidance for Components to ensure efficiency and 

accountability throughout the Department. 

Our audit focused on the five DHS Components with the largest fleets and the most

employees authorized to use HtW transportation—CBP, ICE, USSS, the USCG, and TSA. 

See appendix A for our objective, scope, and methodology. 

Results of Audit 

DHS has attempted to establish policies and procedures to ensure that its use of HtW 

transportation is effective and efficient, that data and reporting are reliable, and that it 

complies with applicable laws and regulations. However, the Department and the 

Components we reviewed do not adequately monitor and provide oversight of HtW 

transportation to ensure that the Components are complying with its guidance and

consistently gathering timely, accurate information on eligibility and authorization, 

vehicle use, and the number of participants. 

The Department does not always ensure that HtW transportation applicants comply 

with eligibility requirements and that use of HtW transportation is authorized and 

justified. The Department has not ensured that all Components using HtW 

transportation have complied with DHS’ annual reporting requirement. As a result, DHS

www.oig.dhs.gov 3 OIG-14-21
 
 

 

 OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

does not have reliable and accurate data to determine whether participation is justified 

or to make informed decisions about the use of HtW transportation. 

Monitoring and Oversight of Home-to-Work Transportation

DHS does not adequately monitor and oversee HtW transportation activities to 

ensure that the Components comply with its guidance and consistently gather 

timely, accurate information on vehicle use and HtW participants, including their 

eligibility and authorization to use HtW transportation. Specifically, the

Department does not track HtW users accurately, review authorizations 

sufficiently, or ensure that reauthorizations are timely. DHS and the Components 

do not track, monitor, and report HtW transportation-related activities 

adequately, which may hinder detection of waste and abuse. Although all 

Components with HtW transportation users are required to report information 

on the program annually to the OCAO, only two Components have met this 

requirement. Consequently, the Department does not have accurate information 

on participant eligibility, vehicle mileage, including mileage associated with 

commuting and operations, as well as fuel costs. 

Tracking and Monitoring HtW-related Information

Neither DHS nor the Components have systems to track and monitor HtWrelated data adequately or gather it in a central system. For example, to respond 

to a request for the total number of HtW users, DHS relied on and provided 2-

year-old data; CBP, TSA, and USSS headquarters had to request information from 

their field offices. CBP and ICE headquarters have fleet information systems, but 

the field offices cannot access these systems and instead collect HtW use on 

monthly paper-based logs. 

Although DHS Components collect HtW data submitted by individual users, they 

are not aggregating or verifying the monthly data for all HtW users. According to 

40 U.S.C. § 17502, Federal agencies should establish and operate a centralized 

monitoring system for motor vehicle operations; however, DHS does not have 

such a system to identify, collect, and analyze the costs of operating and 

maintaining its vehicle fleet. A centralized system would assist DHS in gathering 

and maintaining comprehensive and up-to-date information on HtW 

transportation, in analyzing the activities, and in determining whether the

program could be more cost efficient. The absence of such a system hinders the 

Department and its Components in obtaining and using reliable data for internal 

and external reporting and in making informed decisions. The Mobile Assets and 

www.oig.dhs.gov 4 OIG-14-21
 
 

 

 

 OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

Personal Property Program Office acknowledged the need for Components to 

track and maintain useful HtW information in an easily accessible data system. 

Eligibility and Authorizations 

Although the DHS HtW manual describes the eligibility categories, which must be 

selected for authorizing HtW transportation, the Department is not enforcing 

compliance. Some Components do not follow the guidance and use componentcreated eligibility categories, making it more difficult for DHS to determine 

whether participation is justified according to Federal law. For example, on TSA 

authorization request forms, employees justified the need for HtW 

transportation based on the program office in which they work. 

Although the DHS HtW manual includes descriptions of who is eligible to use 

HtW transportation, the manual does not include definitions or examples of the 

types of positions or duties for its eligibility categories, which may allow 

ineligible personnel to participate in the program. The manual does not define 

terms such as intelligence, counterintelligence, protective services, or criminal 

law enforcement as they relate to the Department’s mission. According to the 

General Services Administration Bulletin FMR B-35 Motor Vehicle Management, 

in their HtW programs, all agencies should consider defining terms such as 

emergency use, criminal law enforcement, intelligence, and counterintelligence 

as they relate to the agencies’ specific operations. 

Once a supervisor has determined that an employee is eligible for HtW 

transportation, the employee must complete and submit a DHS HtW 

authorization request for review. In DHS’ review process, field office supervisors 

approve and sign requests for authorization and forward them to Component 

headquarters officials. Headquarters officials are supposed to combine all field 

office HtW authorization requests and submit them to OCAO to review and 

recommend for approval or denial by the Secretary of DHS. OCAO is responsible 

for ensuring that authorization packages are complete, have sufficient detail, 

and comply with applicable laws and regulations. 

DHS does not ensure that HtW authorization requests are complete and 

accurate. During our site visits to Component field offices, we identified 25 of 

482 employees who were using HtW vehicles when their authorization forms 

were incomplete and did not comply with DHS guidance—16 forms did not have 

a supervisor’s signature and 9 forms did not include an eligibility category or 

provide a justification narrative. In addition to the 25, 15 of the 482 employees 

using HtW transportation did not have an authorization form on file at the time

www.oig.dhs.gov 5 OIG-14-21
 
 

 OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

of our review. During our interviews at eight locations, four employees 

responsible for fleet management said that officers and agents considered the 

HtW vehicles a perk to their position and reported that they viewed HtW

transportation as more of an entitlement. DHS needs to strengthen the guidance 

in its HtW manual to ensure that each HtW authorization request adequately 

justifies and supports the need for an HtW vehicle. 

DHS has not ensured that Components submit timely requests to reauthorize the 

use of HtW transportation, and some participants use HtW vehicles even though 

the HtW authorization expired. We reviewed 482 authorizations and identified 

38 that were expired for employees who were using HtW vehicles for either 

fieldwork or a compelling operational consideration. According to the DHS HtW 

manual, fieldwork authorizations are limited to 2 years, after which use of HtW 

must be reauthorized. Compelling operational considerations are effective for 

not more than 15 calendar days, but can be extended for up to 180 days. 

Although DHS allows determinations for employees engaged in intelligence, 

counterintelligence, protective services, or criminal law enforcement duties to 

be generally open-ended, the HtW manual recommends that the Department 

and its Components monitor and oversee HtW transportation to ensure that the 

vehicle is still needed to meet the mission. We identified 67 law enforcement 

and 56 intelligence HtW authorizations that were not reviewed in more than 2 

years. The HtW manual identifies 2 years as the maximum timeframe for which 

the eligibility categories should be reviewed. We used this timeframe as a 

benchmark that should also be applied to law enforcement and intelligence 

authorizations. However, the manual does not specify the policies and 

procedures for periodic reauthorization related to law enforcement officials or 

any other categories for use of HtW transportation. See appendix C for more 

details. 

Data on Vehicle Use 

We identified errors and inconsistencies in the Components’ HtW data, which 

hamper the Department’s ability to make informed decisions for HtW 

transportation. Specifically, during our fieldwork, we identified Component field 

offices that: 

www.oig.dhs.gov 6 OIG-14-21
 
 

 OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

•	 Could not provide the actual number of HtW miles driven. 

•	 Could not determine the fuel costs directly related to commuting from home 

to work. 

•	 Reported different authorized HtW users than were included on lists from 

their Component headquarters. When comparing the lists of authorized 

participants from the Component headquarters that we reviewed to the lists 

provided by the field offices that we visited, we identified 1,288 employees 

whose names appeared on one list or another, but not on both lists. 

•	 Tracked HtW miles inconsistently. Some employees defined HtW use as any 

miles driven during their commute between their home and their duty 

station, whereas other employees defined HtW use as any miles driven in 

their HtW vehicle. 

•	 Applied inconsistent definitions and circumstances for recording call-outs. 

Call-outs, commonly defined as responses to emergency situations, are a 

primary justification for law enforcement officers to use HtW transportation. 

Some Components had employees who commuted more than the established 

50-mile limit each way at the seven locations we visited. According to the DHS 

HtW manual, HtW transportation cannot exceed 50 miles each way from 

residence to duty station, unless the OCAO grants a waiver. We verified the 

distance between 473 employees’ recorded home address and the duty station 

address and identified 19 employees who were non-compliant with the 50-mile 

limit and did not have an approved waiver. One employee at a field office 

commuted as far as 164 miles each way. In its annual HtW report to DHS, NPPD 

reported 64 employees who were not in compliance with the 50-mile limit and 

did not have a waiver on file. As of August 2013, DHS had not taken action to 

address NPPD’s reported noncompliance. 

Annual Reporting Requirement

The Department has not ensured that all Components using HtW transportation 

have complied with its annual reporting requirement. According to the DHS HtW 

manual, by December 31 of each year, all Components must submit to OCAO a 

comparison of the HtW transportation costs proposed in the original request for 

authorization to those actually incurred, when the actual costs exceed the 

original projection. At a minimum, these cost comparisons must include

www.oig.dhs.gov 7 OIG-14-21
 
 

 

 

 

 OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

maintenance, fuel, and repairs; and a "Statement of Assurance" that the 

Component is meeting all statutory requirements of the program. 

Only CBP and NPPD submitted the 2012 annual HtW transportation report, and 

neither submission included a comparison between proposed and actual costs 

because neither had the necessary information to compare costs. According to 

CBP’s annual report, its data collection process does not have the fidelity to 

meet the annual reporting requirement. CBP intends to improve the data 

currently stored and entered into its HtW tracking system, in an effort aimed at 

validating and correcting vehicle inventory data and HtW reporting. As of August 

2013, the Mobile Assets and Personal Property Program Office had not 

requested these required reports from any other Components, nor had it 

requested the missing cost information in the submitted reports. 

Conclusion

DHS has not implemented all the necessary internal controls for the use of HtW 

transportation, and it does not have reliable and accurate data to determine 

whether participation is justified or to make informed decisions about the use of 

HtW transportation. With more than 17,000 employees using governmentprovided vehicles, the Department needs to improve the reliability of program 

data so that it can thoroughly assess all HtW transportation-related activities to 

ensure that only eligible employees who meet its policy requirements are 

participating in the HtW program. 

Recommendations 

We recommend that the Under Secretary for Management: 

Recommendation #1:

Strengthen the DHS Manual 112-05-001 Home-to-Work Transportation with 

clear definitions and guidelines for eligibility to participate and establishing 

guidance for periodic reauthorization of all approved home-to-work 

authorizations.

www.oig.dhs.gov 8 OIG-14-21
 
 

 

 OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

Recommendation #2: 

Implement policies to ensure Components collect reliable information necessary 

to track, monitor, analyze, and report on home-to-work transportation use and 

costs. 

Recommendation #3: 

Enforce the DHS Manual 112-05-001 Home-to-Work Transportation annual 

reporting requirement.

Recommendation #4: 

Perform a thorough assessment of the home-to-work transportation program 

annually to validate the accuracy and completeness of the information reported, 

Component monitoring efforts, compliance with DHS guidance, and home-towork transportation participant eligibility. 

Recommendation #5: 

Implement a centralized, department-wide, home-to-work data system, 

accessible by headquarters and Component personnel, to collect, track, and 

monitor home-to-work transportation-related information, such as 

authorizations, costs, vehicle use, and number of users. 

Management Comments and OIG Analysis 

DHS provided formal comments to our report. A copy of the response in its 

entirety is included as appendix B. DHS also provided a separate document with 

technical comments and suggested revisions to our report. We reviewed the 

technical comments and made minor changes in the report when appropriate. 

DHS concurred with all five of our recommendations. A summary of the 

responses and our analysis of those responses follow. 

Response to Recommendation #1: DHS concurred. The CRSO will work with 

Component operations to strengthen the HtW manual and clarify definitions and 

guidelines for eligibility to participate. DHS will also establish guidance for 

periodic renewal of all approved HtW authorizations. The estimated completion 

date is June 30, 2014. 

www.oig.dhs.gov 9 OIG-14-21
 
 

 OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

OIG Analysis: DHS’ planned corrective actions are responsive to the 

recommendation. This recommendation will remain resolved and open until we 

receive documented support that DHS has strengthened the HtW manual and 

established guidance for periodic HtW reauthorizations. 

Response to Recommendation #2: DHS concurred. The CRSO plans to develop a 

data dictionary to specify each data element that must be included to document 

HtW use. The CRSO will also edit the HtW manual to include implementation 

guidance on the collecting and reporting of data and will issue a standard 

mileage log for use in the field. The estimated completion date is September 30, 

2014. 

OIG Analysis: DHS’ planned corrective actions are responsive to the 

recommendation. This recommendation will remain resolved and open until we 

receive documented support that DHS has edited the HtW manual to include

implementation guidance on collecting and reporting HtW data. We will also 

need to verify that DHS has developed and issued a data dictionary and a 

standard mileage log. 

Response to Recommendation #3: DHS concurred. The CRSO will continue to 

encourage Components to comply with the reporting requirements by sending 

reminders of their responsibilities and offering support in meeting and 

understanding requirements. A certification requirement for the Component 

Head will be added to the requirement starting with the 2014 annual report. The 

estimated completion date is September 30, 2014. 

OIG Analysis: DHS’ planned corrective actions are responsive to the 

recommendation. OIG understands that the CRSO has oversight responsibility 

but limited authority to enforce Components’ compliance with the annual 

reporting requirement. This recommendation will remain resolved and open 

until we receive documented support that DHS is fulfilling its oversight 

responsibility to encourage the Components to comply with the annual HtW 

reporting requirement.

Response to Recommendation #4: DHS concurred. The CRSO will institute an 

annual review of Component HtW programs and documentation supporting all 

approved HtW requests. The estimated completion date is September 30, 2014. 

OIG Analysis: DHS’ planned corrective actions are responsive to the 

recommendation. This recommendation will remain resolved and open until we 

receive documented support that DHS has instituted an annual review of 

www.oig.dhs.gov 10 OIG-14-21
 
 

 

 OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

Component HtW programs and documentation supporting all approved HtW 

requests. 

Response to Recommendation #5: DHS concurred and within the next 180 days, 

the CRSO will explore options for developing or acquiring a department-wide 

HtW data system. DHS plans to develop an implementation schedule if a viable 

option exists. The estimated completion date is to be determined. 

OIG Analysis: DHS’s planned corrective actions seem responsive to the 

recommendation. The recommendation will remain unresolved and open until 

we receive documented support on how DHS plans to implement a centralized, 

department-wide HtW data system. 

www.oig.dhs.gov 11 OIG-14-21
 
 

 OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

Appendix A 

Objectives, Scope, and Methodology 

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Office of Inspector General (OIG) was 

established by the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (Public Law 107-296) by amendment 

to the Inspector General Act of 1978. This is one of a series of audit, inspection, and 

special reports prepared as part of our oversight responsibilities to promote economy, 

efficiency, and effectiveness within the Department. 

This report provides the results of our work to determine whether DHS has 

implemented appropriate internal controls to ensure the use of HtW transportation is 

justified and used efficiently. To achieve our objectives, we interviewed DHS officials 

and Component personnel from the Mobile Assets and Personal Property Program 

Office, CBP, ICE, TSA, USSS, and the USCG. 

We reviewed policies and procedures related to HtW transportation including 31 U.S.C. 

§ 1344, Passenger Carrier Use, which grants the agency head authority to determine 

HtW eligibility, 41 CFR Part 102-5 covering HtW transportation, the General Services

Administration Bulletin FMR B-35 Motor Vehicle Management on HtW transportation, 

the DHS Manual 112-05-001 Home-to-Work Transportation, and fleet management 

handbooks of the various Components we reviewed. 

We met with officials at eight locations to review the HtW activities. In Washington, DC, 

we met with officials at DHS’ Mobile Assets and Personal Property Program Office, 

which is under the CRSO and assists Components with fleet management policy and 

oversight. We conducted fieldwork testing at the five DHS Components with the largest 

fleets—CBP, ICE, USSS, the USCG, and TSA—at the following seven locations: Boston, 

MA; San Diego, Los Angeles, and Long Beach, CA; Tucson and Phoenix, AZ; and Chicago, 

IL. We selected site visit locations based on the following criteria: field offices with the 

largest fleets; field offices reporting the largest participation in HtW transportation; 

locations with multiple co-located Component offices (CBP, ICE, USSS, the USCG, and 

TSA); and Component offices near OIG offices to save travel funds. We excluded OIG to 

meet the generally accepted government auditing standards conceptual framework 

approach to independence. 

www.oig.dhs.gov 12 OIG-14-21
 
 

 OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

During site visits— 

•	 We collected HtW authorizations to verify whether the employees were 

authorized to use HtW vehicles; 

•	 We reviewed vehicle log records to determine whether HtW and operational 

mileage, response to emergencies, and monthly mileage readings were 

documented; and 

•	 We completed a vehicle verification form for all HtW officers and agents we 

interviewed to determine where they reported daily on their duties and how 

often they used their HtW vehicle. We also inspected their vehicles to verify the 

accuracy of headquarters and local vehicle inventory files. We verified the

vehicle identification number in the headquarters and local fleet inventories to 

ensure that both offices were tracking HtW vehicle use. 

We interviewed field supervisors and users with oversight responsibility for HtW 

vehicles and reviewed vehicle inventories, vehicle usage logs, and HtW authorizations. 

We mapped the distance from duty station to residence for all HtW users we 

interviewed to determine if they were complying with the DHS HtW manual’s 50-mile 

commuting limit. Because of limited audit resources, we relied on Component selfreporting and did not perform data reliability tests on the data we received from the 

DHS Components pertaining to their HtW fleet inventories, number of approved HtW 

users, or vehicle log records. 

We conducted this performance audit between November 2012 and June 2013 

pursuant to the Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended, and according to generally 

accepted government auditing standards. Those standards require that we plan and 

perform the audit to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable 

basis for our findings and conclusions based upon our audit objectives. This is one of a 

series of audit, inspection, and special reports prepared as part of our oversight 

responsibilities to promote economy, efficiency, and effectiveness within the 

Department. We believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our 

findings and conclusions based upon our audit objectives. 

www.oig.dhs.gov 13 OIG-14-21
 
 OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

Appendix B 

Management Comments to the Draft Report 

U.S. Department or llomdand Security 

\Yashinl!IOn, DC 20528 

Homeland 

Security 

November 13.2013 

MEMORANDUM FOR: Charles K. Edwards 

Deputy Inspector General 

Office of inspector General 

FROM: Jim H. Crumpacker kj{.. q} . ~ , Director 

Departmental GA0-0 Liaison 

~ 

Office 

SUBJECT: OIG Draft Report: "DHS Home to Work Transportation" (Project 

No. 13-016-AUD-MGMT) 

Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this draft report. The U.S. Department 

of Homeland Security (DHS) appreciates the Office oflnspector General's (OIG's) work in 

planning and conducting its review and issuing this report. 

DHS recognizes the importance of managing its resources to effectively deliver its mission. The 

Department established policy and related procedures and requirements for the Home to Work 

(HtW) transportation program with the issuance of the DHS HtW Manual in November 20 I 0. 

The HtW Manual includes guidance establishing and maintaining Component-specific programs 

to ensure HtW efficiency and accountability throughout the Department. 

The draft rep01t contained five recommendations with which the Department concurs. 

Specifically, OTG recommended that the Under Secretary for Management: 

Recommendation 1: Strengthen the DHS Manual 112-05-001 Home-to-Work Transportation 

with clear definitions and guidelines for eligibility to participate and establishing guidance for 

periodic reauthorization of all approved HtW authorizations. 

Response: Concur. The DHS Chief Readiness Support Officer (CRSO) will work with 

Component operations to strengthen the manual, clarifying definitions and guidelines for 

eligibility to participate. This work will include objective criteria for eligibility for each of the 

HtW categories: fieldwork, intelligence, counterintelligence, protective services, criminal law 

enforcement, highly unusual circumstances, and contingency detenninations. Guidance will also 

be established for periodic renewal of all approved HtW authorizations. We anticipate revising 

and reissuing the manual within approximately 180 days. Estimated Completion Date (ECD): 

June 30,2014. 

Recommendation 2: Implement policies to ensure Components collect reliable infonnation 

necessary to track, monitor, and analyze, and report on home-to-work transportation usc and 

costs. 

www.oig.dhs.gov 14 OIG-14-21
 
 OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

Response: Concur. The OilS CRSO will develop a data dictionary and specify each data 

element that must be included to document HtW. The HtW Manual will be edited to include 

implementation guidance relative to collection and reporting of data, including responsibilities 

for data capture, consolidation, and monitoring. These steps should improve the understanding 

of the data required and the quality of the data captured. A standard mileage log with mileage 

recorded by employee, certified by supervisor and forwarded to local fleet manager for data 

entry on a periodic (monthly) basis will be issued for implementation. The daily log will include 

a reminder of the employee's ethics responsibilities and potential consequences for failing to 

meet expected standards in the footer. ECD: September 30, 2014. 

Recommendation 3: Enforce the DHS Manua/112-05-001 Home-to-Work Transportation 

annual reporting requirement. 

Response: Concur. The DHS CRSO will continue to encourage Components to comply with 

reporting requirements established in December 2008 in Management Directive 11 2-05, !lome to 

Work Transportation Programs. Strategies to encourage Component compliance include 

frequent reminders of their responsibilities, offers of support in meeting and understanding 

requirements, and meeting with Component management and/or other operations upon which the 

Component fleet managers rely for data and compliance. A certification requirement for the 

Component Head will be added to the requirement starting with the 2014 annual report. ECD: 

September 30,2014. 

Recommendation 4: Perform a thorough assessment of the home-to-work transportation 

program annually to validate the accuracy and completeness of the infonnation reported, 

component monitoring efforts, compliance with DHS guidance, and HtW transportation 

participant eligibility. 

Response: Concur. The DHS CRSO will continue efforts to monitor data submitted by 

Components for compliance. This will include instituting an armual review of Component HtW 

programs and documentation supporting all approved requests. CRSO will assess the 

Component HtW programs in conjunction with its broader assessment of support services 

programs in 2014. ECD: September 30,2014. 

Recommendation 5: Implement a centralized, department-wide, home-to-work data system, 

accessible by headquarters and component personnel, to collect, track, and monitor home-towork transportation-related information, such as authorizations, costs, vehicle use, and number 

of users. 

Response: Concur. The DHS CRSO will explore options for development or acquisition of a 

DHS-wide, HtW data system with a goal of developing requirements within the next 180 days. 

Specific findings and an implementation schedule will then be developed if a viable option is 

identified and given the availability of budgetary resources. Should resource constraints or other 

concerns preclude development of a DHS-wide system; alternatives will be identified to meet the 

intent ofOIG's recommendations. ECD: To Be Detcnnined 

Again, thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this draft report. Technical 

comments were previously provided under separate cover. Please feel free to contact me should 

you have any questions. We look forward to working with you in the future. 

www.oig.dhs.gov 15 OIG-14-21
 
 

 

 

 OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

Appendix C 

Eligibility Type As Reported on Authorization Forms 

Eligibility Category 

Reported by 

Component 

Duration Authorizations 

Reviewed 

Expired or No 

Evidence of

Review in more 

than 2 years 

Legislative (Senior Level 

Officials) Unlimited 0 N/A 

Intelligence Generally open-ended 77 56 

Law Enforcement Not listed as one of the five 

types of eligibility, used duration 

for intelligence. 

172 67

Highly Unusual

Circumstances

15 calendar days with two 90-

day extensions 0 0 

Fieldwork 2 years 100 9

Compelling Operational 

Consideration 

Not listed as one of the five 

types of eligibility, used duration 

for Highly Unusual 

Circumstances. 

36 29

Emergency Not listed as one of the five 

types of eligibility, used the 

maximum duration of 2 years. 

6 0 

Contingency 

Determinations 

Limited duration 0 0

No Authorization on File Could not determine 15 15 

No, Multiple, or 

Component-Created 

Eligibility Selections 

Could not determine 76 N/A 

Totals 482 176

Source: DHS OIG Analysis of Authorizations

www.oig.dhs.gov 16 OIG-14-21
 

 OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

Appendix D 

Major Contributors to This Report 

Patrick O’Malley, Director 

Shelley Howes, Audit Manager 

Lindsey Koch, Auditor-in-Charge 

Sandra Ward-Greer, Auditor 

Frank Lucas, Auditor 

Tom Hamlin, Program Analyst 

Kelly Herberger, Communications Analyst

Ralleisha Dean, Independent Referencer

www.oig.dhs.gov 17 OIG-14-21
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

Department of Homeland Security 

Appendix E 

Report Distribution 

Department of Homeland Security 

Secretary 

Deputy Secretary 

Chief of Staff 

Deputy Chief of Staff 

Chief Administrative Officer 

General Counsel 

Executive Secretary 

Under Secretary for Management 

Director, GAO/OIG Liaison Office 

Assistant Secretary for Office of Policy 

Assistant Secretary for Office of Public Affairs 

Assistant Secretary for Office of Legislative Affairs 

Mobile Assets and Personal Property Program Office 

Component Liaison, U.S. Customs and Border Protection 

Component Liaison, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement 

Component Liaison, United States Secret Service 

Component Liaison, United States Coast Guard 

Component Liaison, Transportation Security Administration 

Chief Privacy Officer 

Office of Management and Budget 

Chief, Homeland Security Branch 

DHS OIG Budget Examiner 

Congress 

Congressional Oversight and Appropriations Committees, as appropriate 

www.oig.dhs.gov 18 OIG-14-21 
 

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND COPIES 

To obtain additional copies of this document, please call us at (202) 254-4100, fax your 

request to (202) 254-4305, or e-mail your request to our Office of Inspector General 

(OIG) Office of Public Affairs at: DHS-OIG.OfficePublicAffairs@oig.dhs.gov. 

For additional information, visit our website at: www.oig.dhs.gov, or follow us on Twitter 

at: @dhsoig. 

OIG HOTLINE 

To expedite the reporting of alleged fraud, waste, abuse or mismanagement, or any 

other kinds of criminal or noncriminal misconduct relative to Department of Homeland 

Security (DHS) programs and operations, please visit our website at www.oig.dhs.gov 

and click on the red tab titled "Hotline" to report. You will be directed to complete and 

submit an automated DHS OIG Investigative Referral Submission Form. Submission 

through our website ensures that your complaint will be promptly received and 

reviewed by DHS OIG. 

Should you be unable to access our website, you may submit your complaint in writing 

to: 

Department of Homeland Security 


Office of Inspector General, Mail Stop 0305 


Attention: Office of Investigations Hotline 


245 Murray Drive, SW 


Washington, DC 20528-0305 


You may also call 1(800) 323-8603 or fax the complaint directly to us at 

(202) 254-4297. 

The OIG seeks to protect the identity of each writer and caller.