Department of Homeland Security

Office of Inspector General 

Review of Immigration and Customs 


Enforcement's Expenditure Plan
 

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009
 

OIG-09-108 September 2009 
SEP 2 2 2009 

Preface 

Office of Illspector Gelleral 

U.S. Department of Homeland Security 

Washington, DC 20528 

Homeland 

Security 

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Office of Inspector General (DIG) 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 for programs, grants, and 

projects awarded by the department under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act 

of 2009 to promote economy, efficiency, and effectiveness within the department. 

This report includes observations on the departmenf s efforts. to manage funds 

appropriated by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, and includes 

issues that should be considered by the department and its components to improve the 

management of those funds. We trust this report will result in more effective, efficient, 

and economical operations. We express our appreciation to all those who contributed to 

the preparation of this report. • 

4~~~

Richard L. Skinner 

Inspector General 
Table of Contents/Abbreviations 

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



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

Results of Review ................................................................................................................3 
 

Recommendations..........................................................................................................5 
 

Management Comments and OIG Analysis ..................................................................6 
 

Appendices 

Appendix A: Purpose, Scope and Methodology..........................................................7 
 

Appendix B: Management Comments to the Draft Report.........................................8 
 

Appendix C: Major Contributors to This Report ......................................................11 
 

Appendix D: Report Distribution ..............................................................................12 
 

Abbreviations 

CBP Customs and Border Protection 
 

DHS Department of Homeland Security 
 

ICE Immigration and Customs Enforcement 
 

OIG Office of Inspector General


OIG



Department of Homeland Security 

Office of Inspector General 

Executive Summary 

We reviewed the Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s 

expenditure plan as part of our oversight responsibilities to monitor 

the use of funds provided to the Department of Homeland Security 

under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 

(Recovery Act). The Recovery Act provided $20 million to 

Immigration and Customs Enforcement to procure and deploy 

tactical communications equipment and radios. The Recovery Act 

also requires that the recipients of Recovery Act funds develop an 

expenditure plan for the use of the funds. Our objective was to 

determine whether the plan is practical, thorough, and consistent 

with prudent management principles, such as risk mitigation and 

management control strategies. 

Immigration and Customs Enforcement generally developed a 

practical and comprehensive plan to spend Recovery Act funds to 

procure and deploy tactical communications equipment and radios. 

However, it will not meet all the goals of the Recovery Act, in 

particular the quick-start activities Recovery Act goal. 

Additionally, we identified opportunities for Immigration and 

Customs Enforcement to better collaborate with Customs and 

Border Protection to procure and modernize tactical 

communications systems. 

We are making one recommendation to Immigration and Customs 

Enforcement, which is designed to improve collaboration and 

coordination with Customs and Border Protection. Immigration 

and Customs Enforcement concurred with our recommendation 

and provided information on ongoing actions to collaborate and 

communicate with Customs and Border Protection as well as 

future plans and coordination meetings regarding tactical 

communications. A copy of Immigration and Customs 

Enforcement’s response is provided at Appendix B. 

Review of Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Expenditure Plan 


Page 1 

Background 

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, Public Law 

111-5, (Recovery Act) was enacted on February 17, 2009, 

allocating almost $787 billion to preserve and stimulate economic 

growth in the United States. The Recovery Act made 

supplemental appropriations to federal departments and agencies 

for infrastructure investment, energy efficiency and science, 

assistance to the unemployed and disabled veterans, and state and 

local stabilization for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2009. 

Under provisions of the Act, the Department of Homeland Security 

received approximately $2.8 billion for equipment, construction, 

infrastructure improvement, and emergency management grants. 

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) received $20 million 

of this amount for tactical communications modernization. The 

Recovery Act required that, within 45 days of enactment of the 

Act, the department submit to Congress a plan for expending these 

funds. Accordingly, on April 3, 2009, ICE issued its Atlas Tactical 

Communications Recovery Act Expenditure Plan (expenditure 

plan). 

We reviewed ICE’s expenditure plan to determine whether it is 

practical, thorough, and comprehensive, using provisions of the 

Recovery Act as our guide. Specifically, we reviewed the plan for 

evidence that ICE met the goals of the “preference for quick-start 

activities” and “special contracting” provisions. The goal of the 

quick-start activities general provision (Section 1602 of the 

Recovery Act) was to use at least 50% of the funds for activities 

that could be initiated within 120 days of the date that the Act was 

signed, or by June 17, 2009. The special contracting provision 

(Section 1554) recommended that, to the maximum extent 

possible, recipients use competitive procedures to award fixedprice contracts. We measured the expenditure plan against prudent 

management principles to determine whether the plan will achieve 

program goals while providing safeguards against fraud, waste, 

error, abuse, risk of delays, and cost overruns. We did not evaluate 

the original process ICE used to establish its criteria or any 

underlying assumptions. 

ICE plans to use its Recovery Act funds to carry out its original 

intent to modernize tactical communications in 2 of its 26 regions, 

Boston and Denver, in FY 2010. ICE’s current wireless tactical 

communications systems consist primarily of legacy, analog 

handheld radios and vehicular radio equipment that are not 

compliant with current standards for interoperability (known as PReview of Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Expenditure Plan 
 

Page 2 
 
25 standards), nor with federal mandates for the use of Advanced 

Encryption Standard and narrowband frequencies.1 ICE plans to 

replace its noncompliant legacy tactical communications systems 

with interoperable, encrypted, narrowband equipment and radios. 

ICE and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) plan to purchase 

similar tactical communications radios made by the same 

manufacturer. In addition to hand-held radio equipment, both ICE 

and CBP require infrastructure upgrades, including radio frequency 

repeaters and telecommunications circuits. 

Results of Review 

ICE generally developed a practical and comprehensive plan to 

spend Recovery Act funds to procure and deploy tactical 

communications equipment and radios. Although ICE did not 

meet the Recovery Act goal of using 50% of the Recovery Act 

funds for activities that could be initiated by June 17, 2009, it does 

plan to obligate 100% of the Recovery Act funds by September 30, 

2009. ICE is planning to use competitive procedures to award 

fixed-price contracts. According to ICE’s spending plan, tactical 

communications modernization in the Boston region is a joint 

project with CBP. ICE must coordinate with CBP to ensure that 

the project is completed effectively, efficiently, and economically 

to meet their respective mission needs and support interoperability. 

Quick-Start Activities Provision 

ICE did not meet the quick-start goal of using at least 50% of its 

Recovery Act funds for activities that could be initiated within 120 

days of enactment of the date, or by June 17, 2009. However, ICE 

plans to obligate 100% of its Recovery Act funds in the fourth 

quarter of FY 2009 and outlay roughly 85% of the Recovery Act 

funds during FY 2010. According to ICE officials, it did not meet 

the June 17, 2009, date because it needs more time to develop and 

award procurement contracts that will satisfy the requirements of 

the Federal Acquisition Regulation. 

1

 The Department of Commerce, National Institute of Standards and Technology requires federal agencies 

to use Advanced Encryption Standard to protect sensitive information, effective May 26, 2006 and the 

National Telecommunications and Information Administration requires all federal, land-mobile radio 

systems to use narrowband frequencies, effective January 1, 2008. 

Review of Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Expenditure Plan 

Page 3 
ICE Tactical Communication Obligations and Outlays 

$0 

$2 

$4 

$6 

$8 

$10 

$12 

$14 

$16 

$18 

$20 

Cost (In Millions of Dollars) 

Obligations $0.00 $0.00 $20.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 

Outlays $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $4.14 $4.50 $4.36 $4.24 $2.76 

Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 

FY09 FY10 FY 11 100% 20.70% 22.50% 21.80% 21.20% 

0%0%

0%0%0%

0%

0%

13.80% 

0% 

June 17th 

The graph above shows ICE’s planned schedule of obligations and 

outlays through FY 2010. An “obligation” is a commitment to pay 

for something and an “outlay” is an actual payment. Funds that 

have been obligated cannot be used for anything else and are 

considered spent. Obligated funds may stimulate the economy by 

increasing business operations, even though there may be a delay 

of months or years before obligated funds are paid. 

Special Contracting Provisions 

According to its expenditure plan, ICE is meeting the special 

contracting provision that it use Recovery Act funds to award 

fixed-price contracts through competition. ICE is planning to 

award approximately $18.6 million in Recovery Act funds using 

the department’s First Source contract. The First Source contract 

is the department’s preferred source for acquiring information 

technology and is a small business set-aside contract. ICE plans to 

award the remaining Recovery Act funds using U.S. General 

Services Administration Government-wide Acquisition Contracts. 

Both the First Source and the Government-wide Acquisition 

Review of Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Expenditure Plan 

Page 4 
Contracts are to be awarded on a firm-fixed price basis using 

competitive procedures.

Coordination With Customs and Border Protection

ICE needs to take additional steps to ensure effective coordination 

with CBP on modernizing tactical communications equipment. 

According to the expenditure plan, ICE will work jointly with CBP 

to modernize tactical communications equipment in the Boston 

region. However, the expenditure plan does not describe a process 

for coordination between the components, nor does it describe any 

joint planning activities that have taken place to date. 

ICE and CBP have a memorandum of understanding that provides 

general direction for cooperation on tactical communications 

needs. However, the memorandum of understanding, dated March 

2008, was signed before the Recovery Act was passed and is not 

specific to Recovery Act-funded projects. Therefore, the 

memorandum of understanding may not be sufficient to ensure that 

cooperative planning takes place for the use of Recovery Act 

funds.

For example, according to the memorandum of understanding, 

“Each Focus Area will be supported by an independent 

requirements document which will include specific requirements 

identified by ICE within each Focus Area.” A focus area is a 

defined project within a given geographical location. CBP 

provided us with a copy of its requirements document for the 

Houlton Focus Area, which is in ICE’s Boston region. Although 

the document identified tactical communications interoperability 

with ICE as a critical operational requirement, it did not include 

any ICE-identified requirements. The need for more details in 

both the expenditure plan and the memorandum of understanding 

raises concerns that ICE may not effectively coordinate equipment 

procurements with CBP, thereby missing opportunities to 

maximize resources, such as volume discounts or infrastructure 

sharing. More important, where ICE does not properly coordinate 

with CBP in identifying requirements for the Houlton area, tactical 

communications systems may be modernized in a manner that may 

not meet ICE’s operational needs. 

Recommendation

We recommend that the Assistant Secretary for ICE, in 

conjunction with CBP, develop detailed plans for ensuring that 

Recovery Act funds are used to modernize tactical 

Review of Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Expenditure Plan 

Page 5 
Review of Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Expenditure Plan 

Page 6 

communications equipment in a cost-effective manner that will 

meet their respective mission needs and ensure interoperability.

Management Comments and OIG Analysis 

ICE concurred with our facts, conclusions and recommendations.

ICE stated that it has already taken some action to collaborate and 

communicate with CBP, as well as identified future plans and 

coordination meetings regarding tactical communications. We 

consider the recommendation resolved but open, pending receipt 

and review of documentation on these collaborative effort 

meetings, including the Acquisition Decision Memorandum. 
Appendix A 

Purpose, Scope and Methodology

The objective of our review was to determine whether Immigration 

and Customs Enforcement has developed a practical and 

comprehensive plan to procure and deploy tactical 

communications equipment and radios. Our review included a 

determination of whether ICE followed its own criteria for 

prioritizing projects. We did not evaluate the original process ICE 

used to establish its criteria or any underlying assumptions. We: 

Review of Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Expenditure Plan 

Page 7 













Reviewed laws, regulations, and guidance related to the 

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.

Obtained information on the processes and controls in place 

for budgetary resources management and financial and 

contract management. 

Examined prior Department of Homeland Security audit 

reports in the program-specific areas of acquisition 

management and acquisition workforce planning. 

Analyzed ICE’s Atlas Tactical Communications Recovery 

Act Expenditure Plan, dated April 3, 2009, for the 

procurement and deployment of tactical communications 

equipment and radios. 

Analyzed documentation supporting the Recovery Act 

expenditure plan, such as acquisition plans, methodologies, 

and cost/benefit analysis of system upgrades. 

Interviewed senior officials from the offices of the Chief 

Information Officer and the Chief Financial Officer, as well 

as Financial Operations, Procurement, and Tactical 

Communications Program staff. We conducted these 

interviews in Washington, DC, at ICE’s Headquarters and 

Potomac Center North. 

We conducted our review between April 2009 and June 2009 

under the authority of the Inspector General Act of 1978.

We would like to thank the Immigration and Customs Enforcement 

for their cooperation and courtesies extended to our staff during 

this review.
Appendix B 

Management Comments to the Draft Report 

Review of Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Expenditure Plan 
 

Page 8 
 
Appendix B 

Management Comments to the Draft Report 

Review of Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Expenditure Plan 
 

Page 9 
 
Appendix B 

Management Comments to the Draft Report 

Review of Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Expenditure Plan 
 

Page 10 
 
Appendix C 

Major Contributors to This Report 

Linda Howard, Director 

J. Eric Barnett, Project Lead 

Eliece Pizarro, Auditor 

Elaine Ferguson, Program Analyst 

Andrea Rambow, Desk Officer 

Barry Cleveland, Program Analyst 

Lisa Vonder Haar, Desk Officer 

Review of Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Expenditure Plan 
 

Page 11 
 
Appendix D 

Report Distribution 

Department of Homeland Security 

Secretary 

Deputy Secretary 

Chief of Staff for Operations 

Chief of Staff for Policy 

General Counsel 

Executive Secretariat 

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 

Office of Management and Budget 

Chief, Homeland Security Branch 

DHS OIG Budget Examiner 

Congress 

Congressional Oversight and Appropriations Committees, as 

appropriate 

Review of Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Expenditure Plan 
 

Page 12 
 
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND COPIES 

To obtain additional copies of this report, please call the Office of Inspector General (OIG) at (202) 254-4100, 

fax your request to (202) 254-4305, or visit the OIG web site at www.dhs.gov/oig. 

OIG HOTLINE 

To report alleged fraud, waste, abuse or mismanagement, or any other kind of criminal or noncriminal 

misconduct relative to department programs or operations: 

• Call our Hotline at 1-800-323-8603; 

• Fax the complaint directly to us at (202) 254-4292; 

• Email us at DHSOIGHOTLINE@dhs.gov; or 

• Write to us at: 

DHS Office of Inspector General/MAIL STOP 2600, 

Attention: Office of Investigations - Hotline, 

245 Murray Drive, SW, Building 410, 

Washington, DC 20528. 

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