HOMELAND 

SECURITY

Civil Air Patrol 

Involved in Certain 

Missions, but DHS 

Should Assess the 

Benefits of Further 

Involvement

Report to Congressional Committees

November 2012

GAO-13-56

United States Government Accountability Office

GAO
United States Government Accountability Office

Highlights of GAO-13-56, a report to 

congressional committees 

November 2012 

HOMELAND SECURITY

Civil Air Patrol Involved in Certain Missions, but

DHS Should Assess the Benefits of Further 

Involvement

Why GAO Did This Study

Homeland security partnerships may

grow increasingly important as fiscal 

constraints provide impetus for federal 

agencies to look to partners for mission 

support. One partner is CAP, a 

congressionally chartered, federally 

funded, nonprofit corporation with 

approximately 61,000 volunteer 

members that can function as the 

auxiliary of the U.S. Air Force. CAP

conducts missions throughout the 

United States, including counterdrug, 

disaster relief, and search and rescue, 

using mostly single-engine aircraft. The 

conference report accompanying the 

fiscal year 2012 DHS appropriations 

act directed that GAO study the 

functions and capabilities of CAP to 

support homeland security missions. In 

response to the mandate, this report 

addresses (1) the extent to which CAP 

has been used to perform homeland 

security missions to date at the local, 

state, and federal levels, and (2) the 

factors that should be considered in 

determining CAP’s ability to support 

additional homeland security missions 

and the extent to which DHS has 

assessed CAP’s capabilities and 

resources to accomplish such 

missions. GAO reviewed laws and 

guidance; analyzed fiscal year 2011 

CAP flight data; and interviewed 

officials from DHS, the Air Force, CAP, 

and a nongeneralizable sample of 10

of 52 state-level CAP wings. 

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends that DHS, in 

coordination with the Air Force, costeffectively assess the extent to which 

CAP can further assist DHS with future 

homeland security missions. DHS 

concurred with the recommendation. 

What GAO Found

The Civil Air Patrol (CAP) has performed certain homeland security missions for 

federal, state, and local customers, but devotes the majority of its flying hours to 

training and youth programs. Several of CAP’s mission areas fit within the 

Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) definition of homeland security, as 

found in the Quadrennial Homeland Security Review Report (QHSR)—a strategic

framework for homeland security. For example, CAP disaster assistance and air 

defense activities relate to the QHSR mission areas of ensuring resilience to 

disasters and preventing terrorism and enhancing security, respectively. CAP 

has performed some of these activities in support of DHS components, including 

the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection (CBP), and the Coast Guard, as well as state and local governments. 

For example, CAP has provided disaster imagery to FEMA, performed certain 

border reconnaissance for CBP, and assisted the Coast Guard in providing air 

support during the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. CAP has also performed 

homeland security-related activities for other customers, such as the U.S. Air 

Force. For example, 9 of the 10 CAP wings GAO spoke with had participated in 

military readiness exercises where CAP aircraft provided mock targets for military 

interceptor aircraft or ground-based radar. CAP’s participation in homeland 

security activities accounted for approximately 9 percent of its fiscal year 2011

flying hours, but the majority of its flying hours (approximately 63 percent) were 

devoted to training and flying orientation, with the remaining devoted to other 

activities such as counterdrug and maintenance. 

Several factors affect CAP’s ability to support homeland security missions, and

DHS and its components have not yet assessed how CAP could be used to 

perform certain homeland security missions. These factors—including legal 

parameters, mission funding, existing capabilities, and capacity—were issues 

cited by the DHS components and Air Force and CAP officials GAO contacted 

that could affect CAP’s suitability for additional homeland security missions. For 

example, as an Air Force auxiliary, CAP is subject to laws and regulations 

governing the use of the military in support of law enforcement, which, among 

other things, allow CAP to conduct aerial surveillance in certain situations, but 

preclude its participation in the interdiction of vehicles, vessels, or aircraft.

Similarly, while CAP’s existing operational capabilities—aircraft and vehicles, 

personnel, and technology—position it well to support certain homeland security 

missions, they also limit its suitability for others. For example, FEMA officials

cited the role of CAP imagery in providing useful situational awareness during the 

initial stages of some past natural disasters, while, in contrast, officials from CBP

and the Coast Guard noted limitations such as inadequate imagery capabilities 

and insufficient detection technology. Although the components we contacted 

provided varying opinions regarding CAP’s suitability for certain homeland 

security activities, DHS has not assessed CAP’s capabilities and resources or 

determined the extent to which CAP could be used to support future homeland 

security activities. By assessing the ability of CAP to provide additional homeland 

security capabilities in a budget-constrained environment, DHS in coordination 

with the Air Force could position itself to better understand, and potentially utilize, 

another resource to accomplish its homeland security missions.

View GAO-13-56. For more information, 

contact Carol R. Cha at (202) 512-4456 or 

chac@gao.gov, or Brian J. Lepore at (202) 

512-4523 or leporeb@gao.gov. 
Page i GAO-13-56 Civil Air Patrol Homeland Security Missions 

Letter 1 

Background 4

CAP Has Performed Certain Homeland Security Missions for 

Federal, State, and Local Customers 9

Key Factors Affect CAP’s Ability to Support Homeland Security 

Missions; Assessment of CAP Capabilities and Resources Could 

Inform Decision-Making 14

Conclusions 24

Recommendation for Executive Action 24

Agency Comments, Third-Party Views, and Our Evaluation 25

Appendix I Comments from the Department of Homeland Security 27

Appendix II Comments from the Civil Air Patrol 29

Appendix III GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments 31

Tables

Table 1: CAP Appropriations since Fiscal Year 2007 7

Table 2: CAP Imagery Platforms 20

Figures

Figure 1: CAP Cessna 182 6

Figure 2: CAP Fiscal Year 2011 Air Force Auxiliary Flying Hours by 

Type of Mission 10

Figure 3: Examples of Homeland Security Missions Conducted by 

Selected CAP Wings from Fiscal Years 2007 through 2012 12

Contents
Page ii GAO-13-56 Civil Air Patrol Homeland Security Missions 

Abbreviations

CAP Civil Air Patrol

CAP-USAF Civil Air Patrol-United States Air Force

CBP U.S. Customs and Border Protection

DHS Department of Homeland Security

FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency

QHSR Quadrennial Homeland Security Review

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

United States. The published product 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.
Page 1 GAO-13-56 Civil Air Patrol Homeland Security Missions 

United States Government Accountability Office 

Washington, DC 20548

November 1, 2012

The Honorable Mary Landrieu

Chairman

The Honorable Dan Coats

Ranking Member

Subcommittee on Homeland Security

Committee on Appropriations

United States Senate

The Honorable Robert Aderholt

Chairman

The Honorable David Price

Ranking Member

Subcommittee on Homeland Security

Committee on Appropriations

House of Representatives

The events of September 11, 2001, emphasized the concept of homeland 

security as a shared responsibility across a variety of federal, state, local, 

and private entities. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS)—in its 

2010 Quadrennial Homeland Security Review Report (QHSR)—specified 

five homeland security mission areas: (1) preventing terrorism and 

enhancing security, (2) securing and managing our borders, (3) enforcing 

and administering our immigration laws, (4) safeguarding and securing 

cyberspace, and (5) ensuring resilience to disasters.1

 

1

DHS, Quadrennial Homeland Security Review Report: A Strategic Framework for a 

Secure Homeland (Washington, D.C.: February 2010). The Quadrennial Homeland 

Security Review Report outlines a strategic framework for homeland security to guide the 

activities of homeland security partners including federal, state, local, and tribal 

government agencies; the private sector; and nongovernmental organizations. For the 

purposes of this report, we have used the five mission areas in the Quadrennial Homeland 

Security Review Report to determine what constitutes a homeland security activity. 

The QHSR report 

highlights the importance of partnerships among federal, state, local, 

tribal, territorial, nongovernmental, and private sector entities in 

accomplishing these missions, and, more broadly, in ensuring the safety 

and security of America and the American population. Such partnerships

may assume increasing importance as fiscal constraints provide impetus 

for federal agencies to look to community partners to provide more 

support for homeland security activities.

 
 

Page 2 GAO-13-56 Civil Air Patrol Homeland Security Missions 

The Civil Air Patrol (CAP) is a congressionally chartered, private, 

nonprofit corporation that functions as an auxiliary to the United States Air 

Force when providing support to a federal agency. In fiscal year 2012, 

Congress appropriated approximately $38 million to fund CAP.2 CAP’s 

membership includes approximately 61,000 volunteer members spread 

across 52 wings located in the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and 

Puerto Rico.3 Using mostly single-engine aircraft, CAP conducts a variety 

of missions in support of federal, state, local, and nongovernmental 

entities, including search and rescue, counterdrug, disaster relief, air 

defense training, and communications support, among others. The 

conference report accompanying the DHS appropriations act for fiscal 

year 2012 directed GAO to study and report on the functions and 

capabilities of CAP to support homeland security missions.4

1) the extent to which CAP has been used to perform certain 

homeland security missions to date at the local, state, and federal 

levels, and

In response 

to this mandate, this report addresses

2) the factors that should be considered in determining CAP’s ability 

to support additional homeland security missions and the extent to 

which DHS has assessed CAP’s capabilities and resources to 

accomplish such missions.

To determine the extent that CAP has been used to perform homeland 

security missions, we analyzed CAP flight hours to determine the number 

and type of homeland security missions conducted by CAP based on the 

five homeland security missions outlined by DHS’s QHSR. Specifically, 

we analyzed flight data from fiscal year 2011, as the most recent full year 

of flight data available at the time of our review, and spoke with CAP wing 

officials regarding their participation in missions over the last few years to 

determine any trends in CAP’s participation in homeland security 

missions for federal, state, and local customers. To assess the reliability 

of these data, we spoke with CAP officials to gain an understanding of the 

 

2

Pub. L. No. 112-74, § 8022, 125 Stat. 786, 809 (2011).

3

A wing represents the state-level organization of CAP (including the District of Columbia 

and Puerto Rico). A wing is composed of the wing headquarters and all units within its 

geographical boundaries, including individual squadrons. 

4

H.R. Rep. No. 112-331, at 963 (2011) (Conf. Rep.).
 

Page 3 GAO-13-56 Civil Air Patrol Homeland Security Missions 

processes and databases used to collect and record flight data and to 

understand existing quality control procedures and known limitations. For 

the purposes of our report, we found these data to be sufficiently reliable. 

We also interviewed officials from DHS and its components, CAP 

headquarters, 10 out of 52 CAP wings, and the U.S. Air Force. We 

selected the 10 CAP wings based on their involvement in homeland 

security activities in the National Capital Region, along the border, and in 

disaster-prone areas.5

To determine the factors that should be considered in determining CAP’s 

ability to support additional homeland security missions, and the extent to 

which DHS and its components have assessed the capabilities and 

resources of CAP to accomplish such missions, we reviewed pertinent 

laws, regulations, and internal CAP guidance for any restrictions on 

CAP’s activities, as well as selected mission paperwork and current and 

past agreements between CAP and other organizations to identify 

common parameters for CAP operations. In addition, we interviewed CAP 

and Air Force officials regarding any specific mission approval criteria and 

funding requirements, and analyzed flight data to determine any trends 

that might reflect on CAP’s capacity to assume additional missions. 

Further, we interviewed DHS components regarding their past 

experiences with CAP during homeland security-type operations, their 

overall assessment of CAP’s performance during these operations, and 

their willingness to continue to use CAP for these missions based on past 

experiences. We also interviewed DHS and component officials to identify 

any assessments DHS or its components have conducted related to 

CAP’s role in homeland security. Specifically, we spoke with officials from 

DHS’s Office of Policy, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), the 

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), and the Coast Guard 

to discuss their experiences and relationships with CAP as well as their 

views on expanding CAP’s role in other homeland security missions. We 

While these interviews are not generalizeable to all 

CAP wings across the country, they provided a range of perspectives 

related to CAP operations and homeland security missions. Finally, we 

also interviewed officials from the Department of Justice’s Drug 

Enforcement Administration to discuss CAP’s role in counterdrug 

operations as well as their views on CAP’s effectiveness during these 

missions.

 

5

Specifically, we spoke with officials from the Alabama; Arizona; Florida; Georgia; 

Maryland; New Mexico; Texas; Virginia; Washington; and Washington, D.C. wings.
 

Page 4 GAO-13-56 Civil Air Patrol Homeland Security Missions 

also interviewed Air Force and CAP officials and reviewed relevant 

documentation to identify past or ongoing efforts to develop formal 

agreements between CAP and DHS related to future homeland security 

assistance. We compared DHS’s efforts to assess CAP’s capabilities and 

resources with our past work on effective collaboration and on conducting 

assessments to determine the extent to which DHS had assessed CAP 

as a potential homeland security partner.6

We conducted this performance audit from March 2012 through 

November 2012 in accordance with 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 on our audit objectives. We 

believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our 

findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives.

In early 2010, DHS defined its mission and strategy for responding to 

homeland security threats. The result of this effort was the completion of 

the QHSR report––a strategic framework to guide the activities of 

participants in homeland security toward a common goal. One of the key 

themes of the QHSR report is the importance of sharing homeland 

security responsibilities across a variety of actors including federal, state, 

local, tribal, territorial, nongovernmental, and private sector entities. 

Emphasizing this shared responsibility, the QHSR report notes that in 

some areas—such as border security or immigration management—DHS 

possesses unique capabilities and responsibilities that are not likely to be

found elsewhere. However, in other areas, such as critical infrastructure 

protection or emergency management, DHS mainly provides leadership 

and stewardship because the capabilities for these areas are often found 

at the state and local levels.

 

6

See, for example GAO, Catastrophic Disasters: Enhanced Leadership, Capabilities, and 

Accountability Controls Will Improve the Effectiveness of the Nation’s Preparedness, 

Response, and Recovery System, GAO-06-618 (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 6, 2006), and 

Results Oriented Government: Practices That Can Help Enhance and Sustain 

Collaboration among Federal Agencies,GAO-06-15, (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 21, 2005). 

Background

DHS’s Mission
 

Page 5 GAO-13-56 Civil Air Patrol Homeland Security Missions 

In December 1941, CAP was established out of the desire of civil airmen 

of the country to be mobilized with their equipment in the common 

defense of the Nation. Under the jurisdiction of the Army’s Air Forces, 

CAP pilots were active during World War II, performing border patrol, 

search and rescue, and emergency transport, among other missions. In 

1946, CAP was established as a federally chartered organization.7 In 

1948, shortly after the Air Force was established, CAP was designated as 

the civilian auxiliary of the Air Force,8 and later, in October 2000, CAP 

was designated as the volunteer civilian auxiliary of the Air Force when 

CAP provides services to any department or agency in any branch of the 

federal government.9

As a nonprofit organization, CAP has a unique relationship with the Air 

Force, which may use CAP’s services to fulfill its noncombat programs 

and missions. The Secretary of the Air Force governs the conduct of CAP 

when it is operating as the auxiliary of the Air Force and prescribes 

regulations governing the conduct of CAP. CAP is embedded in the Air 

Force’s command structure under the Air Education and Training 

Command.

CAP has three missions: aerospace education, 

cadet programs, and emergency services.

10 The Air Force includes CAP in its internal budget process, 

provides technical advice to ensure flying safety, ensures that CAP’s 

federal funds are used appropriately, and provides building space, among 

other things.11

 

7

60 Stat. 346, 347 (1946).

CAP also has its own administrative structure governed by 

a volunteer national commander, national vice-commander, and an 11 

member Board of Governors. A paid chief operating officer manages 

CAP’s headquarters at Maxwell Air Force Base in Montgomery, Alabama. 

8

62 Stat. 274, 275 (1948).

9

10 U.S.C. § 9442. 

10The Air Force’s Air Education and Training Command provides basic military training, 

initial and advanced technical training, flight training, and professional military and degreegranting professional education.

11In October 2000 and October 2001, the Air Force and CAP finalized a joint Cooperative 

Agreement and Statement of Work, respectively. The purpose of the cooperative agreement 

was to clarify the relationship by specifying the Air Force’s and CAP’s responsibilities. The 

statement of work specifies certain accountability and management requirements under the 

cooperative agreement and permits the Air Force to temporarily restrict CAP wings from 

receiving federal funds if the Air Force determines that CAP has inadequate control over its 

resources. 

History and Administrative 

Structure of CAP 
 

Page 6 GAO-13-56 Civil Air Patrol Homeland Security Missions 

However, the chief operating officer has no command authority over the 

volunteers and assets spread throughout the United States.

CAP is divided into eight geographic regions consisting of 52 state wings 

(the 50 states, Puerto Rico, and the District of Columbia). Each state wing 

is divided into smaller squadrons, of which there are approximately 1,500 

nationwide. CAP has more than 61,000 members divided between cadet 

(26,725) and adult (34,693) members.12 According to CAP officials, of the 

adult members, there are approximately 3,000 active mission pilots.13

Figure 1: CAP Cessna 182

Nonpilot adult members contribute to the organization in various ways, 

serving as crew members, administering wing operations, and managing 

cadet programs, among other things. CAP has 550 single-engine aircraft, 

42 gliders, and 960 vehicles. Figure 1 depicts a CAP aircraft.

 

12Cadet programs are for youth ages 12-20. Cadets are educated in four main program 

areas: leadership, aerospace, fitness, and character development.

13A CAP mission pilot is an individual CAP member authorized to fly CAP missions as well 

as transport CAP personnel and equipment. 

Field Organization and 

Resources of CAP
 

Page 7 GAO-13-56 Civil Air Patrol Homeland Security Missions 

The majority of CAP’s operating budget comes from funds included in the 

Department of Defense’s appropriation and designated by Congress for 

CAP. CAP is included in the Air Force’s internal budgeting process and 

submits each year a financial plan to the Air Force for consideration. 

CAP’s financial plan is reviewed and adjusted by both the Air Education 

and Training Command and Air Force headquarters. According to an Air 

Force official involved with CAP’s budget submission, the Air Force 

attempts to ensure that CAP receives at least the same amount of 

funding it had the previous year. However, CAP is competing against 

other Air Force priorities in the normal Air Force budget development 

process. Still, according to the Air Force official, CAP often receives 

additional funding from Congress above the Air Force’s request. For 

example, in fiscal year 2011, Congress provided an additional $4.2 million 

of funding above the Air Force’s request. See table 1 for CAP’s 

appropriations since fiscal year 2007.

Table 1: CAP Appropriations since Fiscal Year 2007

(Dollars in millions)

Fiscal Year Appropriations 

2007 $36.0

2008 $33.7

2009 $34.9

2010 $33.8

2011 $30.4

2012 $37.7

Source: GAO analysis of U.S. Air Force data. 

The funds in table 1 are used to reimburse CAP for some Air Forceassigned missions, cover the costs associated with maintenance, and 

fund aircraft and other procurement, including vehicles. For example, 

these funds cover mission costs associated with some Air Forceassigned missions, such as air intercept exercises and counterdrug 

activities. CAP also receives mission reimbursement from other federal, 

state, and local agencies. For example, in fiscal year 2011, FEMA 

reimbursed CAP approximately $155,000 for a variety of disaster-related 

missions. In addition, CAP receives funding from other sources 

throughout the course of the year, including state appropriations, 

membership dues, and member contributions. In fiscal year 2011, CAP 

received approximately $3.2 million in appropriations from 37 states. 

State funding is sometimes earmarked for a specific state activity, such 

as disaster response. CAP also received in fiscal year 2011 $3,076,925 in 

membership dues.

CAP Funding and Mission 

Approval Process
 

Page 8 GAO-13-56 Civil Air Patrol Homeland Security Missions 

CAP can conduct missions either as an auxiliary of the Air Force or in its 

corporate status.14 Approximately 75 percent of CAP’s missions are 

conducted in Air Force auxiliary status. While all missions in support of 

federal agencies must be conducted in its Air Force auxiliary status, CAP 

may conduct missions in its corporate status on behalf of state and local 

agencies and nongovernmental organizations. CAP pilots are not 

afforded federal protections when they fly in corporate status.15

All requests for CAP operational missions––with the exception of 

corporate missions and those for Alaska and Hawaii––are coordinated 

through CAP’s National Operations Center and approved by 1st Air 

Force.16 Agencies requesting CAP support contact the CAP National 

Operations Center with a formal request for support. The National 

Operations Center works with the requesting agency and the CAP wing to 

develop an operations plan, budget, and funding documents for the 

mission. These are then forwarded to 1st Air Force, which conducts legal, 

funding, operations, and risk management reviews to ensure that the 

mission meets CAP requirements. Once these reviews are complete, the 

Air Force can approve the mission and CAP can task its wings with the 

assignment. CAP corporate missions undergo a similar review process—

wherein legal, funding, and risk reviews are conducted—but are not 

routed through the Air Force for approval.

 

14Missions flown as the Air Force auxiliary must have a “federal interest.” According to Air 

Force officials, the definition of “federal interest” was expanded after Hurricane Katrina and 

can include such justifications as providing situational awareness to the Air Force, 

monitoring of state situations by the federal government, or checking on the status of federal 

buildings or land.

15When flying as members of the Air Force auxiliary, CAP pilots are covered by certain 

federal protections, such as the Federal Employees Compensation Act. See 5 U.S.C. 

§ 8141.

16These missions are flown under the authority of U.S. Northern Command, the joint 

command responsible for the continental United States. CAP receives taskings from the 

air component of Northern Command, 1st Air Force, located at Tyndall Air Force Base, 

Florida. Missions in Alaska and Hawaii follow the same process, but are approved by 11th

Air Force (Alaska) or 13th Air Force (Hawaii).
 

Page 9 GAO-13-56 Civil Air Patrol Homeland Security Missions 

Our review of fiscal year 2011 CAP flight hour data and discussions with 

officials from 10 CAP wings show that CAP has performed missions that 

fit within three of the five QHSR homeland security mission areas: (1) 

preventing terrorism and enhancing security, (2) securing and managing 

borders, and (3) disaster response.17 CAP missions related to these 

areas have accounted for 9 percent of CAP’s flying hours; however, CAP 

has devoted the majority of its flying hours (approximately 63 percent) to 

training for these and other missions and cadet and Reserve Officer 

Training Corps flying orientations. The remaining 28 percent of CAP’s 

missions consisted chiefly of assistance to law enforcement for domestic 

drug interdiction activities, such as marijuana crop identification, and 

maintenance-related flights.

CAP flight hour data for fiscal year 2011 show that CAP participated in a 

variety of homeland security activities, but that a majority of the 

organization’s Air Force-assigned flying time was devoted to training and 

flying orientation for cadets and Reserve Officer Training Corps members. 

Specifically, CAP devoted about 63 percent (46,132 hours) of its total Air 

Force-assigned mission flying hours to training and flying orientations.18

 

17The other two homeland security categories are enforcing and administering our 

immigration laws and safeguarding and securing cyberspace.

Of the remaining 37 percent of Air Force-assigned flight hours, 9 percent 

(6,575 hours) were dedicated to homeland security-related missions. For 

example, CAP reported 2,583 Air Force-assigned hours devoted to air 

defense, which includes CAP’s participation in the Department of 

Defense’s low-flying aircraft readiness exercises and exercises for 

training military pilots to intercept low-flying aircraft. These missions relate 

to the homeland security mission area of preventing terrorism and 

enhancing security. CAP also devoted 2,314 Air Force-assigned flight 

hours to defense support to civilian authorities/disaster relief, 

corresponding to the homeland security mission area of ensuring 

18Training includes flights to train CAP personnel in conducting operational missions. 

Orientation flights for CAP cadets and Reserve Officer Training Corps members include 

those in both powered and glider aircraft.

CAP Has Performed 

Certain Homeland 

Security Missions for 

Federal, State, and 

Local Customers

Air Force Auxiliary 

Missions Include Some 

Homeland Security 

Activities, but Consist 

Primarily of Training and 

Flight Orientation
 

Page 10 GAO-13-56 Civil Air Patrol Homeland Security Missions 

resilience to disasters. Figure 2 provides a breakdown of CAP fiscal year 

2011 flight hours by mission.19

Figure 2: CAP Fiscal Year 2011 Air Force Auxiliary Flying Hours by Type of Mission

Notes: Maintenance includes flights in support of aircraft delivery and pickup. 

For Surrogate Predator training, CAP employs modified aircraft to carry special full-motion in-flight 

video equipment that is used to help train U.S. military ground personnel in remotely piloted aircraft 

operations before they deploy overseas. 

Other homeland security missions includes flights CAP performed for federal, state, and local entities 

such as escorting naval vessels and reconnaissance flights related to safety planning (e.g., 

determining potential evacuation routes) for various events. 

Some CAP drug interdiction missions, such as certain border reconnaissance, may relate to the 

QHSR homeland security mission areas of terrorism prevention and border security. However, most 

of CAP’s drug interdiction missions support inland crop detection efforts and are therefore presented 

separately in the figure from the homeland security–related missions. 

CAP headquarters and officials from all 10 CAP wings we spoke with 

generally concurred that the fiscal year 2011 flight hours are reflective of 

their activities in recent years—that is, training and cadet activities have 

accounted for the majority of their missions. CAP intends for its training 

 

19CAP reported a total of 102,565 total flying hours for fiscal year 2011. Of this amount, 

73,435 hours—or 72 percent—were Air Force auxiliary missions, depicted in figure 2. The 

remaining 29,130 flying hours consisted of CAP corporate missions, such as cadet flights 

and pilot proficiency and check rides (26,706 hours), and flights where Air Force 

personnel flew CAP aircraft (2,424 hours). 
 

Page 11 GAO-13-56 Civil Air Patrol Homeland Security Missions 

and pilot certification missions to prepare its pilots and other volunteers to 

perform homeland security-related missions. In addition, CAP wing 

officials told us that they have modified training schedules to 

accommodate the demand for real-world missions when they have 

occurred—including those related to homeland security—and will 

continue to do so in the future.

Officials from all 10 CAP wings we spoke with said their wings had 

performed missions related to at least one of the three QHSR mission 

areas covered by CAP for a variety of federal, state, and local customers. 

For example, 9 of the 10 wings had contributed to preventing terrorism 

and enhancing security by participating in military readiness exercises 

where CAP aircraft acted as mock targets for airborne interceptors or 

ground-based radar. In most cases CAP aircraft acted as slow-moving, 

potentially hostile targets that were identified, tracked, and escorted by 

active-duty, reserve or state Air National Guard radar or airborne fighters. 

Figure 3 shows examples of these and other homeland security missions 

conducted by the 10 CAP wings during fiscal years 2007 through 2012.

All 10 Select CAP Wings 

Performed Homeland 

Security Missions for 

Federal, State, and Local 

Customers 
 

Page 12 GAO-13-56 Civil Air Patrol Homeland Security Missions 

Figure 3: Examples of Homeland Security Missions Conducted by Selected CAP Wings from Fiscal Years 2007 through 2012

As part of efforts to secure and manage the nation’s borders, 3 of the 4 

CAP wings shown in figure 3 that share a land border with Mexico or 

Canada were involved in various reconnaissance activities for federal 

customers that included flights over border regions to identify suspicious 
 

Page 13 GAO-13-56 Civil Air Patrol Homeland Security Missions 

activity.20

As part of efforts to ensure resilience to disasters, officials from 7 of the 

10 CAP wings stated they had engaged in disaster assistance operations 

for a variety of federal, state, and local customers. CAP wings provided 

imaging technology for post storm damage assessments for the National 

Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, FEMA, and state and 

local emergency management officials. Two of the 7 CAP wings that 

indicated involvement in disaster assistance also stated that they had 

engaged in reconnaissance for wildfires in response to requests from 

both federal and state officials.

For example, as shown in figure 3, the Arizona CAP wing 

conducted reconnaissance for suspicious persons and vehicles in the 

Barry Goldwater Air Force Testing Range, which is located on the border 

with Mexico. Similarly, Texas CAP officials stated that they had 

conducted border reconnaissance missions in support of CBP operations 

along the state’s border with Mexico. According to CBP officials, these 

reconnaissance missions were for monitoring, detection, and reporting of 

any suspicious border activity observed. New Mexico CAP officials stated 

that they had not performed any specific border-related missions in recent 

years, but that they were interested in doing so and in the process of 

conducting outreach to potential federal, state, and local customers to 

offer their services in this area.

Officials from all 10 of the wings we contacted also told us they have 

provided support to local governments (i.e., counties and municipalities), 

including search and rescue missions. While search and rescue does not 

strictly fit within the QHSR homeland security mission areas, DHS has 

noted that search and rescue activities are often intertwined with and 

mutually supporting of homeland security activities.

 

20The 4 border wings we met with included 3 along the border with Mexico (Arizona, New 

Mexico, and Texas) and one along the border with Canada (Washington). 
 

Page 14 GAO-13-56 Civil Air Patrol Homeland Security Missions 

There are several factors that may affect CAP’s ability to support existing 

and emerging homeland security missions, including legal parameters, 

mission funding and reimbursement, existing capabilities, and capacity. 

While some of these factors were cited by the DHS components we 

contacted as issues that could affect CAP’s suitability for additional 

homeland security missions, neither DHS nor the components have 

assessed how CAP could be used to perform certain homeland security 

missions.

As a volunteer auxiliary of the Air Force, CAP is subject to laws and 

regulations governing the use of the military in support of law 

enforcement and is thus limited in the types of support it can provide. 

Specifically, the Posse Comitatus Act prohibits the Air Force and Army 

from playing an active and direct role in civilian law enforcement except 

where authorized by the Constitution or an act of Congress.21

 

2118 U.S.C. §1385. 

However, 

federal law authorizes the military—and by extension, CAP—to provide 

limited support to federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies. For 

example, Department of Defense and CAP personnel made available to a 

civilian law enforcement agency may conduct aerial reconnaissance, and 

Key Factors Affect 

CAP’s Ability to 

Support Homeland 

Security Missions; 

Assessment of CAP 

Capabilities and 

Resources Could 

Inform DecisionMaking

Several Factors May Affect 

CAP’s Ability to Support 

Homeland Security 

Missions

Legal Parameters Guide CAP’s 

Mission Involvement
 

Page 15 GAO-13-56 Civil Air Patrol Homeland Security Missions 

detect, monitor, and communicate on the movement of certain air, sea, 

and surface traffic.22

In providing support to civilian law enforcement agencies, CAP is 

precluded from participating in the interdiction of vehicles, vessels, or 

aircraft, or in search, seizure, arrest, apprehension, surveillance, pursuit, 

or similar activity.23 CAP is also unable to transport prisoners, contraband, 

and law enforcement officers in direct support of an ongoing mission, or 

when hostilities are imminent.24 CBP officials told us that because of 

these restrictions, CAP is unable to provide the type of support that is 

necessary for some law enforcement activities. In addition, officials from 

the Coast Guard noted concerns with CAP’s access to classified 

information that may further limit the range of missions CAP can 

support.25 According to Air Force officials, the approval process for law 

enforcement support activities involving the monitoring of air, sea, or 

surface traffic is lengthy, requiring consent from the Office of the 

Secretary of Defense.26

 

22The Department of Defense and CAP are limited to conducting these activities for air 

and sea traffic within 25 miles of and outside the geographic boundaries of the United 

States. For surface traffic, these activities may occur outside the geographic boundaries of 

the United States and within the United States not to exceed 25 miles of the boundary if 

initial detection occurred outside the boundary. Pub. L. No. 101-510, § 1004, 104 Stat. 

1485, 1629 (1990) (codified as amended at 10 U.S.C. § 374 note).

Air Force and CAP officials noted that developing 

standing agreements with law enforcement agencies could help enable 

CAP to support such requests on shorter notice.

23U.S. Air Force, Air Force Instruction 10-2701, Organization and Function of the Civil Air 

Patrol (Jul. 2005, Incorporating Change 1, September 2006). 

24CAP, Civil Air Patrol Capabilities Handbook: A Field Operations Resource Guide,

August 2010. There are some exceptions for contraband as long as a law enforcement 

officer maintains the chain of custody.

25Air Force–assigned missions may require CAP personnel to have a security clearance 

and the Air Force is to validate the number and levels of security clearances needed to 

meet Air Force–assigned mission requirements. CAP members that have a valid and 

current Department of Defense clearance from military or government service may also 

use them when performing Air Force–assigned missions.

26Approval criteria for defense support to domestic law enforcement agencies are 

specified by Deputy Secretary of Defense Memorandum Department Support to Domestic 

Law Enforcement Agencies Performing Counternarcotic Activities (Oct. 2, 2003).
 

Page 16 GAO-13-56 Civil Air Patrol Homeland Security Missions 

CAP’s ability to provide support is often contingent on its customers’ 

ability and willingness to pay CAP for its services—making the availability 

of mission funding a key consideration in determining whether CAP can 

support additional homeland security missions. Per Air Force guidance, 

CAP ordinarily conducts missions on a cost-reimbursable basis. Typically, 

any federal agency requesting CAP assistance through the Air Force 

must certify that its request complies with the Economy Act, which 

requires that requesting agencies have available the monies necessary to 

cover the expense of the service being requested, among other things.27

CAP’s reimbursement rate as of October 2012 was $160 per flying hour, 

covering fuel and maintenance.28

While CAP typically requires reimbursement for its support activities, 

some of CAP’s missions are financed through federally appropriated 

funds.

According to CAP and Air Force 

officials, formal agreements between CAP and requesting 

organizations—such as those that exist between some CAP wings and 

state-level entities—can expedite the approval process by identifying 

funding mechanisms prior to CAP support.

29

 

2731 U.S.C. § 1535. 

Some of these missions were identified by officials from CAP or 

DHS components as areas in which CAP could provide further support. 

For example, CAP has received since 2004 in its annual operations and 

maintenance budget an allotment for counterdrug activities, and therefore 

conducts many of its counterdrug missions at no expense to the 

customer. Additionally, the Air Force funds through the CAP appropriation 

a range of activities deemed to be of interest to the Air Force, including 

inland search and rescue. According to CAP officials, CAP’s current 

funding levels are sufficient to support these activities. However, an 

increase in such unreimbursed activities could affect CAP’s ability to 

respond to other missions supported by appropriated funds. For example, 

CAP officials told us that, because of the counterdrug nexus, border 

reconnaissance missions in support of CBP are also typically funded by 

28Several factors are important to consider when comparing CAP’s $160 per hour flying 

rate with the operating costs of other federal air assets. These include (1) the capabilities 

of CAP’s aircraft may differ considerably from those of other federal air assets; (2) CAP 

pilots are unpaid volunteers; and (3) a higher operational tempo could affect CAP’s overall 

maintenance costs and thereby increase the reimbursable amount.

29About 77 percent of CAP wings have consistently received state funding over 6 or more 

of the last 10 years that is sometimes earmarked for specific purposes, including certain 

missions, programs, or procurements.

Additional Homeland Security 

Missions May Require 

Reimbursement
 

Page 17 GAO-13-56 Civil Air Patrol Homeland Security Missions 

the CAP operations budget instead of reimbursed by the customer. 

Consequently, an increase in such unreimbursed border reconnaissance 

missions—which relate to the homeland security area of securing and 

managing our borders—could diminish CAP’s ability to support other 

unreimbursed activities, such as counterdrug activities for the Drug 

Enforcement Administration and others.

According to CAP and DHS officials, CAP’s existing operational 

capabilities—aircraft and vehicles, personnel, and technology—have 

been sufficient to support certain homeland security missions, yet they 

may not be suitable for other types of missions. Recognizing this, officials 

from CAP headquarters told us that if DHS identified additional homeland 

security missions for CAP, it might be necessary to pursue additional 

resources or technologies.

Aircraft and Vehicles

According to CAP officials, the number and locations of CAP’s assets—

which include 550 aircraft and 960 vehicles across 52 wings—could be 

conducive to conducting additional homeland security missions, which 

can originate at the local, state, and federal levels. CAP’s aircraft, 

primarily consisting of Cessna 172s and 182s, are capable of performing 

aerial reconnaissance and damage assessment, search and rescue 

missions, and air intercept exercises. FEMA officials told us that because 

CAP’s assets are geographically dispersed across the country, it has 

proven to be a flexible and timely resource to capture imagery in the first 

hours or days of an event. As an example, FEMA officials cited CAP’s 

support of the agency’s operations in response to Hurricane Isaac in 

2012, specifically stating that CAP’s imagery helped to establish 

situational awareness. CAP’s vehicles are capable of light transport of 

personnel and equipment, mobile communications, and ground damage 

assessment. Many vehicles are also equipped with radios that are able to 

communicate with CAP aircraft, which could enable a coordinated 

approach to air and land missions. CAP and Air Force officials stated that 

they would be open to repositioning aircraft and vehicles in order to meet 

demands associated with an increased homeland security workload and 

the needs of their customers.

CAP’s standardized fleet does have functional limitations. For example, 

CAP’s single-engine aircraft have limited transport capacity. Additionally, 

CAP guidance prohibits sustained flight at an altitude of less than 1,000 

feet during the day or 2,000 feet at night. This limitation was also cited by 

Coast Guard officials, who specifically stated that during the Deepwater 

Existing Capabilities May Limit 

CAP’s Suitability for Some 

Homeland Security Missions 
 

Page 18 GAO-13-56 Civil Air Patrol Homeland Security Missions 

Horizon incident, CAP was unable to fly certain oil tracking missions 

because of altitude restrictions. A Coast Guard official further noted that 

the range of CAP’s aircraft was limited over water—with aircraft being 

required to stay within gliding distance of shore. CAP officials told us, 

however, that CAP aircraft are able to operate up to 50 nautical miles 

from shore under normal conditions, and that this range can be extended 

for special missions.

Personnel

CAP officials stated that, since CAP is a volunteer organization, its 

membership—consisting of 61,000 volunteers, including approximately 

35,000 senior members and 11,000 crew members—constitutes its most 

critical asset. According to CAP officials, CAP has standards and 

qualifications for its member pilots and maintains online systems that 

train, test, and track all aspects of crew qualifications. For example, 

CAP’s mission pilots must possess a private pilot’s license with 200 flight 

hours, and are required to complete training courses specific to search 

and rescue and disaster response. Those performing specialized 

missions are also subject to more stringent requirements. For example, 

counterdrug mission pilots must (1) be qualified for emergency services 

flights; (2) be current in a skill that has application to the counterdrug 

program; (3) complete a national counterdrug orientation course and, 

biennially, a refresher course; and (4) maintain a minimum of 20 hours of 

participation in the program yearly. Many of CAP’s members have also 

completed training in the National Incident Management System in order 

to allow CAP personnel to integrate operationally with local, state, and 

federal incident command structures.30

However, limitations in the quantity and expertise of mission pilots exist 

that may hinder CAP’s ability to support some activities. For example, 

CAP’s membership includes 3,000 mission pilots, representing 

Officials from some of the 

customer organizations we spoke with cited the professionalism of CAP’s 

personnel as a factor contributing to their success during past operations. 

For example, the Coast Guard Director of Air Operations during the 

Deepwater Horizon oil spill told us that CAP personnel conducting high 

profile shoreline and oil boom patrols were well-organized.

 

30The National Incident Management System standardizes the process for integrated 

emergency management and incident response operations by establishing organizational 

incident management structures.
 

Page 19 GAO-13-56 Civil Air Patrol Homeland Security Missions 

approximately 5 percent of total membership. Although CAP has in the 

past demonstrated its ability to temporarily transfer pilots to support surge 

missions—such as during the Deepwater Horizon incident—it could face 

challenges in increasing its support to sustained, long-term homeland 

security missions, particularly if those missions were to occur in areas 

with few mission pilots. Officials from CAP headquarters pointed towards 

their past successes in supporting surge missions, but they also 

recognized that there could be challenges associated with frequently 

moving pilots to meet mission demands since the pilots are volunteers.

Coast Guard officials we spoke with questioned whether CAP, because of 

its volunteer status, would consistently have pilots available to respond 

when needed and raised concerns that CAP pilots have limited expertise 

in maritime situations and do not have water survival training—both of 

which could be important requirements for many Coast Guard missions.

According to CAP officials, however, 521 CAP crew members have 

completed water survival training consisting of classroom instruction and 

a swim test.31

Technology

CAP’s current technological capabilities in terms of imagery and 

communications may both enable and limit its ability to support additional 

homeland security operations. CAP currently has a variety of imagery and 

communications technologies that can be used during some homeland 

security operations to provide ground and airborne communications relay 

and to capture geographically identifiable still-frame aerial imagery, and, 

in some cases, full-motion video. CAP’s nationwide communications 

capability includes high frequency and very high frequency AM and FM 

fixed, mobile, and repeater systems capable of providing connectivity 

during local, regional, and national events. CAP officials told us that these 

capabilities have in the past proved essential in maintaining 

communications during geographically dispersed operations. Table 2

depicts CAP’s imagery platforms.

 

31These crew members consist of both mission pilots and observers.
 

Page 20 GAO-13-56 Civil Air Patrol Homeland Security Missions 

Table 2: CAP Imagery Platforms

Imagery platform Description

Advanced Digital Imagery 

System

Provides point-to-point transmission of aerial and ground 

georeferenced digital imagery, primarily via e-mail. The 

most widely available imagery system, with approximately 

100 units available nationwide.

Airborne Real-Time Cueing 

Hyperspectral Enhanced 

Reconnaissance 

Uses non-invasive reflected light technology to identify 

targeted objects and detect changes and anomalies in 

images. Wing officials expressed mixed views regarding 

this system, noting its effectiveness during past missions, 

but also characterizing it as a problematic and aging 

technology that CAP no longer intends to support.

Geospatial Information 

Interoperability Exploitation 

Portable 

Capable of transmitting high-resolution still and video 

imagery from the air over cell phone networks. Select 

wings have been provided this technology by the Air Force 

and National Guard.

Predator Ball Imagery 

Turrets

Full-motion video turrets found on select military 

unmanned aerial vehicles. According to CAP officials, this 

equipment is currently affixed to two CAP aircraft, and is 

used by the Department of Defense for training exercises.

Source: GAO analysis of CAP information.

According to officials at the DHS components with whom we spoke, 

CAP’s existing technologies are sufficient to support some of the 

homeland security activities we have previously discussed, such as 

disaster assessment. Additionally, officials from CBP told us that CAP 

technologies could help further with detection and monitoring along the 

borders, providing radio relay in remote areas, and gaining situational 

awareness in areas not currently supported by other air platforms. 

However, officials from CBP and the Coast Guard also commented on 

CAP’s limitations in the border and marine environments, citing 

inadequate imagery capabilities, incompatible communications, and 

insufficient detection technology. Specifically, officials from CBP 

commented that CAP is incapable of providing a live video feed to its 

customers, capturing nighttime imagery, providing a video downlink of 

reconnaissance events, and transmitting information securely. These 

same officials emphasized that other technologies not possessed by CAP 

nationwide, including radar, forward-looking infrared cameras, and 
 

Page 21 GAO-13-56 Civil Air Patrol Homeland Security Missions 

change detection capabilities, are critical in the border environment.32

According to CAP headquarters and wing officials, CAP has the capacity 

to conduct additional missions, but some Coast Guard officials raised 

concerns about CAP’s readiness. CAP headquarters officials cite CAP’s 

current operational tempo (i.e., the pace of operations) and overall 

mission trends as factors that might position it well for an increased 

homeland security role. According to CAP officials, CAP’s daily 

operational tempo averages between 10 and 30 percent, leaving some 

excess capacity.

Coast Guard officials cited CAP’s inability to relay imagery in near-real 

time and stated that its systems are not compatible with the Coast 

Guard’s imagery or communications systems. As a result, the Coast 

Guard has not coordinated with CAP regarding the expansion of CAP’s 

role. Air Force and CAP officials recognized that CAP’s current 

technology may not be suitable for certain missions and told us that if new 

capabilities are needed to support additional homeland security missions, 

requirements would be needed from DHS. CAP officials also noted that 

1st Air Force has developed a requirement to modify or purchase 20 

aircraft with capabilities including near-real time communications; video 

and imagery transfer that is interoperable with federal, state, and local 

responders; and sensors useful for locating distressed persons day or 

night.

33

 

32CAP does not have radar, but does currently possess one forward-looking infrared 

system. The Airborne Real-Time Cueing Hyperspectral Enhanced Reconnaissance 

system, discussed in table 2, has change and anomaly detection capabilities. However, 

CAP’s seven fully operational systems are nearing the end of their useful life, according to 

CAP officials.

Officials from all 10 of the wings we contacted similarly 

indicated that their wings had capacity to support additional missions. 

While capacity may differ by wing depending on the time of year and 

ongoing operations, CAP officials also pointed to mission trends that may 

increase CAP’s overall capacity and potentially allow for greater 

involvement in homeland security activities. For example, as wireless 

technology has improved, CAP’s participation in search and rescue 

operations has steadily declined because victims in distress are able to 

more rapidly and accurately transmit their exact position—through GPS33CAP’s daily operational tempo is the percentage of total possible missions being flown 

based on the number of available aircraft and pilot availability. CAP’s goal is to have five 

mission pilots per each available aircraft. CAP has not determined what level constitutes 

its maximum operating capacity.

CAP’s Current Operating 

Capacity May Allow for 

Additional Missions
 

Page 22 GAO-13-56 Civil Air Patrol Homeland Security Missions 

enabled cell phones and locator beacons—to receive other assistance. 

This shift has freed up additional time for CAP to conduct other missions.

Officials we spoke with from the Coast Guard expressed some concern 

over relying on a volunteer organization like CAP because it does not 

have the same readiness posture and response standards as the Coast 

Guard. However, our discussions with these officials and the CAP wings 

identified no instances in which CAP was unable to respond to a request, 

or in which CAP was delayed in responding to a request because of a 

shortage of pilots or other personnel. According to CAP officials, CAP has 

also demonstrated an ability to surge in support of other agencies and to 

perform continuous operations for a sustained period of time. For 

example, CAP provided continuous support over 118 days during the 

Deepwater Horizon incident. A Coast Guard official involved in this 

operation corroborated CAP’s account of this operation, speaking highly 

of its organization and ability to conduct missions. Also, while the Drug 

Enforcement Administration is not a DHS component, officials from this 

agency told us that they rely on CAP aerial communications and imagery 

for approximately 2,500 counterdrug sorties per year and that they have 

received positive feedback regarding CAP’s ability to conduct these 

operations from their field agents. CAP officials stated that large 

operations such as Deepwater Horizon do not necessarily affect CAP’s 

ability to provide support in other areas throughout the year, but do 

significantly reduce their operations and maintenance funds because 

reimbursement does not cover these expenses. Further, while many of 

CAP’s missions are preplanned, CAP and Air Force officials stated that 

wings are tested biennially in a no-notice exercise, such as the 

Department of Defense’s Ardent Sentry, to ensure that personnel can 

assemble and deploy quickly to no-notice events.

DHS has not assessed CAP’s capabilities and resources or determined 

the extent to which CAP could be used to support future homeland 

security activities. The DHS concept of homeland security, as articulated 

in the QHSR, is that of a national enterprise, requiring the collective 

efforts and shared responsibilities of federal, state, local, 

nongovernmental, and private sector partners, among others. As we have 

reported in the past, ensuring that capabilities are available for such 

efforts requires effective planning and coordination in which capabilities 

are realistically tested in order to identify and subsequently address 

DHS Has Not Assessed 

CAP’s Ability to Support 

Additional Homeland 

Security Missions
 

Page 23 GAO-13-56 Civil Air Patrol Homeland Security Missions 

problems in partnership with relevant stakeholders.34 Additionally, we 

have also reported that achieving results for the nation increasingly 

requires collaboration among many different entities, and that because of 

the nation’s long-range fiscal challenges, the federal government must 

identify ways to deliver results more efficiently and in a way that is 

consistent with its multiple demands and limited resources.35

Officials we spoke with from CAP and the Air Force expressed support for 

FEMA’s efforts to develop imagery requirements for CAP. CAP officials 

told us that they were optimistic that this effort would provide insight into 

how CAP could better support its DHS customers. Similarly, Air Force 

officials stated that, in order to determine whether CAP could support 

additional DHS missions, DHS would first need to provide them with 

requirements for missions and also obtain a good understanding of CAP’s 

limitations—particularly in the area of support to law enforcement. To that 

end, CAP and Air Force officials told us that they have performed 

outreach to DHS, CBP, and FEMA in an effort to inform these potential 

partners of their capabilities and establish formal agreements that would 

define CAP’s role in providing support to such entities. By establishing 

such relationships and assessing the ability of CAP to provide additional 

homeland security capabilities, DHS, in coordination with the Air Force, 

However, 

according to an official in the DHS Office of Policy, DHS has not 

conducted a review to determine how CAP might be used by DHS or its 

components, and DHS does not have a position on the use of CAP for 

homeland security operations. Additionally, of the three DHS components 

we contacted, only FEMA had taken steps to consider CAP’s suitability 

for future homeland security activities and incorporate CAP in its 

operational planning. Specifically, FEMA officials told us that they are 

working with the DHS Science and Technology Directorate to develop 

requirements for CAP imagery and that they have included CAP in 

several of their disaster planning annexes. According to these officials, 

simple technological upgrades could improve FEMA’s ability to integrate 

CAP’s imagery into its operations. The other two components we 

contacted—CBP and the Coast Guard—had not assessed CAP’s ability 

to support their operations, but expressed reservations about using CAP 

for certain activities, as previously discussed.

 

34GAO-06-618. 

35GAO-06-15. 
 

Page 24 GAO-13-56 Civil Air Patrol Homeland Security Missions 

could position itself to better understand, and potentially utilize, another 

resource to accomplish its homeland security missions.

DHS faces the difficult challenge of securing our homeland through a 

wide range of missions from preventing terrorism, to securing our large 

borders and shorelines, and planning for and responding to natural and 

man-made disasters. Recognizing this challenge, DHS has emphasized 

the importance of partnering with other federal, state, local, and private 

entities to achieve its homeland security missions. Moreover, recent fiscal 

constraints may compel federal agencies, such as DHS, to partner with 

other organizations in order to accomplish their missions and achieve 

their goals. CAP is one such potential partner, having performed various 

missions since its inception in support of homeland security missions and 

components. Several factors affect CAP’s ability to conduct these and 

additional homeland security missions, including legal parameters, 

mission funding and reimbursement, existing capabilities, and capacity. At 

the same time, while some concerns exist among DHS components 

about partnering with CAP, a cost-effective assessment of CAP’s 

capabilities and resources, in coordination with the Air Force, could help 

DHS to better identify whether CAP can assist with its future homeland 

security missions.

To determine the extent to which CAP might be able to further assist DHS 

and its components in conducting homeland security missions, we 

recommend that the Secretary of Homeland Security, in coordination with 

the Secretary of the Air Force, cost-effectively assess how CAP could be 

used to accomplish certain homeland security missions based on the 

factors described in this report, including legal parameters, mission 

funding and reimbursement, capabilities, and operating capacity.

Conclusions

Recommendation for 

Executive Action
 

Page 25 GAO-13-56 Civil Air Patrol Homeland Security Missions 

We provided a draft of this report to DHS, CAP, and the Department of 

Defense for review and comment. DHS concurred with our 

recommendation, citing some challenges and constraints to the expanded 

use of CAP for DHS missions as well as describing its plan to address our 

recommendation. Specifically, DHS stated that its Office of the Chief 

Financial Officer (Program Analysis and Evaluation Division), along with 

components such as the Coast Guard will consider how DHS can make 

efficient and effective use of CAP and other aviation capabilities. In 

implementing our recommendation, it will be important for DHS to 

consider all of the factors described in our report, including legal 

parameters, mission funding and reimbursement, capabilities, and 

operating capacity, as we recommended. This action would then address 

the intent of our recommendation. DHS’s comments are reprinted in their 

entirety in appendix I.

CAP also concurred with our recommendation, noting that it is prepared 

to assist both DHS and the Air Force in assessing how it could be used to 

support certain homeland security missions. CAP’s comments are 

reprinted in their entirety in appendix II. The Department of Defense 

elected to not provide written comments, but did—along with DHS and 

CAP—provide technical comments that we incorporated into the report, 

as appropriate.

Agency Comments, 

Third-Party Views,

and Our Evaluation
 

Page 26 GAO-13-56 Civil Air Patrol Homeland Security Missions 

We are sending copies of this report to the Secretary of Homeland 

Security, the Secretary of Defense, CAP, appropriate congressional 

committees, and other interested parties. This report is also available at 

no charge on GAO’s website at http://www.gao.gov. 

If you or your staffs have any questions about this report, please contact 

either Carol Cha at (202) 512-4456 or chac@gao.gov or Brian Lepore at 

(202) 512-4523 or leporeb@gao.gov. Contact points for our Office of 

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

of this report. Key contributors to this report are listed in appendix III. 

Carol R. Cha

Acting Director

Homeland Security and Justice

Brian J. Lepore

Director

Defense Capabilities and Management
Appendix I: Comments from the Department of 

Homeland Security 

Page 27 GAO-13-56 Civil Air Patrol Homeland Security Missions 

Appendix I: Comments from the Department 

of Homeland Security 
Appendix I: Comments from the Department of 

Homeland Security 

Page 28 GAO-13-56 Civil Air Patrol Homeland Security Missions 
Appendix II: Comments from the Civil Air 

Patrol 

Page 29 GAO-13-56 Civil Air Patrol Homeland Security Missions 

Appendix II: Comments from the Civil Air 

Patrol 
Appendix II: Comments from the Civil Air 

Patrol

Page 30 GAO-13-56 Civil Air Patrol Homeland Security Missions 
Appendix III: GAO Contacts and Staff 

Acknowledgments

Page 31 GAO-13-56 Civil Air Patrol Homeland Security Missions 

Carol R. Cha, (202) 512-4456 or chac@gao.gov

Brian J. Lepore, (202) 512-4523 or leporeb@gao.gov

In addition to the contacts named above, key contributors to this report 

were Chris Currie, Assistant Director; Kimberly Seay, Assistant Director; 

Chuck Bausell; Ryan D’Amore; Michele Fejfar; Mike Harmond; Tracey 

King; and Dan Klabunde.

Appendix III: GAO Contacts and Staff 

Acknowledgments 

GAO Contacts

Staff 

Acknowledgments

(441063)
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 website (http://www.gao.gov). Each weekday 

afternoon, GAO posts on its website newly released reports, testimony, 

and correspondence. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted 

products, go to http://www.gao.gov and select “E-mail Updates.”

The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO’s actual cost of 

production and distribution and depends on the number of pages in the 

publication and whether the publication is printed in color or black and 

white. Pricing and ordering information is posted on GAO’s website, 

http://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm. 

Place orders by calling (202) 512-6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or 

TDD (202) 512-2537. 

Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card, 

MasterCard, Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional information.

Connect with GAO on Facebook, Flickr, Twitter, and YouTube. 

Subscribe to our RSS Feeds or E-mail Updates. Listen to our Podcasts. 

Visit GAO on the web at www.gao.gov. 

Contact:

Website: http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

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

Katherine Siggerud, Managing Director, siggerudk@gao.gov, (202) 512-

4400, U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 

7125, Washington, DC 20548

Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov, (202) 512-4800

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

Washington, DC 20548

GAO’s Mission

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony

Order by Phone

Connect with GAO

To Report Fraud, 

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs

Congressional 

Relations

Public Affairs

Please Print on Recycled Paper.