Transportation Security Administration: Actions and Plans to Build a Results-Oriented Culture
Published: 2003-01-17T00:00:00

Fast Facts:

Highlights:
section_title: Why GAO Did This Study
paragraphs: Never has a results-oriented focus been more critical than today, when the security of America's citizens depends on the outcomes of many federal programs. In response to the September 11 terrorist attacks, the Congress passed the Aviation and Transportation Security Act (ATSA) that created the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) and made it responsible for transportation security. ATSA requires TSA to implement specific practices that are intended to make it a results-oriented organization.
section_title: What GAO Found
paragraphs: In its first year, TSA has simultaneously started to build the infrastructure of a large organization as it focused primarily on meeting its aviation security deadlines. As TSA begins to take responsibility for security in the maritime and surface modes of transportation, its current and future challenge is to continue to build, sustain, and institutionalize the organizational capacity to help it achieve its current and future goals. In this regard, TSA has made an impressive start in implementing practices that can create a results-oriented culture. These practices--leadership commitment, strategic planning, performance management, collaboration and communication, and public reporting and customer service--are shown below. Such practices are especially important when TSA moves into the newly created Department of Homeland Security.

section_title: Letter
paragraphs: Over a year has passed since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001,  turned commercial aircraft into missiles, killing thousands of people,  destroying billions of dollars’ worth of property, and realigning our national  priorities. These attacks tragically underscore the forces that are likely to  shape American society, the United States’ place in the world, and the role  of the federal government. The federal government is engaged in a  comprehensive review, reassessment, reprioritization, and as appropriate  reengineering of what the government does, how it does business, and in  some cases, who does the government’s business. Leading public and  private organizations in the United States and abroad have found that for  organizations to successfully transform themselves they must often  fundamentally change their cultures so they are more results oriented,  customer focused, and collaborative in nature. Ultimately, federal agencies  will need to transform their cultures to meet the realities of a post- September 11 environment and the challenges of the 21st century.
In response to the September 11 terrorist attacks, the Congress passed the  Aviation and Transportation Security Act (ATSA) in November 2001, which  created the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) as a new  organization in the Department of Transportation (DOT). According to  ATSA, TSA is responsible for security in aviation and other modes of  transportation. In addition, ATSA requires TSA to implement specific  practices that are intended to make it a results-oriented organization. Also  in response to the September 11 terrorist attacks, the Congress created the  Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to better coordinate the United  States’ efforts to combat terrorism. The creation of this department moves  TSA and its responsibilities for security of all modes of transportation out  of DOT and into the newly created DHS.
A key factor to help organizations achieve their missions and program  results is to implement a positive control environment. A positive control  environment provides discipline and structure as well as the climate that  influences the quality of internal control. In essence, a positive control  environment requires management and employees to establish a supportive  attitude toward internal control and conscientious management. As such,  effective internal control includes strategic planning, budget formulation  and execution, organizational alignment and control, performance  measurement, human capital, financial management, information  technology, and acquisition.
At your request, this report describes TSA’s actions and plans for  implementing the results-oriented practices required in ATSA and  recommends next steps for TSA to take to build a results-oriented  organizational culture and to establish a positive control environment. To  address the objective of this report, we reviewed our models, guides,  reports, and other products on strategic planning and performance  measurement, strategic human capital management, transformation  efforts, and other related areas to identify results-oriented practices and  recommend next steps for TSA. We next analyzed ATSA in relation to our  products to identify any results-oriented practices that were statutorily  required in the legislation. We interviewed officials from various TSA  offices responsible for strategic planning, human capital, training, budget,  public affairs, and policy, among others and reviewed TSA and DOT  missions, performance goals and measures, performance agreements,  policies and procedures, and organizational charts and other relevant  documentation. For additional information on our scope and methodology,  see appendix I.
This report addresses a part of your larger request for GAO to provide  information on the extent to which TSA’s policies, procedures, and  organizational structure are likely to ensure the adequate oversight of its  workforce of air marshals, airline passenger and baggage screeners, and  other security personnel, as well as other matters. We have testified before  your committee and issued reports on TSA and aviation security that  address issues included in your larger request. In an ongoing effort to  provide real-time, constructive assistance to TSA, we provided TSA with  our guides and reports on strategic planning and strategic human capital  management. See related GAO products listed at the end of this report for a  list of GAO reports, testimonies, guides, and other products related to TSA,  transportation security, and results-oriented practices.
subsections: section_title: Background
paragraphs: Unlike other federal organizations that must transform their existing  cultures, TSA has the opportunity to create a culture that fosters high  performance from the outset. For TSA, this means creating a culture that  focuses on   results rather than processes;  matrixes rather than stovepipes;  an external (citizen, customer, and stakeholder) perspective rather than   employee empowerment rather than micromanagement;  risk management rather than risk avoidance; and  knowledge sharing rather than knowledge hoarding.
TSA is an organization facing immense challenges to simultaneously build  the infrastructure of a large government agency responsible for security in  all modes of transportation and meet unprecedented deadlines required in  ATSA to federalize aviation security. Two of the most significant deadlines  require TSA to  deploy federal passenger screeners at security checkpoints at 429  airports across the nation by November 19, 2002, and  install explosives detection systems to screen every piece of checked  baggage for explosives no later than December 31, 2002.
In July 2002, we testified before your committee on the progress TSA has  made in enhancing aviation security and in meeting the deadlines to deploy  federal screeners at security checkpoints and to install explosives  detection systems. At that time, we reported that while TSA’s efforts were  well underway to hire and train thousands of key security personnel,  including federal screeners and security directors, TSA had experienced  unexpected delays in finding and hiring security screener personnel who  met the requirements of ATSA. We also reported that while TSA had made  progress in checking all bags for explosives and planning for the purchase  and installation of explosives detection equipment, TSA had not kept pace  with planned milestones to meet congressional deadlines for using  explosives detection systems to screen 100 percent of checked baggage. In  addition, we reported that TSA had not fully implemented the  responsibilities required in ATSA such as the security of other modes of  transportation, cargo security, and general aviation security. Finally, we  also observed that the move of TSA from DOT to a DHS poses further  challenges that may delay progress on meeting mandated deadlines and  addressing other security vulnerabilities in the nation’s transportation  system.
TSA and DOT leadership have also testified before the Congress at several  hearings on challenges TSA was facing as it tried to meet its deadlines and  other transportation security responsibilities while establishing itself as a  federal organization. Leadership stated that one of TSA’s challenges is to  build a large organization from the ground up. Specifically, in January 2002,  TSA only had approximately 15 employees of the more than 60,000 it  reported it would need by the end of 2002. In addition, the Under Secretary  of Transportation for Security testified that at that time the congressionally  mandated cap on the number of employees it can employ of 45,000 would  limit its ability to meet the deadlines. TSA also testified on the need for  additional funding to meet its security responsibilities and the delays it  experienced in receiving this funding. According to TSA and DOT, delays in  funding and restrictions on the use of the additional funding at that time  had undermined TSA’s ability to meet the deadlines. DOT leadership stated  that TSA is especially disadvantaged by operating under a continuing  resolution because it does not have money from previous years to help  bridge the gaps between programmatic needs and the funding it receives  under the continuing resolution.
When the Congress created TSA, it required practices consistent with other  government initiatives to restructure their agencies in order to instill  results-oriented organizational cultures. In the United States and abroad,  governments have restructured their agencies to improve the delivery of  government services and clarify accountability for results. During the 1980s  and 1990s, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development  reported that its member countries increased efforts to restructure their  public sector organizations for results. Among member countries,  restructured organizations represent about 50 percent, sometimes as high  as 75 percent, of public expenditure and public servants.
In 1988, the United Kingdom started to restructure its government agencies  to increase their focus on accountability and improve customer service.  Called “executive agencies,” these restructured agencies are still the  predominant form of service delivery in the United Kingdom. As of  December 2001, there were over 130 executive agencies covering more  than three-quarters of the British civil service. In July 2002, the Prime  Minister’s Office of Public Services Reform reviewed the performance of  these executive agencies and set out to identify management principles  that may have contributed to their success. The Prime Minister’s Office  concluded that the restructured executive agency model has been a  success and the management principles underlying the restructured  agencies continue to be highly relevant. These principles are: (1) a clear  focus on delivering specified goals within a framework of accountability,  (2) responsibility for performance resting clearly with the chief executive  and agency staff, and (3) an agency focus that is outward rather than  inward.
In the 1990s, the Congress recognized the need to restructure federal  agencies and to hold them accountable for achieving program results. To  this end, the Congress established performance-based organizations  (PBOs), modeled after the United Kingdom’s executive agencies: the Office  of Student Financial Assistance, United States Patent and Trademark  Office, and Air Traffic Organization. Designed in statute, PBOs were to  commit to clear management objectives and specific targets for improved  performance. These clearly defined performance goals, coupled with direct  ties between the achievement of performance goals and the pay and tenure  of the head of the PBO and other senior managers, were intended to lead to  improved performance. Specifically, the head of the PBO is appointed for a  set term, subject to annual performance agreements, and eligible for  bonuses for improved organizational performance.
Similarly for TSA, the Congress required an Under Secretary to be  appointed for a 5-year term to manage TSA who is entitled to a bonus based  on performance; measurable goals to be outlined in a 5-year performance  plan and reported annually; a performance management system to include  individual and organizational goals for managers and employees; an annual  performance agreement for the Under Secretary, senior managers, and  staff; an oversight board to facilitate communication and collaboration; and  public reporting requirements to build citizen confidence.
TSA will be 1 of over 20 originating agencies or their components with  differing missions, cultures, systems, and procedures that are to move into  DHS. The newly created DHS is the most recent manifestation of the  continuing consideration of how best to restructure government to respond  to the challenges of the 21st century. At a GAO-sponsored forum on mergers  and transformation, participants observed that people and cultural issues  are at the center of successful mergers and transformations. The  importance of these issues should not be avoided, but aggressively  addressed at the outset and throughout the process.
section_title: TSA Actions and Plans to Implement Selected Results-Oriented Practices
paragraphs: Within its first year of existence, TSA has made an impressive start in  implementing practices that can create a results-oriented organizational  culture and help TSA as it begins to take responsibility for the security of  the maritime and surface modes of transportation. These practices include   leadership commitment to creating a high-performing organization,  strategic planning to establish results-oriented goals and measures,  performance management to promote accountability for results,  collaboration and communication to achieve national outcomes, and  public reporting and customer service to build citizen confidence.
TSA’s actions and plans to implement the results-oriented practices  required in ATSA and recommended next steps that can help TSA build a  results-oriented culture are described on the following pages.
subsections: section_title: Leadership Commitment to Creating a High-Performing Organization
paragraphs: A critical element and the foundation of TSA’s successful implementation  of results-oriented practices will be the demonstrated and sustained  commitment of its top leaders. Ultimately, successful organizations  understand that they must often change their culture to successfully  transform themselves, and that such a change starts with top leadership.  Top leadership involvement is essential to overcoming an organization’s  natural resistance to change, marshalling the resources needed in many  cases to improve management, and building and maintaining the  organizationwide commitment to new ways of doing business. At a recent  GAO-sponsored roundtable, we reported on the necessity to elevate  attention, integrate various efforts, and institutionalize accountability to  lead efforts to fundamentally transform an agency and address key  management functions at the highest appropriate level in the  organization. At TSA, the leadership faces a daunting challenge to create  this results-oriented culture. From the outset, this challenge was  exacerbated by the change in TSA’s head position, the Under Secretary of  Transportation for Security, just 8 months after the organization was  established. TSA has continually stated its commitment to becoming a  high-performing organization, and has reinforced that commitment in its  performance agreements for TSA executives.
TSA leadership has expressed its commitment to creating a results- oriented organizational culture. Specifically, in its 180-day action plan  report to the Congress outlining goals and milestones for defining  acceptable levels of performance in aviation security, TSA stated that it is  committed to “being a leading-edge, performance-based organization—an  organization whose operative culture establishes performance  expectations that support the mission, drives those expectations into  organizational and individual performance plans, and collects objective  data to assess its performance.”
TSA leadership also plans to use the Baldrige performance excellence  criteria as a management tool to promote an awareness of quality and  performance in TSA. These criteria are: leadership, strategic planning,  customer and market focus, information and analysis, human resource  focus, process management, and business results. TSA leadership hired a  former Baldrige award application examiner to be TSA’s Chief Quality  Officer and to head the Office of Quality Performance. According to TSA  officials, the Office of Quality Performance will serve as internal  consultants to TSA management to help them use the Baldrige criteria as a  tool to create a culture focused on performance.
To hold TSA’s leadership accountable for achieving results, ATSA requires  TSA to establish a performance agreement between the Under Secretary  and the Secretary of DOT that includes organizational and individual  performance goals. A TSA official told us that as of November 2002, no  performance agreement had been finalized for the Under Secretary since  the current Under Secretary has been acting in the position. During times  of transition, high-performing organizations recognize that performance  agreements can reinforce accountability for organizational goals. To this  end, when TSA moves into its new parent department, DHS, TSA can use  performance agreements to maintain a consistent focus on its goals. ATSA  also allows for the Under Secretary to receive a bonus for any calendar  year up to 30 percent of the annual rate of pay, based on a performance  evaluation. However, TSA’s interim performance management system does  not specifically address performance bonuses for the head of TSA.
In addition, ATSA requires TSA to establish performance agreements  between TSA’s Under Secretary and his or her executives that set  organizational and individual performance goals. TSA has created a  standardized performance agreement for TSA executives as a part of its  interim performance management system. TSA’s executive agreements  include both organizational and individual goals, as shown in figure 1. For  example, each executive performance agreement includes an  organizational goal such as to maintain the nation’s air security and ensure  an emphasis on customer satisfaction. The agreement also includes  individual goals, such as to meet or exceed requirements for satisfactory  performance and to demonstrate commitment to civil rights. In addition,  the agreement includes competencies, such as to provide leadership in  setting the workforce’s expected performance levels and ensure that the  executive’s work unit contributes to the accomplishment of TSA’s mission.  TSA can strengthen these performance agreements by setting explicit  targets that are directly linked to organizational goals.
Governmentwide, to help hold senior executives accountable for  organizational results, federal agencies are to establish performance  management systems that (1) hold senior executives accountable for their  individual and organizational performance by linking performance  management with the results-oriented goals of the Government  Performance and Results Act (GPRA); (2) evaluate senior executive  performance using measures that balance organizational results with  customer satisfaction, employee perspectives, and any other measures  agencies decide are appropriate; and (3) use performance results as a basis  for pay, awards, and other personnel decisions. We have found that  progress is needed in explicitly linking senior executive expectations for  performance to results-oriented organizational goals and greater emphasis  should be placed in fostering the necessary collaboration both within and  across organizational boundaries to achieve results. Furthermore, a  specific performance expectation to lead and facilitate change could be a  critical element as agencies transform themselves to succeed in an  environment that is more results oriented, less hierarchical, and more  integrated.
subsections: section_title: Recommended Next Steps
paragraphs: Establish a performance agreement for the Under Secretary of  Transportation for Security that articulates how bonuses will be  tied to performance. To hold the Under Secretary accountable for  achieving results, DOT, or the new parent department DHS, should create a  performance agreement for the Under Secretary that includes  organizational and individual goals and also articulates how bonuses for  the Under Secretary will be tied to his performance in achieving the goals  in the performance agreement.
Add expectations in performance agreements for top leadership to  foster the culture of a high-performing organization. Successful  organizations understand that top leadership performance and  accountability are critical to their success and to the success of the federal  government’s transformation. TSA can strengthen its current performance  agreements for top leadership, including the Under Secretary and senior  executives, by adding performance expectations that   establish explicit targets directly linked to organizational goals,  foster the necessary collaboration within and across organizational  boundaries to achieve results, and  demonstrate commitment to lead and facilitate change.
section_title: Strategic Planning to Establish Results-Oriented Goals and Measures
paragraphs: Strategic planning is a continuous, dynamic, and inclusive process that  provides the foundation for the fundamental results the organization seeks  to achieve. ATSA’s requirements for TSA are consistent with the results- oriented planning and reporting principles embodied in GPRA. GPRA  provides a strategic planning and management framework intended to  improve federal performance and hold agencies accountable for achieving  results. Effective implementation of this framework requires agencies to  clearly establish results-oriented performance goals in strategic and annual  performance plans for which they will be held accountable, measure  progress towards those goals, determine the strategies and resources to  effectively accomplish the goals, use performance information to make the  programmatic decisions necessary to improve performance, and formally  communicate results in performance reports. Specifically, ATSA requires  TSA to submit to the Congress a 5-year performance plan and an annual  performance report, but does not specify when these documents are to be  submitted to the Congress.
TSA has taken the first steps to establishing the performance planning and  reporting framework consistent with GPRA. The starting point for the  framework envisioned under GPRA is the strategic plan that describes an  organization’s mission, outcome-oriented strategic goals, strategies to  achieve these goals, and key factors beyond the agency’s control that could  impact the goals’ achievement, among other things. According to TSA  officials, TSA is currently developing its strategic plan. TSA has, however,  made components of its plan public. TSA has articulated its mission, vision,  and values. TSA’s mission is to protect the nation’s transportation systems  to ensure freedom of movement for people and commerce. TSA’s vision is  to continuously set the standard for excellence in transportation security  through people, processes, and technologies and its values are integrity,  innovation, courtesy and respect, competence, customer focus, dedication,  diversity, and teamwork. In addition, TSA has set an overall strategic goal:  to prevent intentional harm or disruption to the transportation system by  terrorists or other persons intending to cause harm. To support this  strategic goal, TSA has defined three performance goals:  meeting the ATSA mandates to federalize transportation security,  maintaining and improving aviation security, and  servicing TSA customers.
To demonstrate its progress toward meeting its performance goals, TSA  established an initial set of 32 performance measures. For example, TSA’s  primary performance measures for its performance goal to maintain and  improve aviation security are the percentage of bags screened by  explosives detection systems and the percentage of trained screeners.  Other measures to complement these primary measures include the  percentage of explosives detection systems deployed, the percentage of  screeners with 60 hours of on-the-job training completed, and the  percentage of screeners compliant with training standards. TSA plans to  develop more outcome-oriented goals and measures in fiscal year 2003 and  is in the process of finalizing strategies to achieve its goals.
To report on its progress in meeting its performance goals and measures,  TSA has begun to build the capacity to gather and use organizational  performance information. TSA has installed an automated performance  management information system, which became operational in April 2002  and is designed to collect and report data on TSA’s performance measures.  Data will be collected from federal security directors, security screener  supervisors, and headquarters officials and reported through Web-based  reports designed for internal decision making and external reporting.  According to TSA officials, the system will be expanded to include goals  and measures related to all modes of transportation in upcoming fiscal  years. As required by ATSA, TSA reported on November 19, 2002, that it  submitted its first annual performance report.
TSA has linked its aviation security performance goals to those of its parent  department, DOT, to provide a clear, direct understanding of how the  achievement of its performance goals will lead to the achievement of DOT’s  strategic goal for homeland security, as shown in figure 2. Specifically,  TSA’s performance goals to federalize and maintain and improve aviation  security are intended to contribute to DOT’s performance goal to “reduce  vulnerability to crime and terrorism and promote regional stability” and its  strategic goal on homeland security, to “ensure the security of the  transportation system for the movement of people and goods and support  the National Security Strategy.” As TSA establishes its performance goals  for other modes of transportation, it should continue to align its goals with  DOT’s goals. When TSA moves to DHS, it will be necessary to maintain goal  alignment with its new parent department.
GPRA requires agencies to consult with the Congress and solicit the views  of other stakeholders as they develop their strategic plans. However, TSA  has stated few plans to involve stakeholders in its strategic planning  process. Such consultations provide an important opportunity for TSA and  the Congress to work together to ensure that agency missions are focused,  goal are specific and results oriented, and strategies and funding  expectations are appropriate and reasonable. Results-oriented  organizations also recognize that it is important to broaden stakeholder  involvement to create a basic understanding among stakeholders of  competing goals. As TSA works to meet its goals, it will continue to face  ongoing challenges to balance aviation security against customer service.  While TSA needs to screen passengers and baggage carefully to meet its  goal to maintain the security of the aviation system, it must efficiently  move customers and their baggage through the aviation system to minimize  passenger inconvenience to encourage them to continue using air  transportation.
subsections: section_title: Recommended Next Steps
paragraphs: Establish security performance goals and measures for all modes  of transportation as part of a strategic planning process that  involves stakeholders. Stakeholder involvement, and specifically  congressional consultation, is particularly important for TSA in its strategic  planning process given the importance of its mission and the necessity to  establish additional goals to address other modes of transportation. In  addition, TSA operates in a complex political environment where there will  be the ongoing need to balance the sometimes conflicting goals of security  and customer service.
We identified approaches that can enhance the usefulness of consultations  between TSA and the Congress that can also apply to consultations with  external stakeholders. Among the approaches are the following.
Engage the right people. Including people who are knowledgeable about  the topic at hand, such as TSA officials who are knowledgeable about  particular transportation modes and specific programs, is important  when consulting with the Congress and other stakeholders.
Address differing views. Stakeholders may have differing views on what  they believe the level of detail discussed during consultation meetings  should be. For example, participants may want to engage in discussion  that goes beyond TSA’s mission to the appropriate balance between  enforcing security and servicing passengers.
Establish a consultation process that is iterative. All parties involved in  transportation security recognize that the consultation process should  be continuous and they should meet as many times as both sides feel are  necessary to reach a reasonable consensus on TSA’s strategic and  performance goals to address transportation security.
Apply practices that have been shown to provide useful  information in agency performance plans. Results-oriented  organizations focus on the process of performance planning rather than the  planning documents themselves. GPRA was intended, in part, to improve  congressional decision making by giving the Congress comprehensive and  reliable information on the extent to which federal programs are fulfilling  their statutory intent. We have identified practices that TSA can apply to  ensure the usefulness of its required 5-year performance plan to TSA  managers, the Congress, and other decision makers and interested  parties. Table 2 outlines these practices.
section_title: Performance Management to Promote Accountability for Results
paragraphs: TSA has an opportunity to use its individual performance management  system as a strategic tool to drive internal change and achieve external  results. TSA, as a new organization, has a critical challenge in   (1) integrating potentially more than 60,000 employees into a new  organization, (2) creating a common culture, and (3) achieving its security,  customer satisfaction, and related performance goals in an effective,  efficient, and economical manner. The individual performance  management system can be an essential tool in meeting all three of the  above. To help agency leaders manage their people and integrate human  capital considerations into daily decision making and the program results  they seek to achieve, we developed a strategic human capital model. The  model highlights the kinds of thinking that agencies should apply, as well as  some of the steps they can take, to make progress in managing human  capital strategically. In our model, we identify two critical success factors  that can assist organizations in creating results-oriented cultures: (1) a “line  of sight” showing how unit and individual performance link to  organizational goals and (2) the inclusiveness of employees. TSA can apply  these factors to its performance management system to help create a  results-oriented culture.
ATSA requires TSA to establish a performance management system that is  to strengthen the organization’s effectiveness by providing for the  establishment of goals for managers, employees, and the organization that  are consistent with the agency’s performance plan. TSA used the Federal  Aviation Administration’s system until it established its own system in July  2002, when TSA leadership approved an interim employee performance  management system. The interim system is to remain in place until a  permanent system is created and implemented. As of November 2002, TSA  had not established a time frame for implementing its permanent  performance management system.
TSA’s interim system provides specific requirements for planning individual  performance, monitoring that performance, determining employee  development needs, appraising performance, and recognizing and  rewarding performance, as shown in figure 3. For example, at the  beginning of the appraisal cycle, employees’ expectations are to be  established using a performance agreement; throughout the cycle  supervisors are to monitor performance; halfway through the performance  cycle supervisors are to provide feedback to employees and identify  employee development needs; and at the end of the cycle, supervisors are  to appraise performance at two levels: fully satisfactory and unacceptable.  Employees may then receive a bonus or other incentive if their  performance is at the fully satisfactory level. TSA’s first appraisal cycle  ended November 15, 2002.
In addition, ATSA requires that TSA’s performance agreements for its  employees include individual and organizational goals. These performance  agreements can help TSA align individual and organizational goals and  establish the line of sight that helps create a results-oriented culture. TSA  has created standardized performance agreements for groups of employees  including transportation security screeners, supervisory transportation  security screeners, supervisors, and executives. These performance  agreements include a consistent set of organizational goals, individual  goals, and standards for satisfactory performance. Supervisors may  customize performance agreements for the individual job by adding  additional organizational and individual goals and standards of  performance. For example, the standardized performance agreement for  security screeners includes two organizational goals: (1) to improve and  maintain the security of American air travel by effectively deterring or  preventing successful terrorist (or other) incidents on aircraft and at  airports, with minimal disruption to transportation and complete service to  travelers and (2) to ensure an emphasis on customer satisfaction while  maintaining the nation’s air security. In addition, the standardized  performance agreement for security screeners includes an individual goal  to consistently meet or exceed the basic proficiency requirements by:  vigilantly carrying out duties with utmost attention to tasks that will   demonstrating the highest levels of courtesy to travelers and working to  maximize their levels of satisfaction with TSA services,  working as an effective team member at assigned post to ensure that  security violations do not get past the team,  contributing to the accomplishment of TSA’s mission and vision,   behaving in a way that supports TSA’s values, and  demonstrating the highest level of concern for the civil rights of  coworkers and the traveling public.
Finally, the agreement includes standards for satisfactory performance for  security screeners. Standards include (1) completing all required training  successfully and as scheduled, performing satisfactorily on required  proficiency reviews, and passing operational testing satisfactorily and   (2) performing security functions in an effective and timely manner in  accordance with TSA prescribed guidelines.
As described in our strategic human capital model, in addition to and  concurrent with the first critical success factor of creating a line of sight  showing how unit and individual performance link to organizational goals,  successful organizations involve employees to build results-oriented  cultures. This critical success factor is especially timely for TSA as it  transitions from its interim performance management system and finalizes  its permanent system. Particularly when developing a new results-oriented  performance management system, leading organizations have found that  actively involving employees can build confidence and belief in the system.  We reported that when reforming their performance management systems,  agencies in other countries consulted a wide range of stakeholders early in  the process, obtained feedback directly from employees, and engaged  employee unions or associations.
subsections: section_title: Recommended Next Steps
paragraphs: Build on the current performance agreements to achieve  additional benefits. Successful organizations design and implement  performance management systems that align individual employee  performance expectations with agency goals so that individuals understand  the connections between their daily activities and their organization’s  success. While TSA has created standardized performance agreements for  groups of employees as a part of its interim performance management  system, it can also use its performance agreements to achieve benefits by  doing the following.
Strengthen alignment of results-oriented goals with daily operations.  Performance agreements can define accountability for specific goals  and help align daily operations with agencies’ results-oriented  programmatic goals. As TSA continues to develop and gain experience  with performance agreements, TSA should ensure an explicit link exists  between individual performance expectations and organizational goals  for all employees. For example, while TSA lists certain competencies for  individuals that are related to organizational goals such as  demonstrating the highest level of courtesy to travelers, the next step is  to set individual targets to meet the organizational goals.
Foster collaboration across organizational boundaries. Performance  agreements can encourage employees to work across traditional  organizational boundaries or “silos” by focusing on the achievement of  organizationwide goals. For example, as TSA continues to assume  responsibility for security in all modes of transportation, TSA can use  employee performance agreements to set expectations that encourage  employees to work collaboratively to achieve cross-cutting  transportation security goals.
Enhance opportunities to discuss and routinely use performance  information to make program improvements. Performance agreements  can facilitate communication about organizational performance and  pinpoint opportunities to improve performance. TSA’s performance  management process offers several opportunities to discuss an  individual’s performance and how that individual can contribute to  TSA’s goals when meeting to set performance expectations, reviewing  midyear progress, and assessing performance at year-end. These formal  expectation, feedback, and assessment sessions are important to clarify  responsibility and accountability. As a next step, TSA can ensure that it  uses its performance agreements as a critical component of its  performance management process to have on-going, two-way  consultations between employees and their supervisors. In other words,  strategic performance management—a performance management  system that is tied to organizational goals—is not just a once- or twice-a- year formal occurrence, but rather is ongoing and routine.
Provide a results-oriented basis for individual accountability.
Performance agreements can serve as the basis for performance  evaluations. An assessment of performance against the performance  agreement can provide TSA and its employees the data needed to better  achieve organizational goals.
Maintain continuity of program goals during transitions. Performance  agreements help to maintain a consistent focus on a set of broad  programmatic priorities during changes in leadership and organization.  TSA can use its process for developing performance agreements as a  tool to communicate priorities and instill those priorities throughout the  organization during periods of transition.
Ensure the permanent performance management system makes  meaningful distinctions in performance. In addition to providing  candid and constructive feedback to help individual employees maximize  their potential in understanding and realizing goals and objectives of the  agency, an effective performance management system provides  management with the objective and fact-based information it needs to  reward top performers and the necessary information and documentation  to deal with poor performers. Under TSA’s interim performance  management system, employee performance is appraised at only two  levels—fully satisfactory and unacceptable. We have observed that such a  pass/fail system does not provide enough meaningful information and  dispersion in ratings to recognize and reward top performers, help  everyone attain their maximum potential, and deal with poor performers.  As a next step, TSA should consider appraisal systems with more than two  standards of performance. By using its performance agreements as the  basis in making distinctions in performance, TSA can have objective and  fact-based information and the documentation necessary to have an  effective performance management system.
Involve employees in developing its permanent performance  management system. TSA has the opportunity to create a culture that  values the importance of employees to help TSA achieve its goals.  Employee involvement improves the quality of the system by providing a  front line perspective and helping to create organizationwide  understanding and ownership. In addition, even after TSA develops its  permanent performance management system, involving employees in the  process can help employees perceive that the system is fair.
We have identified practices that organizations can apply to further involve  employees. The practices TSA can adopt to promote inclusiveness and  encourage employee ownership for the permanent performance  management system include the following.
Seek employee input. Leading organizations not only provide  information to employees but also commonly seek their employees’  input on a periodic basis and explicitly address and use that input to  adjust their human capital practices. As TSA matures as an organization  it can collect feedback using employee satisfaction surveys, focus  groups, employee advisory councils, and/or employee task forces.
Involve employees in planning and sharing performance information.  Involving employees in the planning process to develop agency goals  helps to increase employees’ understanding and acceptance of them and  improve motivation and morale. For TSA, employees’ understanding  and acceptance of its goals is particularly important because they are to  be held accountable for achieving the goals set out in their performance  agreements.
section_title: Collaboration and Communication to Achieve National Outcomes
paragraphs: Virtually all of the results that the federal government strives to achieve  require the concerted and coordinated efforts of two or more agencies.  Thus, similar to virtually all federal agencies, TSA must collaborate and  communicate with stakeholders within and outside the government to  achieve meaningful results, and participate in matrixed relationships—or  networks of governmental, private sector, and nongovernmental  organizations working together—to achieve its goals. This collaboration  and communication will be even more important given the complex nature  of national security-related goals.
ATSA requires TSA to collaborate and communicate with organizations  across the government and in the private sector to accomplish its mission.  For example, ATSA requires TSA to do the following.
Work with the Federal Aviation Administration to establish procedures  for notifying its Administrator and others of the identity of individuals  known to pose, or suspected of posing, a risk of air piracy or terrorism  or a threat to airline or passenger safety.
Enter into memorandums of understanding with federal agencies or  other entities to share or otherwise cross-check data on individuals  identified on federal agency databases who may pose a risk to  transportation or national security.
Coordinate with federal agencies and air carriers to require air carriers  to use information from government agencies to identify individuals on  passenger lists who may be a threat to civil aviation or national security;  and if such an individual is identified, notify appropriate law  enforcement agencies, prevent the individual from boarding an aircraft,  or take other appropriate action with respect to that individual.
TSA has established a number of offices to collaborate and communicate  with external stakeholders.
The Office of Security Regulation and Policy is to coordinate with TSA’s  offices and stakeholders on policy, rulemaking, and customer service  issues.
The Office of Communications and Public Information is to serve as an  advisor to senior leadership on the public impacts of major policy  decisions, internal audience concerns, and community reaction to and  civilian news media interest in TSA missions and functions.
The Office of Law Enforcement and Security Liaison is to serve as the  national level liaison with federal, state, and local law enforcement and  the international community and is to administer TSA’s Freedom of  Information Act requirement, which allows the public to request  information about TSA policies, procedures, operations, and decisions,  among other things and TSA’s Privacy Act requirement, which allows the  public to request any records that the government has about the  individual making the request.
The Office of Legislative Affairs is to be responsible for working and  communicating with the Congress.
TSA has experienced some challenges with collaboration and  communication. According to TSA officials, TSA is still defining and  clarifying the specific roles and responsibilities of the offices that are to  communicate with stakeholders. As of December 2002, TSA did not have  written guidance to provide information about TSA communication roles  and responsibilities to other TSA employees or to external stakeholders. In  addition, the Under Secretary testified that there were some problems with  reaching stakeholders in the past, specifically the airlines and airports.  The Under Secretary recognized that collaboration with these and other  stakeholders is important to ensure aviation security and made a personal  commitment that TSA will make a concerted effort to communicate better  with stakeholders. In September 2002, we briefed the staff of the  Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, U.S. House of  Representatives, that some officials at selected airports told us that they  had not received clear and comprehensive guidance from TSA on issues  concerning the feasibility of meeting the baggage screening deadline.
TSA officials that we spoke to are aware of the importance of collaboration  and communication across the government. According to TSA officials, the  primary tools TSA will use to formally collaborate with governmental  entities are memorandums of agreement and memorandums of  understanding. They are developing memorandums of agreement with the  other modal administrations within DOT. TSA officials told us that they  also plan to develop memorandums of agreement and memorandums of  understanding with local law enforcement agencies, the Department of  Defense, the Department of State, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the  Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the Federal Emergency Management  Agency, and the Customs Service, among others. They told us that the  purposes of the memorandums are to delineate clear lines of authority and  responsibility between parties; improve services to DOT’s modal  administrations, other federal, state, and local agencies, nongovernmental  stakeholders, and the American public; and achieve national performance  security goals, among other purposes. TSA plans to complete the  memorandums no later than March 1, 2003.
As an additional mechanism to facilitate collaboration and communication,  ATSA established the Transportation Security Oversight Board. According  to ATSA, the Board, which must meet at least every 3 months, should  consist of cabinet heads; directors; high-ranking officials and/or their  designees from DOT, the Department of Defense, the Department of  Justice, the Department of the Treasury, and the Central Intelligence  Agency; and presidentially appointed representatives from the National  Security Council and the Office of Homeland Security. The Secretary of  Transportation is to be the chairperson of the Board. The Board’s  responsibilities include, among other things, reviewing transportation  plans; facilitating the coordination of intelligence, security, and law  enforcement activities affecting transportation; and facilitating the sharing  of intelligence, security, and law enforcement information affecting  transportation. The Board, established within DOT, met twice in 2002. TSA  officials noted that the Board is an excellent mechanism to share  information with national security agencies across government and has  helped focus the national security community on the threats to the  transportation system, which TSA believes is a critical element of meeting  the mandates in ATSA.
subsections: section_title: Recommended Next Steps
paragraphs: Define more clearly the collaboration and communication roles  and responsibilities of TSA’s various offices. To help ensure  collaboration and communication with stakeholders are consistent and  mutually reinforcing, TSA should more fully define and clarify the  collaboration and communication responsibilities of the many offices that  interact with its stakeholders. TSA should ensure both internal TSA staff  and external stakeholders can identify who is responsible for collaboration  and communication at TSA.
Formalize roles and responsibilities among governmental entities  for transportation security. Finalizing memorandums of agreement and  memorandums of understanding with the other modal administrations  within DOT as well as other government agencies as appropriate can help  TSA successfully manage the necessary matrixed relationships to achieve  security in all modes of transportation. For example, agreements between  TSA and the modal administrations can address such issues as separating  responsibilities for standards and regulations, funding, coordinating with  customers, and implementing future security initiatives. Although the  memorandums may change when TSA moves to DHS, TSA should continue  to make progress to formalize its roles and responsibilities until the  transition takes place.
section_title: Public Reporting and Customer Service to Build Citizen Confidence
paragraphs: Federal agencies can promote greater transparency of government by  publicizing what they intend to achieve and by being held accountable for  achieving those results. Such transparency can improve the confidence of  the American people in the capabilities of the federal government.  Improving public confidence is especially critical for TSA as it works to  achieve its goals of improving transportation security.
ATSA required TSA to issue specific reports to the Congress on its activities  and progress in establishing and meeting its goals. Specifically, ATSA  required TSA to provide to the Congress, within 180 days of enactment of  the legislation, an action plan with goals and milestones that was to outline  how acceptable levels of performance for aviation security will be  achieved. In accordance with the time frames outlined in ATSA, TSA  submitted the action plan to the Congress on May 19, 2002, and has made  this report available to the public on its Web site. The action plan, entitled  “Performance Targets and Action Plan, 180 Day Report to Congress,” made  public TSA’s strategic and performance goals, TSA’s performance measures,  and the performance measurement information system.
ATSA also required two progress reports within 6 months of the enactment  of the legislation. TSA released these reports within the established time  frame. The first progress report was to describe TSA’s progress to date on  the evaluation and implementation of actions listed in the legislation. TSA  submitted this progress report, entitled “Report to Congress on Enhanced  Security Measures,” on May 19, 2002, and made the report available to the  public on its Web site. Some of the actions TSA reported it was evaluating  include the following.
Establish a uniform system of identification for all state and local law  enforcement personnel for use in obtaining permission to carry  weapons in aircraft cabins and in obtaining access to a secured area of  an airport.
Establish requirements to implement trusted passenger programs and  use available technologies to expedite the security screening of  passengers who participate in such programs.
Provide for the use of technologies to enable the private and secure  communication of threats to aid in the screening of passengers and  other individuals on airport property who are identified on any state or  federal security-related database for the purpose of having an integrated  response of various authorized airport security forces.
The second progress report was to describe the deployment of passenger  and baggage screening systems. TSA submitted this report on May 18, 2002,  and has made nonsensitive portions of the report available on its Web site.  The report, entitled “Deployment of Screening Systems Strategy &  Progress,” provided the Congress with TSA’s progress on and strategy for  meeting the mandated deadlines to deploy federal screeners at security  checkpoints at 429 airports and to have systems in place for screening  every piece of checked baggage for explosives. For example, TSA reported  that at that time it had identified security screener standards; selected  private contractors to recruit, assess, and train security screeners;  developed a preliminary plan for deploying federal screeners to the  airports; developed an initial screening checkpoint design; and reviewed  available and emerging explosives detection technology. The report did not  include all of the information required in ATSA. For example, ATSA  required specific information such as the dates of installation of each  system to screen all checked baggage for explosives and the date each  system is operational.
Since TSA has issued the statutorily required action plan and progress  reports, it has continued to publicly report on its progress. Specifically,  TSA created a Web site that provides information for customers and the  public, including updates on its progress toward meeting the deadlines in  ATSA; speeches, statements, and testimonies by TSA and DOT leadership;  information on aviation security technology such as explosives detection  systems; fact sheets on TSA contractors; frequently asked questions related  to TSA’s policies and procedures; information for the traveling public; and  information on employment opportunities with TSA. For example, a private  citizen could find out when TSA would be hiring security screeners at her  or his local airport, how to apply for a position with TSA, and what objects  are prohibited and permitted to be carried onto an airplane.
In addition, TSA created an Office of Communications and Public  Information. The purpose of this office is to provide information to the  general public concerning TSA, its people, programs, policies, and events.  To facilitate this mission, the Office of Communications and Public  Information maintains a call center to receive and respond to inquiries  from the public. This office also performs a variety of other functions. For  example, the office develops statements, position papers, policy releases,  media alerts, and marketing plans to inform and educate the public.
TSA has taken several actions that are intended to focus on customer  satisfaction and be responsive to customer concerns in delivering critical  and sensitive services. TSA established an ombudsman position to, among  other things, serve external customers. Specifically, TSA’s ombudsman is  responsible for recommending and influencing systemic change where  necessary to improve TSA operations and customer service. As of  November 2002, TSA is recruiting to fill this position. We have reported that  through the impartial and independent investigation of citizens’  complaints, federal ombudsmen help agencies be more responsive to the  public, including people who believe their concerns have not been dealt  with fairly or fully through normal channels. Ombudsmen may  recommend ways to resolve individual complaints or more systematic  problems, and may help to informally resolve disagreements between the  agency and the public.
In addition, TSA is tracking performance on its customer service. For  example, TSA’s primary performance measure for customer satisfaction is  the average wait time and percentage of passenger complaints per 1,000  passengers. Other measures to gauge customer satisfaction include the  percentage of flights delayed due to security issues, the percentage of  incidents/interventions per 1,000 passengers, the number of weapons  seized per 1,000 passengers, and the number of seats delayed due to  security issues, among others.
As part of its ongoing challenge to balance security against customer  service, TSA is reviewing existing security procedures in order to eliminate  those that do not enhance security or customer service. For example, the  Under Secretary testified that TSA has recently eliminated two procedures  to reduce customers’ “hassle factor” at airports. In August 2002, TSA  allowed passengers to carry beverages in paper or foam polystyrene  containers through walk-through metal detectors and prohibited screeners  from asking passengers to drink or eat from any containers of food or liquid  as a security clearance procedure. TSA also eliminated the requirement for  the airlines to ask a series of security-related questions to customers at  check-in. In addition, TSA recently lifted the existing rule that prohibits  parking within 300 feet of airport terminals. TSA has replaced this rule with  parking security measures specific to each airport and linked to the  national threat level.
Lastly, TSA is also planning to create a customer satisfaction index (CSI)  for aviation operations, which includes collecting customer information  from national polls, passenger surveys at airports, the TSA call center, and  customer feedback at airports. TSA intends to use data from the CSI to  improve performance. As a first step, TSA conducted 12 focus groups with  air travelers to help it understand the aspects of customer experiences that  influence satisfaction with and confidence in aviation security. TSA learned  from the focus groups that:  the federalization of aviation security significantly increased the   key attributes that drive increased satisfaction and confidence include  attentiveness of screeners, thoroughness of the screening process,  professionalism of the workforce, and consistency of the process across  airports;  wait time was not a significant driver of satisfaction, and participants  said they would be willing to wait longer if they thought it would make  them more secure;  the lack of checked baggage screening reduces confidence; and   secondary screening processes are a significant driver of reduced  satisfaction.
The results of the focus groups will help TSA develop the passenger  surveys to be used to collect data for the CSI. TSA intends to implement the  CSI for aviation operations in 2003 and to expand the CSI to include other  stakeholders, such as airport operators, air carriers, and customers of  other modes of transportation.
subsections: section_title: Recommended Next Steps
paragraphs: Fill the ombudsman position to facilitate responsiveness of TSA to  the public. To ensure TSA is as responsive to the public as possible and is  able to identify and resolve individual complaints and systematic problems,  TSA should fill its ombudsman position as soon as high quality candidates  can be identified.
Continue to develop and implement mechanisms, such as the CSI,  to gauge customer satisfaction and improve customer service. TSA  has identified customer satisfaction as one of its three annual performance  goals. By combining data on its service delivery from a number of sources,  such as the CSI, TSA will be able obtain a robust picture of customer  satisfaction, which can be used to improve performance. TSA should  complete the planning and developing of the CSI and begin its  implementation.
section_title: Concluding Observations
paragraphs: Never has a results-oriented focus been more critical than today, when the  security of America’s citizens depends so directly and immediately on the  results of many federal programs. TSA has faced immense challenges in its  first year of existence to build the infrastructure of a large organization and  meet mandated deadlines to federalize aviation security. As TSA begins to  take responsibility for security in the maritime and surface modes of  transportation, its current and future challenge is to build, sustain, and  institutionalize the organizational capacity to help it achieve its current and  future goals. As TSA moves into the newly created DHS, TSA has an  opportunity to continue to foster a results-oriented culture. In this regard,  TSA has started to put in place the foundation of this results-oriented  culture through  leadership commitment to creating a high-performing organization,   strategic planning to establish results-oriented goals and measures,   performance management to promote accountability for results,  collaboration and communication to achieve national outcomes, and   public reporting and customer service to build citizen confidence.
This foundation can serve TSA well in DHS and help TSA to focus on and  achieve its mission to protect the nation’s transportation systems to ensure  freedom of movement for people and commerce.
section_title: Recommendations for Executive Action
paragraphs: We recommend that the Secretary of Transportation, in conjunction with  the Under Secretary of Transportation for Security, continue TSA’s  leadership commitment to creating a high-performing organization that  includes next steps to establish a performance agreement for the Under  Secretary that articulates how bonuses will be tied to performance and to  add expectations in performance agreements for top leadership to foster  the culture of a high-performing organization.
We recommend that the Under Secretary of Transportation for Security  take the next steps to continue to implement the following results-oriented  practices.
Strategic planning to establish results-oriented goals and measures that  includes next steps to establish security performance goals and  measures for all modes of transportation as part of a strategic planning  process that involves stakeholders and to apply practices that have been  shown to provide useful information in agency performance plans.
Performance management to promote accountability for results that  includes next steps to build on the current performance agreements to  achieve additional benefits, to ensure the permanent performance  management system makes meaningful distinctions in performance, and  to involve employees in developing its performance management  system.
Collaboration and communication to achieve national outcomes that  includes next steps to define more clearly the collaboration and  communication roles and responsibilities of TSA’s various offices and to  formalize roles and responsibilities among governmental entities for  transportation security.
Public reporting and customer service to build citizen confidence that  includes next steps to fill the ombudsman position to facilitate  responsiveness of TSA to the public and to continue to develop and  implement mechanisms, such as the CSI, to gauge customer satisfaction  and improve customer service.
section_title: Agency Comments
paragraphs: We provided drafts of this report in December 2002 to officials from DOT,  including TSA, for their review and comment. TSA’s Director of Strategic  Management and Analysis provided oral comments on behalf of DOT and  TSA generally agreeing with the contents, findings, and recommendations  of the draft report. TSA’s Director of Strategic Management and Analysis  provided minor technical clarifications and we made those changes where  appropriate. In addition, she provided updated information on TSA’s progress in its strategic planning, collaboration and communication, and  customer service since the completion of our audit work. We added that  information where appropriate.
As agreed with your office, unless you publicly announce its contents  earlier, we plan no further distribution of this report for 30 days from the  date of this letter. At that time, we will provide copies of this report to the  Secretary of Transportation, the Under Secretary of Transportation for  Security, the Director of the Office of Homeland Security, the Director of  the Office of Personnel Management, and the Director of the Office of  Management and Budget. We will also make copies available to others  upon request. In addition, the report will be available at no charge on the  GAO Web site at http://www.gao.gov.
If you have any questions concerning this report, please contact me or Lisa  Shames on (202) 512-6806. Marti Tracy was a key contributor to this report.
section_title: Objective, Scope, and Methodology
paragraphs: The objective of our review was to describe the Transportation Security  Administration’s (TSA) actions and plans for implementing the results- oriented practices required in the Aviation and Transportation Security Act  (ATSA) and recommend next steps for TSA to build a results-oriented  organizational culture and to establish a positive control environment. To  identify results-oriented practices and recommend next steps, we reviewed  our models, guides, reports, and other products on strategic planning and  performance measurement, strategic human capital management,  transformation efforts, and other related areas. See related GAO products  listed at the end of this report for a list of our products in these areas. We  next analyzed ATSA in relation to our products to identify any results- oriented practices that were statutorily required in the legislation. In  addition, we reviewed TSA and Department of Transportation missions,  performance goals and measures, performance agreements, policies and  procedures, and organizational charts and other relevant documentation.  To describe TSA’s status in implementing these results-oriented practices,  we interviewed 25 officials from various TSA offices including strategic  planning, human capital, training, budget, public affairs, and policy, among  others. We also visited Baltimore-Washington International airport after it  was transitioned to federal control to talk to front-line managers about  their responsibilities and specifically their role in providing performance  data to headquarters. We developed the recommended next steps by  referring to our models, guides, reports, and other products on results- oriented practices and identifying additional practices that were associated  with and would further complement or support current TSA efforts. We  performed our work from May through September 2002 in accordance with  generally accepted government auditing standards.
section_title: Related GAO Products
paragraphs: The following list provides information on recent GAO products related to  the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), transportation security,  and the results-oriented practices discussed in this report. These and other  GAO products can be found at www.gao.gov.
subsections: section_title: GAO’s Mission
paragraphs: The General Accounting Office, the 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.
section_title: Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony
paragraphs: The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost is  through the Internet. GAO’s Web site (www.gao.gov) contains abstracts and full- text files of current reports and testimony and an expanding archive of older  products. The Web site features a search engine to help you locate documents  using key words and phrases. You can print these documents in their entirety,  including charts and other graphics.
Each day, GAO issues a list of newly released reports, testimony, and  correspondence. GAO posts this list, known as “Today’s Reports,” on its Web site  daily. The list contains links to the full-text document files. To have GAO e-mail this  list to you every afternoon, go to www.gao.gov and select “Subscribe to GAO  Mailing Lists” under “Order GAO Products” heading.
subsections: section_title: Order by Mail or Phone
section_title: To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs
section_title: Public Affairs