Information Technology: DHS's Human Capital Plan Is Largely Consistent with Relevant Guidance, but Improvements and Implementation Steps Are Still Needed
Published: 2007-09-10T00:00:00

Fast Facts:

Highlights:
section_title: Why GAO Did This Study
paragraphs: In performing its missions, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) relies extensively on information technology (IT). Recognizing this, DHS's fiscal year 2006 appropriations act required its Chief Information Officer (CIO) to submit a report to congressional appropriations committees that includes, among other things, an IT human capital plan, and the act directs GAO to review the report. GAO's review addressed (1) whether the IT human capital plan is consistent with federal guidance and associated best practices and (2) the status of the plan's implementation. In performing its review, GAO compared DHS's plan and supporting documentation with 27 practices in the Human Capital Assessment and Accountability Framework of the Office of Personnel Management, and examined plan implementation activities at three DHS component agencies.
section_title: What GAO Found
paragraphs: DHS's IT human capital plan is largely consistent with federal guidance and associated best practices; however, it does not fully address a number of important practices that GAO examined. Specifically, the plan and supporting documentation fully address 15 practices; for example, they provide for developing a complete inventory of existing staff skills, identifying IT skills that will be needed to achieve agency goals, determining skill gaps, and developing plans to address such gaps. They also provides for involving key stakeholders--such as the CIO, the Chief Human Capital Officer (CHCO), and component agency CIOs and human capital directors--in carrying out the skill gap analyses and other workforce planning activities. Nevertheless, elements of 12 of the 27 practices are not included in the plan or related documentation. For example, although the plan and supporting documents describe the department's IT human capital goals and steps necessary to implement them, most steps do not include associated milestones. In addition, although the plan and supporting documents provide for involving key stakeholders, they do not specifically assign these stakeholders responsibility and accountability for carrying out planned activities. These and other missing elements of the practices are important because they help ensure that the plan is implemented efficiently and effectively. DHS officials provided various reasons why the missing practices were omitted, including uncertainty surrounding the source of resources for implementing the plan and the demands of other IT priorities, such as consolidating component agency data centers. To date, DHS has made limited progress in implementing the plan, according to officials from the offices of the department's CIO and CHCO and three DHS agencies (the Coast Guard, Customs and Border Protection, and the Federal Emergency Management Agency). These officials said that they are nonetheless following several of the practices because they are required to report quarterly to the Office of Management and Budget on progress in meeting such human capital goals as filling mission-critical positions and delivering key IT training. DHS officials stated that the department's limited progress in implementing the plan was due to its focus on other priorities, and ambiguity surrounding plan implementation roles and responsibilities. Until DHS has a complete plan that fully addresses all practices and the department and components implement the plan, DHS will continue to be at risk of not having sufficient people with the right knowledge, skills, and abilities to manage and deliver the IT systems that are essential to executing the department's mission and achieving its transformation goals.

section_title: Letter
paragraphs: Information technology (IT) is a critical tool in the Department of  Homeland Security’s (DHS) quest to transform 22 diverse and distinct  agencies into 1 cohesive, high-performing department. Because of the  importance of this transformation together with the magnitude of the  associated challenges, we have designated it as a high-risk undertaking.  Among other things, DHS’s ability to modernize its IT systems and  infrastructure to support this transformation depends on its human  capital, which is an area that we have designated as high risk across the  federal government.
Given the enormous role that IT plays in the department’s transformation  efforts, DHS’s fiscal year 2006 appropriations act required its Chief  Information Officer (CIO) to submit a report to congressional  appropriations committees that includes, among other things, an IT human  capital plan, and the act directs us to review the report. The CIO  submitted this report to the committees in June 2006 and the IT human  capital plan on August 30, 2006. As agreed with your offices, our  objectives in this report were to determine (1) whether the department’s  IT human capital plan is consistent with federal guidance and associated  best practices and (2) the status of the plan’s implementation.
To address our objectives, we reviewed the IT human capital plan and  supporting documentation and evaluated them against the Human Capital  Assessment and Accountability Framework issued by the Office of  Personnel Management (OPM). This framework, which we collaborated  with OPM and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in developing,  is consistent with the practices in GAO’s strategic human capital  management model. We assessed the plan and supporting documentation  against 27 practices in the framework that are essential to a well-defined  and executable plan. In addition, we reviewed plan implementation  activities within the department CIO and Chief Human Capital Officer  (CHCO) organizations and within three DHS agencies: the Coast Guard,  Customs and Border Protection, and the Federal Emergency Management  Agency. Collectively, these agencies account for about 33 percent of the  department’s IT budget and about 60 percent of its IT personnel. We  performed our work from October 2006 through July 2007, in accordance  with generally accepted government auditing standards. Appendix I  contains more details about our objectives, scope, and methodology.
subsections: section_title: Background
paragraphs: In March 2003, DHS began operations and set about the daunting task of  merging 22 separate and autonomous federal agencies with homeland  security-related missions under the centralized leadership of a single  department. In doing so, DHS assumed operational control of about  209,000 civilian and military positions from these agencies. As we have  previously reported, the creation and transformation of DHS is critically  important and poses significant management and leadership challenges,  and failure to address these challenges could have serious consequences  for our national security. Consequently, in 2003, we first designated the  department’s implementation and transformation as high risk, and we  continue to do so today.
IT is a critical tool in DHS’s quest to transform itself and carry out the  department’s critical missions on a day-to-day basis. For fiscal year   2008 alone, the department is requesting almost $4 billion in IT budgetary  authority. The department’s ability to effectively and efficiently invest  these funds and deliver IT systems and infrastructure that perform as  intended depends in large part on the capabilities of its IT human capital.  As we have reported, DHS and the other federal agencies historically have  been challenged in their ability to strategically manage human capital. For  this reason, we first designated strategic human capital management as a  governmentwide high-risk area in 2001, and we continue to do so today.
subsections: section_title: Overview of DHS Organizational Structure and Responsibility for IT Human Capital Management
paragraphs: To accomplish its mission, the department is organized into various  agencies and directorates, each of which is responsible for specific  homeland security missions and for coordinating related efforts with other  DHS organizations, as well as external entities. Table 1 shows DHS’s  principal organizations and their respective missions.
Within DHS, responsibility for IT human capital management resides with  the Management Directorate—specifically, the Offices of the CIO and the  CHCO—and with component agency CIO and human capital offices. More  specifically, the management directive of the DHS Office of the CIO’s  states that the office is responsible for leveraging the best available  technologies and applying proven IT management and human capital  practices to provide shared services, coordinate acquisition strategies,  maintain an enterprise architecture, and advocate and enable business  transformation, among other things. To assist in managing these matters,  DHS established the DHS CIO Council made up of the CIOs from each of  DHS’s component organizations. The council identified eight priorities,  including IT human capital, and for each priority, it assigned an executive  sponsor that is responsible for overseeing the department’s efforts in that  area. The council also established the IT Human Capital Resource Center  (formerly called the IT Human Capital Center of Excellence) to support  the council and the executive sponsor responsible for IT human capital. In  short, the center is responsible for setting a DHS-wide vision and strategy  for IT human capital and the functions that IT staff perform. The center is  staffed by the component CIO organizations and, among other things, is  responsible for coordinating the implementation of the department’s IT  human capital initiatives. Figure 1 shows a simplified and partial DHS  organizational structure, including the CIO IT human capital-related  entities.
According to the DHS overall strategic human capital plan, which covers  IT and non-IT personnel, the Office of the CHCO is responsible for  implementing initiatives to achieve strategic human capital goals in  support of the department’s mission. With regard to IT, this includes  planning and managing human capital to meet current and future mission  needs, recruiting a high-quality workforce, developing a strong and  capable workforce, motivating and retaining high performers, and  fostering a culture of continuous learning and improvement. It also  includes applying human capital best practices in carrying out these  responsibilities.
Each of the department’s component agencies has its own CIO and human  capital director to, among other things, manage the implementation of  their respective IT human capital initiatives. According to DHS, this  includes recruiting staff to close competency and skill gaps, coordinating  and delivering mission-essential training, analyzing workforce data, and  aligning component human capital plans with the department human  capital plans to achieve agency and department missions.
section_title: IT Is Critical to Achieving DHS’s Mission
paragraphs: To accomplish its mission, DHS relies extensively on IT. For example, in  fiscal year 2007, about $4.16 billion dollars in funding was requested to  support 278 major IT programs. Table 2 shows the fiscal year 2007 IT  funding for key DHS components.
To manage the use of these funds and carry out these programs, the  department reports that it employs about 2,600 IT personnel. While these  personnel represent about 1 percent of the department’s total workforce,  they nonetheless perform critical mission functions. Specifically, IT  personnel develop, manage, and operate mission-critical systems that are  intended to unify the department under a common IT infrastructure and to  facilitate agencies’ ability to analyze intelligence to identify threats, guard  U.S. borders and airports, protect critical infrastructure, coordinate  national responses to emergencies, and implement other security  measures. Moreover, IT staff track and oversee the efforts of a sizable  workforce of support contractors.
section_title: Prior GAO Reviews Have Highlighted DHS IT Human Capital Challenges and Called for a More Strategic Approach to Addressing Them
paragraphs: According to DHS, the need to successfully manage its IT human capital is  essential to effectively and efficiently leveraging technology in achieving  the department’s mission. This need is compounded by the fact that the  department faces major near-term IT human capital challenges. For  example, DHS estimates that between 2005 and 2010, approximately   35 percent of its IT workforce will be eligible for retirement. Moreover, it  reports that in light of the continued growth in demand of experienced IT  professionals and the high rate of turnover experienced thus far, the  department faces significant risk of critical skill shortages, which could  hamper its mission imperatives.
During the last 3 years, we have reported on the importance of DHS  adopting a strategic approach to addressing its IT human capital  challenges. For example, in August 2004, we reported that DHS had  begun strategic planning for IT human capital at the headquarters level,  but it had not yet systematically gathered baseline data about its existing  workforce. We also reported on CIO staffing concerns and slow progress  in this area. Accordingly, we recommended that the department analyze  whether it had appropriately allocated and deployed IT staff with the  relevant skills to obtain its institutional and program-related goals. In  response, the DHS CIO approved funding for the IT Human Capital  Resource Center in July 2004. Among other things, the center subsequently  began work to complete an IT human capital plan. Consistent with our  recommendation, the center was to ensure that the completed plan  provided for an analysis of IT workforce skill sets. In May 2005, the DHS  CIO issued a draft version of the IT human capital plan. This draft version  was sent to the Senate and House Appropriations Committees on August  30, 2006, as part of the CIO’s report pursuant to requirements in DHS’s  fiscal year 2006 appropriations act. According to the CIO Council senior  executive leading the effort to develop this plan, it was developed in  partnership with the DHS CHCO’s office and intended to direct the  department’s IT human capital efforts.
In March 2006, we testified on a number of IT human capital and other  management challenges at DHS. We noted that DHS had undertaken a  departmentwide human capital initiative, MAXHR, which was to provide  greater flexibility and accountability in the way employees are paid,  developed, evaluated, afforded due process, and represented by labor  organizations. Part of this initiative involved the development of  departmentwide workforce competencies. We testified that the  department had intended to implement MAXHR in the summer of 2005 but  had encountered delays. More recently, DHS officials stated that MAXHR  had been canceled and is to be replaced by another initiative called the  Human Capital Operational Plan. In May 2007, we reported that while  DHS continues work to develop and implement departmentwide human  capital initiatives, its overall progress in managing its IT and non-IT human  capital had been limited.
Since 2002, we have also reported on human capital management  weaknesses associated with key DHS IT programs. For example:  In September 2005, we reported that the program office for the Atlas  program was not adequately staffed. Accordingly, we recommended that  the Atlas program conduct a staffing needs assessment to determine the  positions and the level of staffing needed for all Atlas projects, and that it  develop a human capital strategy for meeting its staffing needs. DHS  agreed with our recommendations and has since completed a needs  assessment, developed a human capital strategy, and used it to staff the  program office and projects.
In February 2006, we reported that the US-VISIT program had developed  a human capital strategy, as we had recommended 2 years earlier, and  had begun implementing it. However, we also reported that several  activities in the plan had not been implemented, such as assessing the  extent of current employees’ competency gaps and developing a listing of  competency-based training courses. To address this shortfall, among other  things, the program recently developed a new human capital plan. We have  not yet reviewed the new plan.
In May 2006, we reported that the Automated Commercial Environment  (ACE) program had yet to develop and implement a human capital  management strategy, as we had recommended several years earlier.  Instead, program officials told us that they were following a less formal  approach to bolstering ACE’s workforce. Accordingly, we recommended  that the department report to its appropriations committees on its strategy  for managing ACE human capital needs. DHS agreed with our  recommendation and has since been working to develop a strategy.
section_title: GAO and OPM Have Developed Tools to Help Federal Agencies Strategically Manage Human Capital
paragraphs: A strategic approach to human capital management includes viewing  people as assets whose value to an organization can be enhanced by  investing in them. Such an approach enables organizations to effectively  use their people and determine how well they integrate human capital  considerations into daily decision making and planning for mission results.  It also helps organizations remain aware of and be prepared for current  and future needs as an organization, ensuring that they have the  knowledge, skills, and abilities needed to pursue their missions.
On the basis of our experience with leading organizations, we issued a  model in 2002 for strategic human capital management. The model is  built around four cornerstones: (1) leadership; (2) strategic human capital  planning; (3) acquiring, developing, and retaining talent; and (4) results- oriented organizational cultures. We also issued a set of key practices in  2003 for effective strategic human capital management. These practices  are generic, applying to any organization or component, such as an  agency’s IT organization.
Since then, OPM, in conjunction with OMB and us, issued a strategic  human capital framework—called the Human Capital Assessment and  Accountability Framework—to provide a consistent, comprehensive  representation of human capital management to guide federal agencies.  Consistent with our 2002 model, OPM’s framework provides six standards,  along with associated indicators (practices) for achieving success. The six  standards for success and related definitions are as follows:    Strategic alignment. The organization’s human capital strategy is aligned  with mission, goals, and organizational objectives and integrated into its  strategic plans, performance plans, and budgets.
Workforce planning and deployment. Among other things, the  organization strategically uses staff in order to achieve mission goals in  the most efficient ways.
Leadership and knowledge management. The organization’s leaders and  managers effectively manage people, ensure continuity of leadership, and  sustain a learning environment that drives continuous improvement in  performance.
Results-oriented performance culture. The organization has a diverse,  results-oriented, high-performance workforce and a performance  management system that effectively differentiates between high and low  performance and links individual, team, or unit performance to  organizational goals and desired results.
Talent management. The organization makes progress toward closing  gaps or making up deficiencies in most mission-critical skills, knowledge,  and competencies.
Accountability. The organization’s human capital decisions are guided by  a data-driven, results-oriented planning and accountability system.
Our recent work has shown that DHS and other federal agencies, such as  the Securities and Exchange Commission, have begun to use OPM’s  framework as the basis for preparing strategic IT and other human capital  plans. According to DHS CIO officials, they used the OPM framework in  developing the IT human capital plan that they included in the August 2006  report to Congress.
section_title: DHS IT Human Capital Plan and Related Documentation Largely Satisfy Relevant Guidance, but Several Key Practices Have Not Been Fully Addressed
paragraphs: DHS has developed an IT human capital plan that is largely consistent with  OPM guidance. Specifically, of 27 key practices in OPM’s framework, the  department’s plan and related documentation fully address 15 practices  and partially address the other 12, meaning that these 12 are missing  elements that are essential to having a well-defined and executable plan.  DHS officials responsible for developing the plan attributed the missing  elements to, among other things, the department’s decision to focus its  resources on other IT priorities. These officials also stated that until the  missing elements are fully addressed, it is unlikely that the plan will be  effectively and efficiently implemented, which in turn will continue to put  DHS at risk of not having sufficient people with the right knowledge,  skills, and abilities to manage and deliver its mission-critical IT systems.
Examples of the key practices that DHS has fully and partially addressed  in its IT human capital plan and related documentation, organized  according to OPM’s six standards for success, are given in the following  text. Also, table 3 is a summary of the DHS plan’s satisfaction of all 27 key  practices. Appendix II contains our full analysis of the plan’s satisfaction  of these 27 practices. Both the summary and full analysis contain  examples to demonstrate full or partial satisfaction of the practices. They  do not contain all examples of DHS’s accomplishments or limitations to a  given key practice.
Strategic alignment. DHS’s plan and related documentation satisfy a  number of strategic alignment practices. For example, they specify human  capital goals for the IT organization and provide for linking them to  departmental human capital goals. More specifically, the plan identifies  such IT human capital goals as meeting current and future mission needs,  recruiting a high-quality IT workforce, and motivating and retaining high  performers. The plan further states that IT human capital programs and  initiatives should produce performance outcomes that support the overall  DHS strategic goal of operational excellence. In addition, the plan calls for  involving key stakeholders—such as the CIO, the CHCO, and their  component agency counterparts—in carrying out a range of workforce  planning activities, such as conducting a workforce analysis, developing  an inventory of current staff skills, and identifying the future skills that are  needed for mission-critical positions. By addressing these key practices,  the plan helps set the overall direction and tone for strategic management  of IT human capital and lays a foundation for demonstrating management  commitment and promoting buy-in across the organization.
However, the plan and related documentation do not fully satisfy other  key practices. For example, they do not include specific milestones for  when most defined activities and steps are to be completed. This is a  serious limitation because milestones help to ensure that resources  needed to execute plans are allocated, and they provide a basis for  measuring progress. In addition, although the plan provides for involving  key stakeholders, it does not assign stakeholders responsibility and  accountability for specific activities. Without fully addressing these  practices, the plan does not provide an adequate basis for promoting  accountability for results, and thus ensuring that the plan will be  effectively implemented.
Workforce planning and deployment. The plan and related documentation  satisfy a number of key practices in this standards area, including  provision for incentives for new recruits, training for existing staff, and an  exchange program to draw on private sector personnel with necessary  skills. This is important because such practices are essential ingredients to  acquiring, training, and deploying an effective workforce. However, the  plan does not provide for regular collection and analysis of data on  promotions, conversions, separations, and retirements to show an  understanding of trends and related indicators of performance. Without  this information, DHS will be limited in its ability to know whether the  techniques being employed are effective, and thus performance results and  accountability goals are being met.
Leadership and knowledge management. DHS’s plan and supporting  documentation provide for a number of leadership and knowledge  management practices. For example, DHS planning documents (e.g., DHS  Succession Management Plan FY 2006–2009) supporting the IT human  capital plan describe and encourage leadership development across all  DHS components through application of the department’s Leadership  Competency Framework and succession approach to workforce planning  efforts. The plan also identifies succession planning goals and objectives,  implementation strategies, and program evaluation critical success factors  to achieve expected leadership outcomes. These efforts are important  because they show how the department and components plan for and  minimize the impact of changes to its leadership team arising from  retirements and separations.
However, the plan does not address how these activities are to be linked  to and reflected in department annual performance plans and budgets.  Having performance plans and budgets that address the IT human capital  goals is vital to ensuring that the plan is properly funded to ensure  implementation.
Results-oriented performance culture. DHS’s plan and supporting  documentation satisfy key practice elements under this standards area,  such as identifying outcome-based human capital goals for its IT  workforce and linking these goals to departmental strategic plans.  However, the plan does not address linking each work unit’s efforts and  performance to these goals. Linking the work units to goals is important  because it provides a framework for setting performance expectations,  determining whether expectations are met, and establishing  accountability, each of which is critical to effective and efficient plan  implementation.
Talent management. DHS’s plan addresses important practices related to  talent management, including documenting mission-critical occupations,  strategizing how to reduce competency gaps between the workforce’s  current skills and those needed to achieve mission goals, and tracking  efforts to implement strategies. In particular, it provides for a monthly  forum hosted by the IT Human Capital Resource Center for DHS  components to share ideas and strategies for recruitment, retention, and  training of their workforces. These initiatives are important because they  provide a disciplined and systematic approach to identifying and reducing  organizational skill shortfalls, and thus contribute to better ensuring that  DHS has the right people with the right skills. However, neither the plan  nor supporting documents fully provide for measuring whether its  recruitment and training efforts are closing competency gaps. Such  performance measurement is vital to effective plan implementation  because it provides feedback on the effectiveness of efforts and the need  for corrective action.
Accountability. The plan addresses the key practice for establishing and  using applicable merit principles and standards in appraising IT staff  performance, and for establishing a process for employee grievances to be  considered and addressed. However, the plan does not fully address other  accountability-related practices. For example, it does not provide for  proactively identifying where the department is at risk with regard to  attaining its IT human capital goals and developing initiatives to mitigate  any high risks. This is a significant omission because proactively managing  risks is a proven means for avoiding problems before they can occur.
According to DHS officials responsible for developing the plan, the 12 key  practices were not fully addressed for several reasons. Specifically, they  stated that uncertainty surrounding the source of resources for  implementing the plan led to a lack of a clear definition of stakeholder  roles and responsibilities, which in turn made setting realistic milestones  impractical. They added that a number of other IT priorities that were  competing for resources, such as consolidation of data centers, also  contributed to the 12 practices not being addressed, while other omissions  were purely an unintended oversight, such as not addressing central  management of risks. According to the officials, the next version of the  plan, which is tentatively scheduled to be released in the second quarter of  fiscal year 2008 based on the assumption that resources are made  available, is to address all of these omissions.
Without a comprehensive IT human capital plan, DHS does not have an  effective means for ensuring that it has the right people in the right place  at the right time to achieve the department’s mission-related IT goals. The  department has acknowledged this risk and estimates there is currently a  medium-to-high level of risk of not meeting DHS’s mission due to  personnel and competency and skill shortages.
section_title: DHS Has Made Limited Progress in Implementing Its IT Human Capital Plan
paragraphs: The DHS departmental offices and component agencies that share  responsibility for implementing the IT human capital plan have collectively  made little progress in doing so. In general, the DHS Offices of the CHCO  and the CIO have done more to implement the plan than have the DHS  component agencies, as described in the following text. The plan’s state of  implementation is due to both a lack of clarity around the respective  implementation-related roles and responsibilities of the various DHS  organizations involved, as well as the lower funding priority that these  organizations have given to the plan’s implementation relative to other  competing IT efforts. Until a complete and well-defined IT human capital  plan is effectively and efficiently implemented, the department will  continue to run the risk of not having the people it needs to leverage  technology in achieving organizational transformation and mission goals.
At the department level, the CIO and the CHCO organizations, working  with the CIO Council’s Human Capital Resource Center, have together  performed some of the tasks in the plan. For example, they have  performed a gap analysis between existing and future skill needs and have  begun examining strategies for reducing the identified gaps. They have  also identified mission-critical occupations and skills necessary to achieve  departmental goals. However, it is unclear which organization has primary  responsibility for the plan. According to officials from both the Offices of  the CHCO and the CIO, primary responsibility for the IT human capital  plan and its implementation has recently moved from the CIO to the  CHCO. However, these officials have yet to provide us with documentation  of this transfer in responsibility.
Despite the previously noted positive steps toward implementing the plan,  officials from the CIO and the CHCO offices told us that the plan is largely  not implemented. For example, while DHS is collecting information on the  number of increasing, decreasing, and new mission-critical occupations, it  is not identifying and analyzing year-to-year changes and trends to  determine whether recruitment and retention strategies need to be  updated to meet current organizational needs. In addition, although the  department has documented performance goals and objectives for some  work units (e.g., managers in Customs and Border Protection) and linked  them to department-level organizational goals, it had not done so for much  of the department.
At the component level, none of the three agencies that we reviewed had  begun implementing the plan, as described in the following text.
The Coast Guard had not implemented the plan. According to Coast Guard  officials, including the Director, Future Force, and the Chief of Human  Resource Information Services, they were aware of the plan’s existence,  but were unaware of any requirement to implement it. However, they  stated that their own human capital efforts satisfy everything in the plan.  For example, these officials said that they had performed workforce  analyses to determine skill and competency gaps and have employed a  range of strategies, such as strategic recruitment through direct hiring  authority and internal training, to fill the gaps. The Coast Guard has yet to  provide us with documentation to substantiate these statements.
Customs and Border Protection had not implemented the plan, although  officials from its Office of Information Technology and the Office of  Human Resources Management told us that they were aware of the plan  and the need to implement it. According to these officials, the agency is in  the process of developing a strategy to implement the plan. They also  stated that the strategy was to be completed in June 2007, but it is still  under development. On August 30, 2007, the officials reported that the  strategy had been completed. We have not yet received the strategy and  had an opportunity to analyze it.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency had not implemented the  plan. Agency officials, including the Deputy CIO and the Chief of the  Human Capital Branch, stated that they were aware of the plan but were  unaware of a requirement to implement it. They also stated that their  agency human capital efforts nevertheless were fully consistent with the  plan. However, the officials have yet to provide analysis and related  documentation to support these statements. In addition, the officials  added that they are in the process of developing an agencywide human  capital plan—addressing both IT and non-IT personnel—that is to be  consistent with the plan and is to be issued on October 1, 2007.
The lack of implementation progress can be attributed in part to ambiguity  surrounding implementation roles and responsibilities. In particular, the  plan itself is in large part silent on implementation roles and  responsibilities as well as implementation accountability mechanisms.  Moreover, as we have previously noted, the plan does not address  important aspects of OPM’s key practices that are implementation related.  To help clarify the plan, including implementation roles and  responsibilities, the DHS CIO Council’s Human Capital Resource Center  developed an implementation briefing and provided it to the CIO Council  members in November 2005. However, the briefing does not assign  specific implementation activities to specific organizations. Rather, it  groups implementation activities into solution sets and then broadly  assigns these sets to department and component agency CIOs, CHCOs,  and human capital directors. As a result, department and component  agency officials told us that they were not clear on who was responsible  for what, particularly with regard to the sources of funding and staff.  Moreover, as we have previously noted, officials for at least one  component agency were not even aware that they were required to  implement it, or what their roles and responsibilities were relative to  implementation.
The lack of implementation progress can also be attributed to resources  being assigned to competing IT initiatives that were judged to be higher  priorities. According to DHS CIO officials, including the CIO Council  senior executive leading the effort, when it came time to fund  implementation of the plan, the department and components decided to  fund other priorities, such as DHS’s effort to consolidate multiple  component data centers and create a unified departmental network.  Furthermore, the IT Human Capital Resource Center program manager  responsible for implementing the plan resigned in January 2006, and his  replacement left in November 2006. According to DHS CIO and CHCO  officials, the department has not provided funding to fill the position,  which still remains vacant.
Department and component officials agreed that the IT human capital plan  is largely not implemented. However, they stated that they are nonetheless  following many of the OPM framework practices in the plan as a by- product of fulfilling their periodic reporting requirements to OMB on the  President’s Management Agenda human capital initiatives. Specifically,  the department and its components are required to report quarterly to  OMB on progress in meeting certain human capital goals, such as filling  mission-critical positions and delivering training to strengthen key IT  knowledge, skills, and abilities. For example, the actions reported to OMB  require the department and components to identify mission-critical  occupations and competencies, develop recruitment strategies to maintain  mission-critical competencies at desired levels, and report on progress  toward achieving human capital goals, which are also called for by the  plan and OPM’s framework. Our analysis showed that efforts related to  this reporting requirement align with about 12 of the 27 practices that we  examined. DHS officials did not disagree with this analysis. This means  that despite a number of IT human capital-related activities, the  department and its component agencies are not implementing the full  range of practices needed for effective management of IT human capital.
section_title: Conclusions
paragraphs: An effective DHS IT workforce is essential to the department’s efforts to  leverage technology in transforming itself and achieving mission goals and  outcomes. Central to creating and sustaining such a workforce is  developing a comprehensive IT human capital plan that reflects relevant  guidance and best practices, and ensuring that the plan is effectively  implemented. While much of such a plan has been developed, and thus a  planning foundation exists upon which to build, this plan is nevertheless  lacking with respect to relevant guidance and best practices aimed at,  among other things, ensuring that the plan is effectively implemented.  Moreover, actual implementation of the plan to date has been limited, with  much remaining to be accomplished by the department CIO and CHCO  organizations as well as their DHS component agency counterparts. The  status of the plan and its implementation is largely attributable to the lack  of clarity surrounding implementation roles and responsibilities, and the  lack of priority being given to the plan’s implementation relative to  competing IT priorities at the department and component agency levels.  Until DHS has a comprehensive plan and follows through to ensure that it  is effectively implemented departmentwide, it will remain challenged in its  ability to have sufficient people with the right knowledge, skills, and  abilities to effectively leverage technology in support of transformation  and mission goals.
section_title: Recommendations for Executive Action
paragraphs: To strengthen DHS’s management of IT human capital, we recommend  that the Secretary of Homeland Security direct the Under Secretary for  Management and the head of each DHS component agency to instruct  their respective CIOs and human capital directors to make development  and implementation of a comprehensive IT human capital plan an  imperative within each organization. In this regard, we recommend that  the Secretary direct the Under Secretary and the component agency heads  to ensure that (1) IT human capital planning efforts fully satisfy relevant  federal guidance and related best practices, (2) roles and responsibilities  for implementing the resulting IT human capital plan and all supporting  plans are clearly defined and understood, (3) resources needed to  effectively and efficiently implement the plans are made available, and  (4) progress in implementing the plans is regularly measured and  periodically reported to DHS leadership and Congress.
section_title: Agency Comments and Our Evaluation
paragraphs: In written comments on a draft of this report, signed by the Director,  Departmental GAO/Office of Inspector General Liaison and reprinted in  appendix III, the department stated that it agreed with our  recommendations. Consistent with our report, it also stated that the state  of IT human capital management varies widely across DHS component  organizations, and it acknowledged that a lower priority has been assigned  to IT human capital relative to other IT-related matters. In addition, DHS  stated that it understands the importance of IT human capital planning and  that it will dedicate the resources needed to ensure that it has a highly  skilled and effective IT workforce.
DHS also provided what it termed additional information about ongoing  and planned activities to update and clarify the status of its IT human  capital efforts, particularly with regard to the key practices that we  determined to be “partially satisfied.” Among other things, DHS stated that  some of our determinations were based on the DHS IT Human Capital  Strategic Plan (2005), which was not intended to include certain details  relative to achieving results, such as milestones, time frames, and roles  and responsibilities. According to DHS, this plan is a high-level strategy  and not a “blueprint for execution.” Rather, it said that the IT Gap  Analysis Report and Improvement Plan (2007) is the department’s  “operative diagram” for achieving its human capital goals and results. We  agree that the IT Gap Analysis Report and Improvement Plan (2007) is  relevant to our determinations. However, we disagree that our  determinations were based solely on the strategic plan. As described in  our report’s scope and methodology, our determinations were based on  examining all relevant documentation that the department provided for  each key practice, including the IT Gap Analysis Report and  Improvement Plan (2007), as well as on interviews with key officials from  DHS’s Offices of the CIO and CHCO, the CIO Council executive sponsor  for Human Capital issues, and officials from the department’s IT Human  Capital Resource Center. Accordingly, the determinations in our draft  report already recognized most of the additional information that DHS  provided. In cases where new information was provided, we have  incorporated, or otherwise recognized, this information in our report as  appropriate.
We are sending copies of this report to the Chairmen and Ranking  Members of the Senate and House committees that have authorization and  oversight responsibilities for homeland security and other interested  congressional committees. We are also sending copies to the Directors of  OMB and OPM; the DHS Secretary, Undersecretary for Management,  CHCO, and CIO; the component agency heads; and other interested  parties. In addition, the report will also be available without charge on  GAO’s Web site at http://www.gao.gov.
Should you have any questions about matters discussed in this report,  please contact me at (202) 512-3439 or by e-mail at hiter@gao.gov. Contact  points for our Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may  be found on the last page of this report. Key contributors to this report are  listed in appendix IV.
section_title: Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology
paragraphs: The objectives of our review were to determine (1) whether the  Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) information technology (IT)  human capital plan is consistent with federal guidance and associated best  practices and (2) the status of the plan’s implementation.
To address our first objective, we reviewed the department’s May 20, 2005,  IT human capital plan, which DHS labeled as “Draft Final for Discussion  Purposes” and submitted on August 30, 2006, to the Senate and House  Appropriations Committees pursuant to requirements in DHS’s fiscal year  2006 appropriations act. We evaluated this plan and supporting  documentation against selected practices in the Office of Personnel  Management’s (OPM) Human Capital Assessment and Accountability  Framework. We used this framework because it is the federal guidance  that DHS used in developing its plan, and because the framework reflects  the human capital best practices in GAO’s strategic human capital model.  In addition, this framework provides a method for assessing the adequacy  of a human capital plan. In applying this method, we focused on 27  practices in the framework that are essential to a well-defined and useful  plan and that span the six standards areas in the framework. We also  validated our use of the 27 practices with OPM.
Using the framework’s method, we compared the DHS IT human capital  plan and supporting documentation with each of the elements comprising  the 27 practices. We also interviewed (1) officials from DHS’s Offices of  the Chief Information Officer (CIO) and the Chief Human Capital Officer  (CHCO); (2) the CIO Council executive sponsor for Human Capital issues;  and (3) officials from the department’s IT Human Capital Resource Center,  which helped develop the IT human capital plan and supporting  documentation. In performing our comparative analysis, we determined if  the practice was fully satisfied, partially satisfied, or not satisfied. For  purposes of this review, we defined “fully satisfied” to mean that the  agency demonstrated, through verifiable evidence, that it had addressed  all aspects of the key practice; “partially satisfied” to mean that such  evidence showed that some, but not all, aspects of the key practice had  been addressed; and “not satisfied” to mean that such evidence showed  that none of the aspects of the key practice had been addressed.
In addition, we shared all of our preliminary determinations with officials  from the DHS CIO Council and the DHS Office of the CHCO and provided  them with an opportunity to comment on these determinations. These  officials agreed with many of our determinations but also provided  additional evidence to support revising others, which we have done and  incorporated in this report.
For our second objective, we reviewed plan implementation activities  within the DHS Offices of the CIO and the CHCO and three DHS  component agencies: the Coast Guard, Customs and Border Protection,  and the Federal Emergency Management Administration. We selected  these components because based on DHS’s fiscal year 2006 budget, they  were among the largest with respect to total budget, IT budget, and IT staff  positions. Thus, the scope of our component agency coverage extended to  about $20 billion of DHS’s $40 billion total budget; $720 million of the  department’s $2.2 billion IT budget; and 60 percent of its IT personnel. In  each of these organizations, we requested and reviewed available  documentation on its respective efforts to implement the plan, including  development of supporting implementation plans, completion of tasks,  and the status of ongoing efforts related to IT human capital. We also  interviewed responsible officials from DHS’s Offices of the CIO and the  CHCO; the Coast Guard’s Human Resources Directorate; Customs and  Border Protection’s Office of Human Resources Management; and the  Federal Emergency Management Administration’s Office of the CIO and its  Office of Human Resources Management.
We performed our work at DHS headquarters in Washington, D.C., from  October 2006 through July 2007, in accordance with generally accepted  government auditing standards.
section_title: Appendix II: Details on IT Human Capital Plan’s Satisfaction of Practices in OPM’s Framework
subsections: section_title: Key stakeholders participate in the development and revision of the agency’s strategic plan (e.g., DHS’s IT human capital plan) and facilitate workforce planning and analysis efforts.
paragraphs: Key stakeholders—identified by DHS as including the CIO,  the CHCO, component agency CIO and human capital  directors, and the IT Human Capital Resource Center— participated in the development of the department’s IT  human capital plan and workforce planning and analysis  efforts. For example, in March 2005, DHS held an off-site  meeting with these stakeholders to facilitate collaboration  and to gather stakeholder input as part of plan  development efforts. DHS’s IT human capital plan also  states that the department intends to involve these  stakeholders in efforts to periodically revise the plan to  reflect current priorities and conditions. Furthermore, the  plan and supporting documentation identify these  stakeholders as participating in analyzing and identifying  the department’s workforce needs and in developing a  departmentwide workforce plan to fill identified gaps.
The organization defines successful  achievement of its mission in terms of valid  and reliable data, including both long- and  short-term human capital performance  goals.
In its IT human capital plan and supporting documentation,  DHS defines accomplishing its near-term and long-term IT  human capital goals and objectives in terms of qualitative  and quantitative measures that are to be based on valid  and reliable data, and links them to accomplishing DHS’s  mission. Specifically, the plan identifies departmental  human capital goals, such as recruiting a high-quality IT  workforce, training its IT workforce to be capable, and  retaining high performers. It also describes how these  goals support the strategic goal of empowering the IT  workforce and how this helps to achieve DHS’s mission.
Trends in mission-critical occupations are  analyzed in terms of suggested factors in  order to continually adjust the agency’s  recruitment and retention strategy to its  current state of need.
In the IT human capital plan and supporting documentation,  the department provides updates for fiscal years 2004 and  2005 on, for example, the number of mission-critical  occupations that are increasing, decreasing, or new.  However, the plan and supporting documentation generally  do not identify and analyze the year-to-year trends. For  example, supporting documentation (e.g., the DHS  Workforce Plan FY 2005–2008) has data for 2003 and  2004, but the year-to-year changes and trends in  occupations are not identified and analyzed to determine  whether the recruitment and retention strategy needs to be  updated to meet the current state of organizational need. In  addition, while DHS officials noted an example of one  component agency (Transportation Security Administration)  adjusting its recruitment and retention strategy to meet the  current state of need, they stated that most components  are not adjusting recruitment strategies on the basis of  available occupation data.
An integrated human capital planning  process is in use, including representatives  from the agency/unit human capital team,  the primary IT human capital officer, and  senior leaders and managers from mission- specific program areas.
DHS’s IT human capital plan and supporting  documentation identify use of a human capital planning  process that includes stakeholders from across the  department and component agencies. For example, in  developing the IT human capital plan, the department used  a process involving representatives from the department’s  CHCO, CIO, and component offices, among others. This  was also the case with regard to other supporting  documentation. For example, in developing the DHS  Workforce Plan FY 2005–2008, the department brought  together stakeholders from across the department to  collaborate on and produce this product. This workforce  plan also defines a human capital planning process whose  stated purpose is to help identify, in an integrated and cost- effective manner, the human capital resources needed to  meet mission goals and develop strategies for developing  or acquiring those resources.
Mission-critical occupations and  competencies are identified in the agency’s  strategic plan and/or performance plan, and  its strategic human capital plan.
Although documentation supporting DHS’s IT human  capital plan identifies mission-critical occupations (e.g., IT  project managers and IT security specialists), the IT human  capital plan and other DHS strategic and human capital  plans do not. Specifically, DHS’s IT Human Capital Plan to  Mitigate IT Competency and Skill Gaps and the DHS  Workforce Plan FY 2005–2008 identify technical  competencies and skills needed for IT occupations.  However, the DHS IT human capital plan and the  departmentwide strategic and human capital plans do not  identify mission-critical IT occupations and competencies.
While documents supporting DHS’s IT human capital plan  (e.g., the November 2005 implementation briefing and the  May 2007 IT Gap Analysis Report and Improvement Plan)  include milestones and assign roles and responsibilities,  neither these documents nor the IT human capital plan  include specific time frames or milestones for when most  defined activities and steps are to be completed. In  addition, although the supporting documents and the plan  provide for involving key stakeholders, they do not assign  stakeholders responsibility and accountability for specific  activities.
Key human capital leaders and agency  stakeholders utilize collaborative  mechanisms/forums that provide a venue for  consistent dialogue in the planning process  (e.g., team members of review boards,  working groups, or executive off-sites).
DHS’s IT human capital plan and supporting  documentation describe the department’s collaborative  mechanisms and forums for planning strategic human  capital activities. They include, for example, the DHS CIO  Council, which is made up of component agency CIOs and  which has monthly meetings to discuss, among other  things, human capital matters. The council used this forum  and off-site meetings to collaborate with the DHS CHCO  office, the IT Human Capital Resource Center, and  component human capital directors, among others, in  developing the IT human capital plan. In addition, the  department tasks the Human Capital Resource Center to  bring together representatives from DHS and the  components on a monthly basis to share ideas and  strategies on emerging IT human capital issues.  Furthermore, DHS established a Workforce Planning  Council, comprising department and component agency  officials, to develop a workforce plan and provide for  analysis across DHS.
In the IT human capital plan and supporting documentation,  DHS documents a change management process that  identifies human capital practices needed to achieve the  department’s human capital objectives. For example, in the  DHS Workforce Plan FY 2005–2008, the department  describes its change management process that includes  steps such as identifying departmental goals, identifying  workforce requirements, developing a workforce strategy,  and evaluating the effectiveness of the planning process. In  addition, the IT human capital plan identifies certain  practices—such as analyzing workforce needs and  capabilities, developing an IT training strategy,  implementing an IT leadership development program, and  developing performance measures for accountability—as  being critical to achieving DHS human capital objectives.  Moreover, supporting documentation (e.g., DHS’s  November 2005 implementation briefing) identifies  traceable linkages between the practices it is intended to  implement and IT human capital goals and objectives.
Studies indicate which occupations and  competencies are essential to achieving the  agency’s strategic goals.
Documentation supporting the IT human capital plan (e.g.,  DHS’s IT Human Capital Plan to Mitigate IT Competency  and Skill Gaps) identifies occupations and competencies to  achieve the agency’s strategic goals. For example, the  department identified competencies within IT project  management, information security, and enterprise  architecture as being critical to achieving the department’s  mission goals.
Line managers and key staff, including  human resources, consider and prepare for  possible workforce changes in areas such  as mission/goals, technology, program  additions or deletions, functions, and  outsourcing initiatives.
DHS’s IT human capital plan and supporting  documentation include guidance for managers and key  staff to consider, plan, and prepare for changes in the  department’s mission, programs, and workforce  composition. Specifically, DHS’s IT human capital plan  states that DHS managers should consider and prepare for  changes in organizational goals, personnel, and  technology. In addition, supporting documentation (e.g., the  DHS Workforce Plan FY 2005–2008) acknowledges the  possibility of workforce changes due to retirements and  attrition. The workforce plan also states that it will serve as  an integrated approach for addressing future business  needs, and identifies steps that department managers  should go through in planning for changes, including  considering how changes will impact mission goals,  programs, functions, and workforce composition. The  workforce plan also states that managers should consider  using alternative strategies, such as outsourcing.
Turnover indicators are monitored regularly.
Documentation supporting the IT human capital plan  (specifically, the DHS Workforce Plan FY 2005–2008)  identifies several factors to be monitored, including  appointments, separations, and retirements, and assigns  the responsibility for monitoring the factors to the  department’s Office of the CHCO. This documentation also  reports on the department’s appointments, separations,  and retirements during fiscal years 2004 and 2005.
A workforce analysis process is used on a  regular basis for assessment and planning,  and to drive human capital decisions.
The IT human capital plan and supporting documentation  show that DHS uses a workforce analysis process for  human capital assessment, planning, and decisions. For  example, supporting documentation (e.g., the DHS  Workforce Plan FY 2005–2008) identifies workforce trends  analyzed among cross-cutting and high-profile mission- critical occupations and the process established and  followed to develop such trend data. Furthermore, the  documentation also shows that DHS established a  Workforce Planning Council that is responsible for ensuring  that workforce planning and human capital initiatives are  integrated consistently and cost-effectively across DHS.  According to DHS CHCO officials, the department intends  to conduct workforce analysis efforts every 2 years.  However, these officials also report that not all components  are using the workforce data on a regular basis to drive  human capital decisions.
The agency has a clearly defined strategy  and plan to facilitate human capital changes.
The IT human capital plan and supporting documents  clearly identify human capital strategies and goals, but do  not fully provide for how and when human capital changes  will be made. For example, the plan defines strategic goals  and objectives and states that an implementation plan is to  be developed and executed with performance measures,  such as milestones, deadlines, and assignment of  personnel responsible for achieving them. However, as we  have previously discussed, DHS developed such a plan in  November 2005 (i.e., the November 2005 implementation  briefing) and later updated it in the May 2007 IT Gap  Analysis Report and Improvement Plan, but these  documents do not include specific time frames or  milestones for when most defined activities and steps are  to be completed. In addition, although the document  provides for involving key stakeholders, it does not assign  stakeholders responsibility and accountability for specific  activities.
Staffing data showing trends in  appointments, promotions, conversions,  separations, and retirements are analyzed  regularly, and management decisions  regarding workforce deployment are based  on documented data.
The IT human capital plan and supporting documentation  include analyses of staffing data for appointments,  separations, and retirements that are reported to the Office  of Management and Budget (OMB) on a quarterly basis. In  addition, these documents (e.g., the DHS Workforce Plan  FY 2005–2008) include workforce trends analyses among  cross-cutting and mission-critical occupations. However,  trends in these data are not fully analyzed, and, according  to DHS CHCO officials, not all components are using the  data on a regular basis to drive human capital decisions.
The agency uses multifaceted techniques to  close competency gaps within the  organization (e.g., strategic recruitment,  midcareer hiring, and training).
The IT human capital plan and supporting documentation  provide for a variety of recruitment and training techniques  to be used in closing competency gaps. For example,  supporting documents (e.g., DHS’s IT Human Capital Plan  to Mitigate IT Competency and Skill Gaps) describe efforts  planned and under way to mitigate gaps using strategic  recruitment through outsourcing, private/public cross  training, internal training, and e-training.
Leadership development and succession  needs are considered, reflected in human  capital plans and strategies, and addressed  through related human capital management  efforts/programs.
The IT human capital plan and supporting documentation,  in particular DHS’s Succession Management Plan FY  2006–2009, describe practices to be followed in developing  the leadership skills of DHS personnel. These documents  also identify succession planning goals and objectives,  implementation strategies, and program evaluation critical  success factors to measure whether expected outcomes  are being achieved.
The agency has a strategy and plan for  communication of human capital changes  and progress, and to capture employee  feedback related to human capital practices  and needs.
In its IT human capital plan and supporting documentation,  DHS identifies strategies and plans for communicating  changes and progress to employees. For example, the IT  human capital plan includes initiatives to improve  communication on human capital changes and progress,  such as developing training materials and courses to  educate supervisors on how to (1) take advantage of hiring  flexibilities; (2) promote the use and accessibility of  departmentwide training opportunities, including e-learning;  and (3) provide Web-based information on training and  human capital policies and procedures. In addition,  supporting documentation, such as the DHS Workforce  Plan FY 2005–2008, includes a communications plan on  how to keep DHS personnel informed on workforce  changes, including the department’s progress in  implementing them. Furthermore, according to DHS CHCO  and CIO officials, the department captures employee  feedback on its practices through representatives to the IT  Human Capital Resource Center and also through annual  IT staff surveys.
Annual performance plans, budgets, and  performance reports document plans for and  progress toward human capital goals.
As directed by OMB, DHS reports quarterly on its progress  on human capital goals. However, DHS’s IT human capital  plan and supporting documentation do not provide for  developing annual performance plans, budget documents,  or performance reports that discuss plans for and progress  against human capital goals. In addition, the information  reported to OMB is primarily on DHS efforts to close IT  competencies and skills gaps, which is just one of the  multiple goals and objectives in DHS’s plan and supporting  documentation.
Work units have documented performance  goals and objectives linked to the agency  strategic plan and performance plan.
Although DHS’s IT human capital plan and related  documentation support having measurable performance  goals for work units, such performance plans and  measures have not been fully developed. For example,  DHS CIO and CHCO officials stated that although the  department has documented performance goals and  objectives for some work units (e.g., managers in Customs  and Border Protection) and linked them to department-level  organizational goals, it had not done so for much of the  department. Specifically, only managers in the DHS  CHCO’s office and also at Customs and Border Protection  have performance objectives that are linked to strategic  plans.
The agency’s strategic planning process  documents and tracks mission-critical  occupations and competency gap-reduction  efforts.
DHS’s IT human capital plan and supporting  documentation provide details on the department’s  strategic planning process, including the reporting and  tracking of mission-critical occupations and efforts to  reduce competency gaps. For example, in supporting  documentation (e.g., the DHS Workforce Plan FY 2005– 2008), the department describes a workforce planning  process that is to help identify the human capital resources  needed to meet mission goals and develop strategies for  developing or acquiring those resources. In addition, other  supporting documentation (e.g., the IT Human Capital Plan  to Mitigate IT Competency and Skill Gaps) identifies  mission-critical IT occupations and high-level efforts  needed to close its competency gaps. The department  uses its OMB quarterly reports to document and track the  status of efforts to close those competency gaps.
Strategies are developed and implemented  for reducing competency gaps through  training, development, or alternative  sources.
As described in its IT human capital plan and supporting  documentation, DHS’s strategies to close its competency  gaps consist of a number of human capital initiatives,  including training, staff development, and an outside  executive exchange program. Specifically, DHS’s IT  Human Capital Plan to Mitigate IT Competency and Skill  Gaps details planned and ongoing efforts to mitigate gaps  using, for example, strategic recruitment through  outsourcing, private/public cross training, internal training,  and e-training.
The IT human capital plan and supporting documentation  state that data on its progress toward meeting human  capital goals will be reported to OMB and DHS  management as required; they do not, however, specify  what data are to be reported. The department reports  quarterly to OMB on the status of efforts to close  competency gaps. In addition, a recently completed (May  2007) DHS workforce survey and gap analysis identify  existing IT competency gaps, but do not indicate any  progress in closing them. According to DHS CHCO and  CIO officials, the department to date has had limited  resources and data available to assess the effectiveness of  ongoing efforts to close competency gaps. They further  stated that they intend to use the newly completed analysis  as a baseline for measuring the success of future efforts.
Recruitment strategies are created to  maintain mission-critical competencies at the  desired level using business forecasting and  workforce analysis results.
Documentation supporting DHS’s IT human capital plan  provides for developing recruiting strategies based on  workforce forecasting and analysis results. For example,  the DHS Workforce Plan FY 2005–2008 states that the  department is to use a strategic approach to recruitment  and workforce planning. In addition, it identifies a DHS  corporate recruitment workgroup, which includes senior  human resources and civil rights staff throughout DHS, who  are to assess departmentwide recruitment activities and  tools; coordinate participation in recruitment fairs; and  develop recruitment strategies and activities for  crosscutting occupations, primarily entry-level positions. In  May 2007, the department developed an improvement plan  that provides updated strategies for addressing  competency gaps and maintaining mission-critical  competencies. This plan is based on the analysis of a  recently completed workforce survey.
Human capital risks are tracked,  documented, and reported to a central  advisory or management board, and action  is taken to mitigate high-risk areas.
Documents supporting DHS’s IT human capital plan (e.g.,  the IT Human Capital Plan to Mitigate IT Competency and  Skill Gaps and the IT Gap Analysis Report and  Improvement Plan) identify and document some but not all  key human capital risks and do not provide for reporting  risks to management or a management board. More  specifically, these plans document that failure to fill critical  competency and skill sets (e.g., IT project management  and IT security) poses a medium-to-high human capital risk  to DHS’s ability to achieve mission goals. However, DHS  CHCO and CIO officials acknowledged that the department  does not track these risks through any formal mechanism.  In addition, they stated that DHS has not established a  comprehensive effort to identify and track the full range of  human capital risks facing the department, as well as  reporting those risks to management or a central advisory  or management board.
Applicable merit principles and standards  are upheld, and employee grievances are  considered and addressed.
DHS’s IT human capital plan and supporting  documentation provide for the application and enforcement  of merit principles and standards and for considering and  addressing employee grievances. For example, the plan  recognizes that the department has legislative and  regulatory requirements to implement performance-based  management practices, including merit principles and  standards, for its IT workforce. In addition, an OPM  analysis of DHS’s human resources management  operations reports that the department’s human resources  management operates in a consistent manner with merit  principles. Moreover, DHS has a policy directive that  defines the process for administering its employee  grievance system. The department also regularly reports to  management and employees on the number of grievances  filed and resolved as well as the number of cases  outstanding.
Program and initiative implementation efforts  include published plans that clearly outline  periodic review of performance and desired  outcomes.
DHS’s IT human capital plan and supporting  documentation provide for performance reviews of desired  outcomes. For example, supporting documentation  (specifically, DHS’s IT Human Capital Plan to Mitigate IT  Competency and Skill Gaps and IT Gap Analysis Report  and Improvement Plan) provides analyses and snapshots  of the department’s performance in trying to close gaps in  mission-critical competencies. However, these competency  gap snapshots do not constitute a comprehensive review  and evaluation of progress against all of the objectives  established in the human capital plan. In addition, DHS’s IT  human capital plan and supporting documentation do not  clearly outline or identify time frames for periodic review.  DHS CHCO and CIO officials stated that they intend to  address this in future revisions to the plan.
DHS’s IT human capital plan does not clearly assign  accountability for human capital improvements or provide  for regular assessments of that accountability. However,  documents supporting the plan (specifically, the  department’s November 2005 implementation briefing and  the May 2007 IT Gap Analysis Report and Improvement  Plan) do assign accountability and responsibility for human  capital improvements. For example, the documents assign  accountability to the DHS CHCO, DHS CIO, and  component agency heads to make improvements related to  closing selected competency gaps. However, the  documents do not provide for assessing accountability on a  regular basis and using the results as an input into future  planning and resource allocation decisions. DHS CHCO  and CIO officials stated that while data related to  competency gaps are used as an input, data regarding  accountability are not.
section_title: Appendix III: Comments from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security
section_title: Appendix IV: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments
subsections: section_title: Staff Acknowledgments
paragraphs: In addition to the individual named above, Gerard Aflague, Mathew Bader,  Justin Booth, Barbara Collier, S. Mike Davis, Bill Doherty (Assistant  Director), and Gary Mountjoy (Assistant Director) made key contributions  to this report.