Emergency communications interoperability refers to the ability of first responders and emergency preparedness and management officials to use their radios and other equipment to communicate with each other across agencies and jurisdictions when needed and as authorized, as shown in our hypothetical example of response to a fire in a federal building in figure 1. According to DHS’s NECP, emergency communications interoperability is one of the components of an effective emergency preparedness and management structure. DHS’s Interoperability Continuum states that first responders need interoperability during day-to-day incidents as well as large scale emergencies. For example, interoperability is important in responding to localized emergency incidents, such as a vehicle collision on an interstate highway, and in regional incident management, such as in responding to a disaster. It also facilitates first responder communications during planned events such as sporting events, State of the Union addresses, or presidential Inaugurations that involve multiple responding agencies. The NCR is a legally-designated geographic region that includes the District, and local jurisdictions in the state of Maryland and the Commonwealth of Virginia, as shown in figure 2. There is no single operational authority for emergency response in the NCR because the responsibilities reside with state and local jurisdictions. Instead, the NCR is supported by a network of committees that were created by the jurisdictions and include representatives from the District, Maryland, Virginia, as well as the federal government, and private and nonprofit entities such as MWCOG. These committees work together to improve the region’s ability to prepare for, respond to, and recover from hazards. For example, key committees include: The Senior Policy Group which is comprised of senior emergency management officials from the District, Maryland, Virginia, and the ONCRC and coordinates efforts to increase regional preparedness, mitigation, and response capabilities in the NCR. The Senior Policy Group also oversees the allocation and implementation of UASI funding and determines priority actions for increasing the region’s preparedness and response capabilities as well as reducing vulnerability to terrorist attacks. The Emergency Preparedness Council (Council) which is an advisory body of representatives from the District, Maryland, Virginia, and private, and non-profit entities that reports to the MWCOG Board of Directors. This Council provides oversight of the regional emergency coordination and strategic plans to identify and address gaps in readiness in the NCR. It also is the federally-required working group with oversight responsibility for the UASI grant program. In this capacity, the Council coordinates with the Senior Policy Group with the aim of ensuring that grant funds are used to support projects that will build an enhanced and sustainable capacity to prevent, protect against, and recover from threats or acts of terrorism. The UASI grant funds can be used to invest in technology, equipment, training, exercises, and management. GAO, Emergency Communications: Various Challenges Likely to Slow Implementation of a Public Safety Broadband Network, GAO-12-343 (Washington, D.C.; Feb. 22, 2012). handheld portable radios (typically carried by emergency responders); mobile radios (often located in vehicles); base station radios (located in a fixed position such as a dispatch repeaters (towers that increase the communication range of handheld portable radios and base station radios by retransmitting received signals). LMR systems are designed to provide rapid voice call set-up and group- calling capabilities. Group calling is important for first responders because it enables one individual to simultaneously communicate to every member of a group, such as all firefighters in the interior of a burning building. According to DHS’s 2014 NECP, because LMR systems will remain the primary tool for mission critical voice communications for many years to come, they have to meet a high standard for reliability, redundancy, capacity, and flexibility. Thus, according to the 2014 NECP, for many public safety agencies maintaining their LMR systems and improving interoperability continues to be their top communications priority. According to the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (HSA), the ONCRC, located within DHS’s Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), is required, among other things, to: coordinate the activities of DHS relating to the NCR; coordinate on terrorism preparedness with federal, state, local, and regional agencies, and private sector entities in the NCR to ensure adequate planning, information sharing, training, and execution of domestic preparedness activities among these agencies and entities; serve as a liaison between the federal government and state, local, and regional authorities, and private sector entities in the NCR to facilitate access to federal grants and other programs; and provide state, local, and regional authorities in the NCR with regular information, research, and technical support to assist the efforts of state, local, and regional authorities in securing the homeland. The HSA also requires that the ONCRC to submit an annual report to Congress that includes: identifying resources required to fully implement homeland security efforts in the NCR; an assessment of the progress made by the entities in implementing homeland security efforts (including emergency communications interoperability); and recommendations to Congress regarding the additional resources needed to fully implement homeland security efforts. The Director of the ONCRC is also a member of the NCR’s Senior Policy Group. In fiscal year 2015, ONCRC’s budget was $3.4 million, and it is currently authorized at 20 full- time equivalent staff in Washington, D.C. DHS’s Office of Emergency Communications (OEC) was, established pursuant to statute in 2006, in response to the September 11th terrorist attacks and the 2005 Hurricane Katrina. The OEC’s mission is to support and promote communications systems used by first responders and government officials to keep America safe, secure, and resilient. Among other things, OEC is responsible for leading the nation’s interoperable public safety, national security, and emergency-preparedness, and communications efforts. The OEC also is responsible for providing training, workshops, and guidance to help federal, state and local agencies and the private sector develop their emergency communications efforts. The ONCRC has worked with both state and local entities and other DHS components on various efforts aimed at improving emergency preparedness in the NCR, including emergency communications interoperability. In particular, the ONCRC’s 2013 report to Congress notes that one of its principal mechanisms to assist state and local agencies in the region with emergency communications interoperability is through its participation on several committees that are involved in planning and carrying out efforts to build and sustain preparedness capabilities. For example, ONCRC staff helped revise the NCR’s 2013 Homeland Security Strategic Plan (NCR Strategic Plan). The NCR Strategic Plan represents the region’s strategy for improving preparedness to address various hazards. According to the Director of ONCRC, the ONCRC works with state and local agencies in the NCR to support their activities aimed at achieving the plan’s goals. One of the goals of the plan is to ensure interoperable communications capabilities. The plan identified a number of NCR’s initiatives to achieve this goal including: ensuring communications interoperability across agencies, managing and coordinating radio upgrades across jurisdictions, maintaining a cache of extra radios, conducting training to improve the ability of all NCR partners to access and use communications systems effectively, and encourage participation in biannual communication exercises that test all regional communication platforms. In addition, the ONCRC has worked with NCR agencies to continue developing the National Capital Region Network (NCRNet) which is a secure, non-commercial, fiber optic network. As part of the interoperable communications infrastructure, the NCRNet is designed to address the NCR’s need for a web-based capability for secure data communications and should allow for more efficient, flexible, and secure data exchange particularly among state and local jurisdictions within the NCR. According to the ONCRC’s 2014 report to Congress, most of the local jurisdictions in the region are connected via the NCRNet, but other NCR agencies are not. In comments on a draft of this report, ONCRC officials said that, as of December 2015, all of the jurisdictions in NCR are connected to NCRNet and efforts are underway to include federal agencies in the NCRNet. According to the Director of ONCRC, although NCR agencies and entities are not required to implement the NCR’s Strategic Plan, they are committed to implementing it because they helped develop the plan and are stewards of public trust and resources. In its 2014 and 2015 reports to Congress, the ONCRC states that, as a result of the NCR’s Strategic Plan, state and local agencies have a framework for sustaining current emergency communications capabilities, such as interoperability, and building new ones. The reports also noted that achieving the plan’s goals will improve the region’s preparedness to address critical risk in the NCR. As noted previously, one of the ONCRC’s responsibilities is to serve as a liaison with entities in the NCR to facilitate access to federal grants. The ONCRC officials told us that the ONCRC (as a member of the Senior Policy Group) has collaborated with the NCR’s Emergency Preparedness Council to facilitate state and local agencies access to the DHS’s UASI grant program. The UASI grant program is the primary source of federal homeland security funding for the NCR. In fiscal year 2014, DHS allocated $53 million through the UASI grant program to the NCR to enhance the region’s homeland security and preparedness capabilities. Almost $7 million of the $53 million was to fund projects aimed at the NCR Strategic Plan’s goal to ensure interoperable communications capabilities, such as purchasing radios and other equipment as well as developing a strategic plan for radio encryption. Regarding other types of grants for homeland security, we found in 2013 that officials in the NCR do not have access to comprehensive information on federal-funding sources for homeland security and emergency-management capabilities other than UASI grants and recommended that the ONCRC collect and maintain information on all such federal funding sources for NCR jurisdictions. Although the ONCRC initially agreed with this recommendation, officials currently state they do not plan to implement it, in part, because it is the responsibility of the NCR’s Project Management Office. The ONCRC also helps support emergency communications interoperability in the NCR by coordinating with FEMA’s Region III’s Regional Emergency Communications Coordination Working Groups to share information with NCR agencies about interoperability, including lessons learned and best practices such as from the 2015 papal visit, the 2010 earthquake, and snowstorms in the NCR. In addition, the ONCRC staff said that, in 2008, when the FCC directed reconfiguration of the 800 MHz band radios—used by police, firefighters, and emergency service personnel— the ONCRC assisted federal agencies in the NCR with ensuring that their 800 MHz band radios were included as part of the local jurisdictions’ reconfiguration plans. Further, according to ONCRC officials, FEMA maintains a cache of extra radios that can be distributed during an emergency to other NCR agencies’ first responders whose radios may not be interoperable with each other. For example, when the U.S. Capitol Police requested additional radios during the 2013 State of the Union address, the ONCRC issued the radios to them, according to ONCRC officials. The ONCRC has coordinated with a number of other DHS’s components in their efforts to improve emergency communications interoperability across the country, including in the NCR, according to ONCRC officials. For example, officials noted that the ONCRC worked closely with DHS’ OEC in the development of DHS’s 2014 National Emergency Communications Plan (NECP) which establishes a national strategy for improving emergency communications (including interoperability) across all levels of government and increasing coordination across the emergency response community. In the 2014 NECP, the Secretary of Homeland Security, states that ensuring interoperable communications among responders during all threats and hazards is paramount to the safety and security of all Americans. The 2014 NECP aims to improve communications capabilities of first responders’ at all levels of the government and states that one of DHS’s top priorities is to identify and prioritize areas for improvement in first responders LMR systems. To do so, the NECP has five goals that include enhancing decision making, coordination, and planning for emergency communications and improving first responders’ ability to communicate through training and exercise programs. The ONCRC also coordinated with OEC to develop the Interoperability Continuum (Continuum), which is designed to assist first responders and policy makers across the country with planning and implementing interoperability solutions for emergency communications. For example, the Continuum identifies the five elements that public safety agencies should address to achieve interoperability. The five elements are to: establish a governance structure; develop standard operating procedures; acquire and implement technology that meets user needs; provide training and exercise programs; and ensure that interoperable communications technologies are used. The Interoperability Continuum can also be used by jurisdictions to track progress in strengthening interoperable communications. While the Interoperability Continuum is guidance, emergency management officials from the District, Maryland, and Virginia have incorporated the Interoperability Continuum’s five elements in their 2013 Statewide Communications Interoperability Plans (SCIP). Specifically, the District, Maryland, and Virginia’s 2013 SCIP have aligned their strategic goals for interoperability—governance, standard operating procedures, technology, training and exercises, and usage— with the Interoperability Continuum’s five elements. The SCIPs identified several initiatives aimed at achieving these goals. For example, regarding governance, Maryland states that one of its initiatives is to codify its existing governance structure through legislation. The District and Virginia plans note that refining the purpose and membership of their statewide interoperability executive committees is one of their initiatives related to governance. To ensure that first responders’ technological needs are met the District, Maryland, and Virginia plan to add nationwide interoperability channels, conduct vulnerability assessments of critical communications infrastructure, and maintain and upgrade existing technologies. Furthermore, the ONCRC worked closely with OEC on developing emergency communications grants guidance, according to ONCRC officials. The guidance aims to provide state and local grant recipients with information on emergency communications policies, eligible costs, best practices, and technical standards for investing federal funds in emergency communications projects. The guidance also recognizes the need to sustain current LMR systems and encourages grant recipients to participate, support, and invest in planning activities that will help them prepare for deployment of new emergency communications systems or technologies. For example, grant recipients should continue developing plans and standard operating procedures, conducting training and exercises, and investing in standards-based equipment to sustain LMR capabilities. Overall, emergency management officials in the District, Maryland, and Virginia we spoke to were generally satisfied with ONCRC’s efforts to coordinate with them to help ensure interoperability of emergency communications. However, these officials also said that achieving interoperability of emergency communications among all NCR agencies and entities when needed will continue to be a challenge, in part, because of the size and complexity of the region. As noted previously, the ONCRC is required to report to Congress annually on the progress of emergency preparedness in the region, including the state of emergency communications interoperability. In the 2014 and 2015 reports to Congress, the ONCRC states that achieving the goals in the NCR’s Strategic Plan will improve the region’s preparedness to address risk in the NCR. However, these reports do not include performance measures that would indicate the extent to which those goals have been achieved. We found in 2013 that, while NCR agencies had taken steps to develop measures to assess the region’s performance in improving emergency preparedness, more could be done to assist in these efforts. We recommended that the ONCRC assist NCR agencies in developing performance measures to better assess the implementation of the NCR’s Strategic Plan. ONCRC agreed with this recommendation and ONCRC officials told us that they are working on implementing it but did not provide a timeframe for completion. In the interim, without performance measures as we recommended for monitoring and assessing regional efforts to enhance interoperability, ONCRC’s ability to provide Congress with comprehensive information on the extent to which first responders in the NCR have emergency communications interoperability when needed and authorized is hampered. For example, in the 2013 through 2015 reports to Congress, the ONCRC reports that NCR agencies continue to make progress towards achieving interoperable communications, but does not report on the extent to which emergency communications interoperability exists in the region. As discussed in the previous section, the ONCRC coordinates with state and local agencies in the NCR primarily through its participation on NCR committees including the Senior Policy Group and the Emergency Preparedness Council. However, the ONCRC currently does not have a formal mechanism in place to coordinate with federal agencies and is making some effort to improve how it coordinates with them. According to ONCRC’s 2015 report to Congress, over 270 federal agencies exist in the NCR, and ONCRC officials are trying to identify those that should be involved in these coordination efforts. For example, as demonstrated in examples cited previously, federal entities—such as DHS, the Navy, and the U.S. Capitol Police—have responsibilities related to emergency preparedness and incident response in the NCR. We noted in 2012 that many of the meaningful results that the federal government seeks to achieve—such as those related to providing homeland security—require the coordinated efforts of more than one federal agency. From the establishment of the ONCRC in 2002 through 2014, the Joint Federal Committee (JFC) was the ONCRC’s primary means of coordinating federal efforts with state and local agencies in the NCR. The JFC’s charter states that it was established to provide a forum for policy discussions, information sharing, and issue resolution regarding federal preparedness activities in the NCR. It was chaired by the Director of ONCRC who was to preside over all meetings, ensure the development of a meeting agenda, and ensure that the JFC’s responsibilities and activities were carried out. Membership in the JFC was open to all federal departments and agencies with offices in the NCR and meetings were to be held at least quarterly. However, the ONCRC officials said that the JFC has not convened since 2014. In its 2014 report to Congress, the ONCRC stated that the JFC is not operating effectively and efficiently to accomplish its mission and would be restructured. The report also noted that federal agencies commented that the JFC lacked the authority, organization, and ability to focus on specific issues to be effective. According to ONCRC officials, during its existence, the JFC focused on information sharing, and they plan to restructure it into a federal coordinating body that will assist in the interagency and intergovernmental coordination of homeland security within the NCR. In addition, they said that once restructured, the JFC would produce guidance (such as standard operating procedures) and identify lessons learned. The Director of the ONCRC told us that in the absence of the JFC, the ONCRC has held informal meetings with some federal agencies in the NCR, such as the Secret Service during the 2015 papal visit, but said that this was not a sufficient mechanism for coordinating with federal agencies in the NCR. The Director also stated there is value to having a coordination mechanism in the NCR, such as the JFC, in part, because it would help federal agencies in the NCR to better coordinate the federal response to future incidents in the region. The Director said that the ONCRC was in the early stages of restructuring the JFC and estimated that it should be reconvened by 2017. However, according to ONCRC officials, written plans or documents for the specific elements of the restructuring were not available. For many years, we have reported about the importance of collaboration between and among federal agencies. For example, we have noted that interagency mechanisms or strategies to coordinate programs that address crosscutting issues may reduce potentially duplicative, overlapping, and fragmented efforts. When the JFC existed, it did not fully operate in a manner that was consistent with key considerations for implementing interagency collaboration mechanisms that we have previously identified. According to our prior work on collaboration, agencies can strengthen their commitment to working collaboratively by having written agreements. Our work has also shown that when implementing collaborative mechanisms, clearly articulating agency roles and responsibilities and how agencies will collaborate, including how they will operate across agency boundaries, into a written document can be a powerful tool for collaboration and doing so can provide a clear understanding of those roles and responsibilities. Our body of work has also shown that written agreements are most effective when they are regularly updated and monitored. The JFC did not have a written agreement that defined the general processes and procedures it used to carry out its responsibilities. Instead, the JFC had a high level charter which was last updated in 2009. The charter stated that membership shall be open to all departments and agencies of the three branches of the federal government. However, the charter did not provide information on (1) the roles, responsibilities, structure, and functions of its members; or (2) how its members were to work together across agency boundaries. It may be difficult for the JFC, once restructured, to enhance interagency understanding, coordination, and collaboration among federal agencies in the NCR without such a written agreement. Addressing the above key considerations for implementing collaborative mechanisms in the planned restructuring of the JFC could provide greater clarity to its members on their roles and responsibilities, particularly when responding to incidents, as well as improve the ONCRC’s ability to carry out its statutory responsibilities for coordinating federal homeland security and emergency-management activities in the NCR. The ONCRC’s statutory responsibility for overseeing and coordinating emergency preparedness, including emergency communications interoperability in the NCR is important for helping to ensure that federal, state, and local agencies can communicate and share information with each other across agencies and jurisdictions when needed and as authorized. However, until the ONCRC implements our recommendation—to assist NCR agencies in developing performance measures to better assess the implementation of the NCR Strategic Plan—the ONCRC has limited ability to monitor and report to Congress on progress in achieving emergency communications interoperability in the region. Moreover, the ONCRC’s primary means of coordinating with federal agencies in the NCR (the JFC) has not convened since 2014 and was not operating in a manner that is fully consistent with some of our key considerations for implementing interagency collaborative mechanisms, such as clearly articulating roles and responsibilities into a written document. According to the Director of ONCRC, efforts are underway to restructure the JFC. Incorporating these key considerations would be an important step toward improving interagency collaboration, particularly among federal agencies, in the NCR. In particular, revising the JFC’s charter to describe in general how the JFC will operate and, in particular, each member’s role and responsibilities would better enable the JFC to assist the ONCRC with coordinating federal agencies’ efforts to help enhance emergency preparedness, including interoperability in the NCR. To further build on the efforts to improve emergency communications interoperability in the NCR, we recommend that the FEMA Administrator direct the Director of ONCRC to take the following action: as part of its efforts to restructure the JFC, clearly articulate in a written agreement the roles and responsibilities of the participating agencies and specify how these agencies are to work together across agency boundaries. We provided a draft of this report to DHS for comment. On March 2, 2016, DHS provided written comments, which are reprinted in appendix I and provided technical comments, which we incorporated as appropriate. DHS concurred with our recommendation and described action under way to address it. Specifically, the ONCRC has formed a temporary working group comprised of volunteers from various federal agencies. That group, among other things, will be responsible for determining the JFC’s mission, functions, deliverables, and membership requirements as well as drafting a new charter to clearly state members’ roles and responsibilities. The ONCRC estimated a completion date of March 31, 2017. We are sending copies of this report to the appropriate congressional committees, the Secretary of Homeland Security, the Administrator of FEMA, the Director of ONCRC, and other interested parties. In addition, this report is available at no charge on the GAO website at http://www/gao.gov. If you or your staff has any questions about this report, please contact me at (202) 512-2834 or goldsteinm@gao.gov. Contact points for our Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last page of this report. GAO staff who made key contributions to this report are listed in appendix II. In addition to the contact named above, Tammy Conquest, Assistant Director; Melissa Bodeau; Antoine Clark; Sharon Dyer; Rich Hung; Sara Ann Moessbauer; Josh Ormond; Cheryl Peterson; and Lisa Shibata made key contributions to this report.

Summary: The NCR is considered at high risk for various threats and hazards. Federal, state, and local agencies in the NCR continue to face challenges with emergency communications interoperability—that is, the ability to use radios to communicate across entities when needed. The federal government has taken actions to improve interoperability in the NCR including allocating almost $720 million through a DHS grant program to enhance regional preparedness since fiscal year 2002, and establishing the ONCRC to coordinate NCR entities on homeland security activities, including interoperability. GAO was asked to review federal efforts to improve emergency communications interoperability in the NCR. This report examines (1) actions the ONCRC has taken to help improve emergency communications interoperability in the NCR and (2) status of the ONCRC's efforts to coordinate with federal agencies to help improve emergency preparedness in the NCR, including communications interoperability. GAO reviewed documentation from the ONCRC and interviewed DHS officials and emergency managers from the District of Columbia, Maryland, and Virginia. The Office of National Capital Region Coordination (ONCRC), within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), has taken various actions, mainly through coordination with state and local agencies, to help improve emergency communications interoperability in the National Capital Region (NCR), a legally-designated area including Washington, D.C. and nearby parts of Virginia and Maryland. For example: The ONCRC participates in several committees that are involved in planning and carrying out efforts to build preparedness and response capabilities of the region. In particular, the Director of the ONCRC is a member of the NCR's Senior Policy Group, which coordinates these efforts. The ONCRC staff helped develop the NCR's 2013 Homeland Security Strategic Plan . One of the goals of the plan is to ensure interoperable communications capabilities. The Strategic Plan identified a number of NCR initiatives to achieve this goal, including supporting the establishment and maintenance of radio interoperability and managing and coordinating radio upgrades across jurisdictions. As part of the responsibility to serve as a liaison with entities in the NCR, the ONCRC has collaborated with the NCR's Emergency Preparedness Council (an NCR advisory body) to facilitate state and local agencies access to the DHS's Urban Area Security Initiative grant program—the primary source of federal homeland security funding for the NCR. In fiscal year 2014, DHS allocated $53 million in grant funding to the NCR to enhance the region's homeland security and preparedness capabilities. Almost $7 million of this amount was to fund activities, such as purchasing radios and other equipment, aimed at achieving the NCR Strategic Plan's goal to ensure interoperable communications capabilities. A key role of the ONCRC is to coordinate with federal, state, and local NCR entities on emergency preparedness and homeland security activities. However, the ONCRC currently does not have a formal mechanism in place to coordinate with federal agencies. From 2002 through 2014, the Joint Federal Committee (JFC) was the ONCRC's primary means of coordinating with federal agencies in the NCR. The ONCRC has not convened the JFC since 2014 and plans to restructure it. Officials explained that the JFC was not efficient and effective as a coordinating body and that they plan to strengthen its coordination capabilities. However, written plans were not available. When the JFC existed, its operation was not fully aligned with interagency collaboration mechanisms that GAO has identified. In particular, the JFC's charter did not specify the roles and responsibilities of participating agencies or how they were to work together across agency boundaries. Addressing these interagency collaborative mechanisms in the planned restructuring of the JFC could provide greater clarity on roles and responsibilities and enhance its ability to coordinate federal efforts in the region. GAO recommends that ONCRC, as part of its efforts to restructure the JFC, clearly articulate in a written agreement the roles and responsibilities of participating agencies and specify how they are to work together across agency boundaries. ONCRC concurred with this recommendation.