Detailed Information on the
Federal Law Enforcement Training Center Assessment

Continuing to improve coordination with other Federal law enforcement training facilities and with partner organizations by holding them more accountable for cost, schedule and performance results.

Continuing to pursue first-time accreditation for FLETC training programs from the Federal Law Enforcement Training Accreditation (FLETA) Board and maintain appropriate compliance to ensure re-accreditation as required. Eleven training programs have been accredited todate. The FLETC achieved Academy Accreditation in March 2006.

Continuing to enhance cooperation and coordination with FLETC Partner Organizations, both DHS and non-DHS, to improve the accuracy of training demand projections and thus maximize planned utilization of existing and projected facilities.

Continuing to develop and utilize the Federal Law Enforcement Training Accreditation Board in order to increase the number of programs accredited and re-accredited.

Considering a competitive sourcing study to ensure that all Federal Law Enforcement Training Center training, including the Border Patrol, is done in the most effective and cost-efficient manner.

Measure: Percentage of federal supervisors that rate their FLETC basic training graduate's preparedness as good or excellent

Explanation:This measure reflects the percentage of federal supervisors of FLETC basic training graduates who, after eight to twelve months of observation, indicate their law enforcement officers or agents are highly prepared to perform their entry-level duties and responsibilities. The percentage is calculated as the number of federal supervisors that rate their FLETC basic training graduate's preparedness as good or excellent divided by the total number of responses.

Measure: Percentage of students that express excellent or outstanding on the Student Quality of Training Survey

Explanation:The Student Quality of Training Survey (SQTS) is used to determine the level of student satisfaction for this measure. Students respond to a modified 5-point Likert scale (Outstanding, Excellent, Good, Satisfactory, and Poor). The ratings of outstanding and excellent were combined to form the student satisfaction measure.

Measure: Percentage of requested training programs conducted (capacity measure)

Explanation:This measure compares the number of programs scheduled during the fiscal year to the number requested training programs by our POs. Capacity percentages are approximately 98.5%. This reflects FLETC's responsiveness to meeting partner organization requests for training, and thus is a proxy outcome measure of FLETC's ability to fulfill its mission requirement to provide all necessary law enforcement training. High performance on this measure demonstrates FLETC's ability to readily adapt to new requirements and mission needs of partner organizations.

Measure: Number of programs accredited (and re-accredited) through the Federal Law Enforcement Training Accreditation (FLETA) program

Explanation:FLETA will provide the accreditation process by which law enforcement training programs and facilities are accredited, and law enforcement instructors are certified, in order to improve the quality of Federal law enforcement training. Once FLETA is fully established, this measure will provide FLETC with an independent indicator of program effectiveness.

Measure: Percentage of Partner Organizations that express an agree or strongly agree on the Partner Organization Satisfaction Survey (POSS)

Explanation:The survey measures the Partner Organization satisfaction rate with FLETC's law enforcement training. The POs are FLETC's external customers, and PO satisfaction with the FLETC training curricula is critical to retaining the consolidated training concept for federal law enforcement.

Measure: Annual percentage change in the cost of a student-week of training

Explanation:This measure is calculated based on total FLETC operating expenses divided by the total number of student-weeks trained. This measure reflects how well FLETC employs its allocated resources and assures the Partner Organizations that the training their personnel receive is both effective and efficient. As this measure is further developed, the future year targets will be adjusted as required by inflation.

Measure: Projection accuracy -- percentage of the number of basic training programs conducted to the number of basic programs projected

Explanation:The measure represents the accuracy of partner organization projections for annual training. Each year FLETC Partner Organizations (POs) project their annual training requirements, and the FLETC relies primarily upon these projections to schedule training throughput the year. This measure enables FLETC to collaborate with POs to improve the accuracy of their annual projections, mitigate the risks associated with inaccurate projections, and thus maximize the amount of training provided. Inaccurate projections result in inefficient use or waste of FLETC resources.

Is the program purpose clear?

Explanation: FLETC's mission statement and Memoranda of Understanding (MOU) signed by over 80 Partner Organizations clearly outline the Center's role and responsibilities. FLETC is the primary provider of career-long federal law enforcement training and prepares law enforcement professionals to fulfill their responsibilities safely and proficiently. The purpose of the program is to provide Federal, state, local, and international agents and officers who graduate FLETC the skills and knowledge needed to perform their law enforcement functions effectively and professionally. The program develops uniform standards for training programs, facilities and instructors to ensure high caliber training across agencies.

Evidence: FLETC Strategic Plan; Memorandum of Understanding between FLETC and its Partner Organizations

Does the program address a specific and existing problem, interest, or need?

Explanation: Newly hired law enforcement personnel must receive law enforcement training before they are commissioned as officers. Career law enforcement agents and officers along with Flight Deck Officers receive specific training to improve our defenses and prevention effectiveness. The post September 11th growth in Federal law enforcement highlights the on-going need for law enforcement training.

Evidence: FLETC responds quickly to emerging training needs and adapts to new requirements. Recent examples include adopting a six-day training week, rapidly relocating Border Patrol, quickly repurposing the Charleston facility to train Coast Guard and US Courts Probation and Pre-Trial Services Officers, developing counter/anti terrorism training, and assisting the military by providing training on urban policing tactics prior to their overseas deployment.

Is the program designed so that it is not redundant or duplicative of any other Federal, state, local or private effort?

Explanation: In addition to FLETC, several other Federal agencies maintain law enforcement training facilities. The existence of redundant or duplicative Federal, state, local and private training facilities is beyond FLETC's control, and some separate training facilities are as a result of legislative mandates. Additionally, many of FLETC's Partner Organizations have separate training facilities, including courses that retrain agents on techniques learned at FLETC. However, no other training venues provide the specific basic law enforcement training curricula required by the over 80 Partner Organizations, and the training provided by the FLETC to state and local and international agents and officers is not readily available to these organizations.

Evidence: Memorandum to Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies (Dated June 29, 1984), Subject: Guidelines for Legislation Involving Federal Criminal Law Enforcement Authority, From: William French Smith, Attorney General; FLETC Catalog of Training Programs dated 2005-2006; Curriculum Development and Curriculum Review Conference After-Action Reports

Is the program design free of major flaws that would limit the program's effectiveness or efficiency?

Explanation: Consolidated basic law enforcement training enables more than 80 federal agencies in virtually every department and all three branches of government to leverage their resources to the mutual benefit of the entire law enforcement community, including our colleagues overseas and in state and local agencies. Consolidation promotes cooperation, professionalism, and effectiveness in law enforcement. Without FLETC, many agencies could never afford the diversity and sophistication of FLETC's training facilities, and they would be unable to assemble a cadre of trainers to match the breadth of experience and depth of expertise found in FLETC's faculty. The effectiveness of FLETC is also enhanced as a result of its flexibility in accommodating new training (e.g., MANPADS, FAM, FFDO), operating at surge capacity (such as adopting a six-day training week) and adapting to new requirements by utilizing multiple training sites.

Evidence: FLETC Continuous Validation Process (CVP); FLETC Partner Organization Satisfaction Survey. Implementation of emergent training programs, the ability to adapt to new requirements by utilizing multiple training sites to accommodate new training and surge capacity required by single events that shift national priorities, and the introduction of new partner organizations are evidence of FLETC's effectiveness.

Is the program design effectively targeted so that resources will address the program's purpose directly and will reach intended beneficiaries?

Explanation: Law enforcement training is FLETC's only mission. No other operational law enforcement mission exists that would require diverting resources and attention away from providing the best possible law enforcement training program. One-hundred percent of program resources are executed in direct support of Federal, state, local, and international law enforcement training, including for over 80 Partner Organizations. Courses are offered each year based on needs projections from Partner Organizations. FLETC, along with the Partner Organizations, routinely conducts Curriculum Review Conferences (CRCs) to assess curricula effectiveness and recommend areas for curricula changes as appropriate.

Evidence: Requirements often emerge for new training as a result of the Curriculum Review Conferences that FLETC holds with Partner Organizations, of the development of new technologies and techniques, etc. As a result, FLETC conducts Curriculum Development Conferences (CDC) to generate, by consensus of the POs in attendance, new training curricula in support of these emergent requirements.

Does the program have a limited number of specific long-term performance measures that focus on outcomes and meaningfully reflect the purpose of the program?

Explanation: The program has measures that support the program's purpose to provide Federal, state, local, and international agents and officers who graduate FLETC with the skills and knowledge needed to perform their law enforcement functions effectively and professionally. Our long-term performance measures are the percentage of Federal supervisors that rate their FLETC basic training graduate's preparedness as good or excellent; the percentage of students that indicate excellent or outstanding on the student quality of training survey (used for both state and local and international subprograms); the number of programs accredited and re-accredited through the Federal Law Enforcement Accreditation (FLETA) Board; and, the percentage of requested training programs conducted (to measure capacity). FLETC is developing a plan to focus performance measures on outcomes. Through benchmarking with other Federal, state, local and DoD agencies, FLETC will be able to adapt best practices for establishing outcome measures and data collection.

Evidence: The FLETC Strategic Plan--FY2004-2009, DHS FYHSP System, and DHS FY2004 Performance and Accountability Report (PAR) contain performance measures and targets. In 2004, the percentage of Federal supervisors that rated their FLETC basic training graduate's preparedness as good or excellent was 73%; the percentage of students that indicated excellent or outstanding on the student quality of training survey was 64%; and the percentage of requested training programs conducted was 98%. The measure of the number of programs accredited and re-accredited through the Federal Law Enforcement Accreditation (FLETA) Board is currently under development.

Does the program have ambitious targets and timeframes for its long-term measures?

Explanation: The program has identified targets, milestones and timeframes for its long-term measures, but due to a lack of sufficient baseline data, it remains unclear how ambitious some of these targets are. The program has set milestones and targets so that by the end of FY2011, it will achieve a (minimum) 80% rating of federal supervisors that rate their FLETC basic training graduate's preparedness as outstanding or excellent on the supervisor's Continuous Validation Process (CVP) survey, reflecting the percentage of federal supervisors of FLETC basic training graduates who, after 8-12 months of observation, indicate their law enforcement officers or agents are highly prepared to perform their entry-level duties and responsibilities. Data sufficient to predict a trend is still needed, so this measure is under review. Also by FY2011, the program will also achieve a (minimum) 71% rating of students that express outstanding or excellent on the student quality of training survey; will achieve 40 programs accredited by FLETA; and will maintain a 98% capacity rating.

Evidence: FLETC Strategic Plan--FY2004-2009; FLETC FY2004 PAR; DHS FY2004 PAR; DHS FYHSP System. FLETC has made significant improvements in establishing performance measures over the past several years, and each of these performance measures include targets and timeframes for acheiving these them. However, 2004 is a baseline year for most of the long-term measures, so the existing data is insufficient to determine how ambitious the long-term targets are.

Does the program have a limited number of specific annual performance measures that can demonstrate progress toward achieving the program's long-term goals?

Explanation: Many of the long-term measures described above are also used as an indicator of annual performance. In addition to the long-term measures, FLETC annually surveys its more than 80 Partner Organizations with the Partner Organization Satisfaction Survey. The results of this survey provide another annual performance measure. FLETC develops and delivers basic and advanced training programs based on the requested needs of its Partner Organizations, so the PO Survey provides an overall customer satisfaction measure of responsiveness, training provision, and training quality.

Evidence: The FLETC has employed a PO Satisfaction for four years??FY2001-2004. The results of the survey are FY2001 -- 93%; FY2002 -- 92.4%; FY2003 -- 92.4%; FY2004 -- 92.7%. The PO Survey scoring methodology groups the available responses for each statement into two basic choices: agree, and disagree. Agree includes responses of strongly agree, agree, and slightly agree. Disagree includes responses of strongly disagree, disagree, and slightly disagree. The DHS FYHSP System, the FLETC Strategic Plan--FY2004-2009 and the FLETC FY2004 PAR include survey result measures.

Does the program have baselines and ambitious targets for its annual measures?

Explanation: The program has identified targets, milestones and timeframes for its annual and long-term measures, but it remains unclear how ambitious some of these targets are. Each year, the program targets are developed based on specific improvements to training such as simulation and counter/anti terrorism training identified by Partner Organizations, national priorities and vulnerabilities. The measures that are both long-term and annual need additional data before sufficient trendlines can be established. FLETC has administered its annual Partner Organization Survey for four years with results between 92% and 93% satisfaction. FLETC's annual targets, however, are well below this baseline result.

Evidence: FLETC hopes to acheive a PO Survey satisfaction rate between 80% and 86% over the next five years. Given that results for the past four years have been close to 93%, these targets do not seem sufficiently challenging. The FLETC Strategic Plan--FY2004-2009; FLETC FY2004 PAR; DHS FY2004 PAR; and DHS FYHSP System contain performance measures and target data.

Do all partners (including grantees, sub-grantees, contractors, cost-sharing partners, and other government partners) commit to and work toward the annual and/or long-term goals of the program?

Explanation: The program encourages close collaboration with over 80 Partner Organizations (PO) through quarterly PO meetings, Curriculum Development and Review Conferences and the PO Satisfaction survey. Partner Organizations, students, and law enforcement supervisors all regularly provide input on program effectiveness. FLETC regularly meets with its Partner Organizations in order to determine upcoming training needs and to make projections regarding the number of attendees anticipated. Agency-specific basic and advanced training courses are developed as a result of the Curriculum Development and Curriculum Review Conferences.

Evidence: PO Meeting reports, Curriculum Development Conference and Curriculum Review Conference After-Action Reports, and the PO Satisfaction Survey all provide evidence of FLETC's close collaboration with Partner Organizations.

Are independent evaluations of sufficient scope and quality conducted on a regular basis or as needed to support program improvements and evaluate effectiveness and relevance to the problem, interest, or need?

Explanation: FLETC program evaluations are currently conducted by Office of Compliance, an internal audit agency. FLETC is developing a plan to benchmark the US Coast Guard's program evaluation best practices and plans to begin to institute these annual practices beginning in FY 2006. FLETC has also worked diligently to establish the independent Federal Law Enforcement Training Accreditation (FLETA) program which has responsibility to approve policies, procedures and standards for accreditation of federal law enforcement training and grant Accreditation Certificates to those programs and academies that have successfully completed the FLETA requirements. A long-term measure under development is the number of courses accredited by FLETA.

Evidence: A GAO report dated July 2004: GAO-03-736, FLETC??Capacity Planning and Management Oversight Need Improvement was neither comprehensive nor recurring. Internal program evaluations include the FLETC FY 2004 PAR, the Office of Compliance Inspection Checklist, and the Curriculum Development Conference and Curriculum Review Conference After-Action Reports.

Are Budget requests explicitly tied to accomplishment of the annual and long-term performance goals, and are the resource needs presented in a complete and transparent manner in the program's budget?

Explanation: The FLETC uses a performance-based budgeting system. This methodology ties funding levels directly to performance goals in both the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the FLETC Strategic Plans. The FLETC and DHS budgets reflect program objectives. Each the five-year budget request is derived from estimates of what is needed to accomplish both the near- and long-term performance goals in both the DHS and FLETC Strategic Plans.

Evidence: FLETC develops a budget based on projected course offerings for the upcoming budget year and develops the course offerings through significant consultation with Partner Organizations and thorough review of the satisfaction survey results, which are tied to annual and long-term performance goals. Additional performance measures related to capacity and projection accuracy also work to ensure that FLETC has an incentive to tie course offerings to the needs of its partners, thus creating a direct link between budget (determining which courses are offered) and performance (determining which courses are needed and how effective the training is).

Has the program taken meaningful steps to correct its strategic planning deficiencies?

Explanation: In FY 2003, FLETC revised its five-year strategic plan. This included the assembly of a Strategic Management and Analysis Review Team with representatives from all levels of the program. The team identified core business functions as well as strategic goals and objectives. The plan was shared with the FLETC Stakeholders, Partner Organizations, OMB and Congress. The resulting five-year plan was implemented in FY2004. It has also restructured the budget program to better align with the DHS Strategic Plan.

Evidence: The FLETC Strategic Plan--FY2004-2009 and the DHS One Strategic Direction Document provide evidence of FLETC's strategic planning improvements. FLETC has also improved its performance measures following the previous PART assessment, and has newly-developed efficiency measures as well. While targets and timeframes for long-term measures are still under review, this is a matter of time required to collect sufficient data and is evidence of improved strategic planning, rather than the reverse.

Does the agency regularly collect timely and credible performance information, including information from key program partners, and use it to manage the program and improve performance?

Explanation: FLETC performance measures include annual surveys of Partner Organizations, students, and the immediate supervisors of students. FLETC uses the feedback to reconfigure training, including the addition or deletion of training topics, the revision of course material, etc. FLETC also meets regularly with Partner Organizations in Curriculum Development Conferences and Curriculum Review Conferences to adjust course offerings in order to meet the needs of program partners.

Evidence: FLETC PO survey; Student Quality of Training and Services surveys

Are Federal managers and program partners (including grantees, sub-grantees, contractors, cost-sharing partners, and other government partners) held accountable for cost, schedule and performance results?

Explanation: Performance plans of FLETC SES members have been prepared in accordance with new DHS performance requirements. FLETC has substantially increased its use of performance-based contracting. The CIO routinely employs performance-based statements of work (SOWs) as the basis for all IT contracts. Heavy demand for training at the FLETC requires that all classes operate at optimum capacity. All organizations are required to notify the Training Resources Coordination Division (TRC) of class/student cancellations at the earliest possible time so that other classes or students may be substituted. Failure to notify the Center of cancellation of a confirmed training quota prior to 20 working days before the scheduled training date results in forfeiture of the student/class training quota for the year or payment of costs incurred for the student/class training quota. However, partner organization have little financial incentive to ensure that initial training projections are accurate, resulting in process inefficiencies when FLETC must fill classes after cancellations at short notice.

Evidence: The FLETC Budget and Performance Plans, the FY2004 PMA report, the FLETC Directive 33-01 and the FLETC SOP 33-01: Funding Guidelines for Training indicate that FLETC is striving to ensure that program managers are held accountable for cost and performance. New efficiency measures of capacity and projection accuracy, as well as forfeiture penalties for cancelled classes, are examples of attempts to hold partners accountable. However, FLETC's appropriations structure of covering most training costs does not optimally contribute to holding partner organizations accountable for cost, schedule and performance results.

Are funds (Federal and partners') obligated in a timely manner and spent for the intended purpose?

Explanation: The FLETC develops an annual spending plan for all appropriations and executes this funding based on these plans. The plan is continuously updated to reflect operational changes and revised priorities. While under the Department of Treasury, FLETC had three consecutive financial audits with unqualified opinions??FY 2000, FY2001, FY2002. Since the move to DHS, FLETC does not receive a separate opinion. A limited scope audit is conducted and the results of that audit are rolled into the DHS overall results.

Evidence: The FLETC Annual Spending Plan, the DHS PAR and regular Budget Execution reports each provide evidence that FLETC funds are obligated in a timely manner and spent appropriately.

Does the program have procedures (e.g. competitive sourcing/cost comparisons, IT improvements, appropriate incentives) to measure and achieve efficiencies and cost effectiveness in program execution?

Explanation: Baseline efficiency measures are the annual percentage change in the cost of student week of training and a projection accuracy measure determined by the percentage of the number of basic training programs conducted compared to the number of basic training programs projected. FLETC continually looks to improve efficiency through IT and technological advances. Proposals have been received for the Student Automated Administration And Scheduling System (SASS) and are under review. In June 2005, as a result of a streamlined competition of the Vehicle Maintenance and Repair function, the in-house Most Efficient Organization (MEO) was selected as the service provider. The MEO's cost estimate was lower than the cost of having the private sector perform the work by approximately $500K over five years. Efficiencies have also resulted from a realigned organizational structure and more efficient allocation of duties.

Evidence: FLETC is in the process of developing a plan to compare FLETC cost of student training to that of similar training provided via other law enforcement training venues. In addition, FLETC will benchmark best practices of cost efficiencies to the extent that the content of consolidated training programs can be disaggregated to resemble the course offerings of these venues. The FLETC Strategic Plan--FY2004-2009 includes the efficiency measures, and the FLETC FY 06-09 Competitive Sourcing Plan includes planned competitions. The efficiency measures are currently developing baselines using 2004 data.

Does the program collaborate and coordinate effectively with related programs?

Explanation: FLETC works closely with over 80 Federal, state, local and international law enforcement entities through quarterly PO meetings, Curriculum Development and Review Conferences and the PO Satisfaction survey. Agency-specific basic and advanced training courses are developed as a result of the Curriculum Development and Curriculum Review Conferences. In response to changing mission requirements in the post-9/11 environment, FLETC initiated, in conjunction with its partners, the design, development, and construction of a Counter Terrorism Operations Training Facility. At least 13 Partner Organizations currently deploy recent graduates overseas in direct support of the Global War on Terrorism.

Evidence: Partner Organizations, students, and law enforcement supervisors all regularly provide input on program effectiveness. FLETC regularly meets with its Partner Organizations in order to determine upcoming training needs and to make projections regarding the number of attendees anticipated. Another example of collaboration is a four-year MOU FLETC has with the DHS Office of State and Local Government Coordination and Preparedness (OSLGCP), authorizing FLETC to analyze state and local intelligence training needs and to design, develop, deliver, and evaluate intelligence training courses for law enforcement officials and other personnel, and included development of three distinct training programs that target line officers and supervisors, executive level officials, and intelligence analysts in law enforcement.

Does the program use strong financial management practices?

Explanation: FLETC complies with all financial laws, regulations, appropriation language, and the OMB Circular A-11. The FLETC has received three unqualified audit opinions from outside agencies. The FLETC financial management system is certified and accredited and Federal Managers' Financial Integrity Act (FMFIA) compliant. A limited audit was performed on the financial statements by KPMG LLP. The firm expressed an opinion on the Consolidated Department of Homeland Security (DHS) financial statements taken as a whole and not the stand-alone financial statements of the FLETC. Therefore, no opinion was expressed on the FLETC stand-alone financial statements.

Evidence: In addition to previous financial audit reports, FLETC's financial management practices are outlined within the DHS PAR, the FLETC FY2003 PAR, and the FLETC quarterly PMA Submissions to DHS.

Has the program taken meaningful steps to address its management deficiencies?

Explanation: In FY 2003, FLETC revised its five-year strategic plan, including the assembly of a Strategic Management and Analysis Review Team with representatives from all levels of the program. The team identified core business functions requiring management improvements, as well as reviewing strategic goals and objectives. The plan was shared with the FLETC Stakeholders, Partner Organizations, OMB and Congress. Additionally, FLETC is working within the context of the President's Management Agenda to improve budget/performance integration and competitive sourcing.

Evidence: FLETC submits quarterly assessments of performance on the President's Management Agenda initiatives to DHS. As a result, FLETC has taken steps to improve the performance plans of SES members in order to improve management accountability. SES evaluations are now prepared in accordance with new DHS performance requirements. In addition to submitting the quarterly PMA assessments, FLETC has improved its performance measures and developed new efficiency measures following the previous PART assessment. These measures are used to increase management accountability.

Has the program demonstrated adequate progress in achieving its long-term performance goals?

Explanation: The long-term program performance measures are the percentage of Federal supervisors that rate their FLETC basic training graduate's preparedness as good or excellent; the percentage of students that indicate excellent or outstanding on the student quality of training survey (used for both state and local and international subprograms); the number of programs accredited and re-accredited through the Federal Law Enforcement Accreditation (FLETA) Board; and, the percentage of requested training programs conducted (to measure capacity). The program has identified targets, milestones and timeframes for its long-term measures, but due to a lack of sufficient baseline data, it remains unclear how ambitious some of these targets are. Evidence of progress on these measures is promising, but targets will need to finalized before long-term progress can be proven.

Evidence: The FLETC Strategic Plan--FY2004-2009, DHS FYHSP System, and DHS FY2004 Performance and Accountability Report (PAR) contain performance measures and targets. In 2004, the percentage of Federal supervisors that rated their FLETC basic training graduate's preparedness as good or excellent was 73%; the percentage of students that indicated excellent or outstanding on the student quality of training survey was 64%; and the percentage of requested training programs conducted was 98%. The measure of the number of programs accredited and re-accredited through the Federal Law Enforcement Accreditation (FLETA) Board is currently under development.

Does the program (including program partners) achieve its annual performance goals?

Explanation: Many of the long-term measures described above are also used as indicators of annual performance. In addition, FLETC annually surveys its more than 80 Partner Organizations with the Partner Organization Satisfaction Survey. The results of the survey are FY2001 -- 93%; FY2002 -- 92.4%; FY2003 -- 92.4%; FY2004 -- 92.7%. FLETC regularly exceeds the annual target for the survey, due in part to annual targets being set at levels well below the baseline range of 92%-93%. For example, the target for 2004 was 78%. For the other measures, annual targets have been under development for the past year.

Evidence: The DHS FYHSP System, the PO Survey, and the FLETC FY2003 PAR contain this performance information. The PO Survey scoring methodology groups the available responses for each statement into two basic choices: agree, and disagree. Agree includes responses of strongly agree, agree, and slightly agree. Disagree includes responses of strongly disagree, disagree, and slightly disagree. For the other measures (considered both long-term and annual), the program targets are and will be developed based on specific improvements to training such as simulation and counter/anti terrorism training identified by Partner Organizations, national priorities and vulnerabilities.

Does the program demonstrate improved efficiencies or cost effectiveness in achieving program goals each year?

Explanation: The consolidation of training also provides economies of scales that otherwise would not exist. The program has established efficiency measures for the percentage change in the cost of student week of training and a projection accuracy measure based on the percentage of the number of basic training programs conducted compared to the number of basic training programs projected. Baseline data for these two measures was collected for 2004, and targets will be better defined as sufficient baseline data becomes available.

Evidence: In addition to establishing new efficiency measures, FLETC continuously evaluates program requirements to determine continued need and alternatives to increase program efficiencies to enable reinvestments in law enforcement training. FLETC is also in the process of developing its Capital Planning Investment Review Process, constant with DHS guidelines. FLETC participation on several DHS Commodity Councils has resulted in improved efficiencies such as combining department-wide requirements to reduce costs such as the Microsoft Licensing cost.

Does the performance of this program compare favorably to other programs, including government, private, etc., with similar purpose and goals?

Explanation: While specific comparisons to other federal law enforcement training programs have not been performed, the increase in the number of partner organizations choosing to participate in FLETC training courses demonstrates evidence that FLETC compares favorably with competing law enforcement training options that agencies might otherwise pursue. FLETC has expressed a willingness to work with OMB and other federal law enforcement training programs to facilitate common measures and to share best practices in order to enable program-based comparisons.

Evidence: FLETC has increased the number of partner agencies since 2002 by six, bringing the total number of Partner Organizations to more than 80. FLETC also works with partner agencies to co-locate advanced, agency-specific training programs with FLETC facilities. FLETC has also worked diligently to establish the Federal Law Enforcement Training Accreditation program, that is developing and implementing a community-wide set of standards for law enforcement training programs and academies. This will result in the ability of FLETA to compare law enforcement training programs to an agreed-upon standard.

Do independent evaluations of sufficient scope and quality indicate that the program is effective and achieving results?

Explanation: FLETC program evaluations are currently conducted by Office of Compliance, an internal audit agency. FLETC is developing a plan to benchmark the US Coast Guard's program evaluation best practices and plans to begin to institute these annual practices beginning in FY 2006. FLETC has also worked diligently to establish the independent Federal Law Enforcement Training Accreditation (FLETA) program which has responsibility to approve policies, procedures and standards for accreditation of federal law enforcement training and grant Accreditation Certificates to those programs and academies that have successfully completed the FLETA requirements. A long-term measure under development is the number of courses accredited by FLETA.

Evidence: A GAO report dated July 2004: GAO-03-736, FLETC??Capacity Planning and Management Oversight Need Improvement was neither comprehensive nor recurring. Internal program evaluations include the FLETC FY 2004 PAR, the Office of Compliance Inspection Checklist, and the Curriculum Development Conference and Curriculum Review Conference After-Action Reports.