This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-03-190 
entitled 'Transportation Security Administration: Actions and Plans to 
Build a Results-Oriented Culture' which was released on February 19, 
2003.



This text file was formatted by the U.S. General Accounting Office 

(GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as part of a 

longer term project to improve GAO products’ accessibility. Every 

attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data integrity of 

the original printed product. Accessibility features, such as text 

descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes placed at the 

end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, are provided 

but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format of the printed 

version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an exact electronic 

replica of the printed version. We welcome your feedback. Please E-mail 

your comments regarding the contents or accessibility features of this 

document to Webmaster@gao.gov.



Report to Congressional Requesters:



January 2003:



TRANSPORTATION SECURITY ADMINISTRATION:



Actions and Plans to Build a Results-Oriented Culture:



GAO-03-190:



GAO Highlights: Highlights of GAO-03-190, a report to Congressional 

Requesters



Why GAO Did This Study:



Never has a results-oriented focus been more critical than today, when

 the security of America’s citizens depends on the outcomes of many 

federal programs.  In response to the September 11 terrorist attacks, 

the Congress passed the Aviation and Transportation Security Act (ATSA) 

that created the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) and made 

it 

responsible for transportation security.  ATSA requires TSA to 

implement 

specific practices that are intended to make it a results-oriented 

organization.  



What GAO Found:



In its first year, TSA has simultaneously started to build the 

infrastructure of a large organization as it focused primarily on 

meeting its aviation security deadlines.  As TSA begins to take 

responsibility for security in the maritime and surface modes of 

transportation, its current and future challenge is to continue to 

build, 

sustain, and institutionalize the organizational capacity to help 

it achieve 

its current and future goals.  In this regard, TSA has made an 

impressive 

start in implementing practices that can create a results-oriented 

culture.  

These practices—leadership commitment, strategic planning, 

performance 

management, collaboration and communication, and public reporting 

and 

customer service—are shown below.  Such practices are especially 

important 

when TSA moves into the newly created Department of Homeland 

Security.    



[See PDF for image]



[End of figure]



What GAO Recommends:



GAO makes specific recommendations to the Secretary of 

Transportation 

and the Under Secretary of Transportation for Security to 

continue and 

augment TSA’s progress in implementing ATSA’s results-oriented 

practices.  

The adjacent table shows selected recommended next steps for 

TSA.  We provided 

drafts of this report to officials from the Department of 

Transportation (DOT), 

including TSA, for their review and comment.  TSA’s Director 

of Strategic 

Management and Analysis provided oral comments on behalf of

DOT and TSA 

generally agreeing with the contents, findings, and 

recommendations of the 

draft report.   



www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-03-190.



To view the full report, including the scope

and methodology, click on the link above.

For more information, contact J. Christopher Mihm, 

202-512-6086, 

mihmj@gao.gov.



Letter:



Results in Brief:



Background:



TSA Actions and Plans to Implement Selected Results-Oriented Practices:



Concluding Observations:



Recommendations for Executive Action:



Agency Comments:



Appendix:



Appendix I: Objective, Scope, and Methodology:



Related GAO Products:



Tables:



Table 1: Summary of ATSA Requirements, TSA Actions and Plans, and 

Recommended Next Steps, by Results-Oriented Practice:



Table 2: Summary of Opportunities to Help Ensure Useful Annual Plans 
and 

Applied Practices:



Figures:



Figure 1: Standardized Performance Agreement for TSA Executives:



Figure 2: DOT and TSA Goal Alignment for Aviation Security:



Figure 3: TSA’s Interim Performance Management System:



ATSA: Aviation and Transportation Security Act:



CSI: customer satisfaction index:



DHS: Department of Homeland Security:



DOT: Department of Transportation:



GPRA: Government Performance and Results Act:



PBO: performance-based organization:



Letter January 17, 2003:



The Honorable Ernest F. Hollings

United States Senate:



The Honorable Kay Bailey Hutchison

United States Senate:



The Honorable John McCain

United States Senate:



The Honorable John D. Rockefeller, IV

United States Senate:



Over a year has passed since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 

2001, turned commercial aircraft into missiles, killing thousands of 

people, destroying billions of dollars’ worth of property, and 

realigning our national priorities. These attacks tragically underscore 

the forces that are likely to shape American society, the United 

States’ place in the world, and the role of the federal government. The 

federal government is engaged in a comprehensive review, reassessment, 

reprioritization, and as appropriate reengineering of what the 

government does, how it does business, and in some cases, who does the 

government’s business. Leading public and private organizations in the 

United States and abroad have found that for organizations to 

successfully transform themselves they must often fundamentally change 

their cultures so they are more results oriented, customer focused, and 

collaborative in nature.[Footnote 1] Ultimately, federal agencies will 

need to transform their cultures to meet the realities of a post-

September 11 environment and the challenges of the 21st century.



In response to the September 11 terrorist attacks, the Congress passed 

the Aviation and Transportation Security Act (ATSA) in November 2001, 

which created the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) as a new 

organization in the Department of Transportation (DOT). According to 

ATSA, TSA is responsible for security in aviation and other modes of 

transportation. In addition, ATSA requires TSA to implement specific 

practices that are intended to make it a results-oriented organization. 

Also in response to the September 11 terrorist attacks, the Congress 

created the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to better coordinate 

the United States’ efforts to combat terrorism. The creation of this 

department moves TSA and its responsibilities for security of all modes 

of transportation out of DOT and into the newly created DHS.



A key factor to help organizations achieve their missions and program 

results is to implement a positive control environment. A positive 

control environment provides discipline and structure as well as the 

climate that influences the quality of internal control. In essence, a 

positive control environment requires management and employees to 

establish a supportive attitude toward internal control and 

conscientious management. As such, effective internal control includes 

strategic planning, budget formulation and execution, organizational 

alignment and control, performance measurement, human capital, 

financial management, information technology, and acquisition.



At your request, this report describes TSA’s actions and plans for 

implementing the results-oriented practices required in ATSA and 

recommends next steps for TSA to take to build a results-oriented 

organizational culture and to establish a positive control environment. 

To address the objective of this report, we reviewed our models, 

guides, reports, and other products on strategic planning and 

performance measurement, strategic human capital management, 

transformation efforts, and other related areas to identify results-

oriented practices and recommend next steps for TSA. We next analyzed 

ATSA in relation to our products to identify any results-oriented 

practices that were statutorily required in the legislation. We 

interviewed officials from various TSA offices responsible for 

strategic planning, human capital, training, budget, public affairs, 

and policy, among others and reviewed TSA and DOT missions, performance 

goals and measures, performance agreements, policies and procedures, 

and organizational charts and other relevant documentation. For 

additional information on our scope and methodology, see appendix I.



This report addresses a part of your larger request for GAO to provide 

information on the extent to which TSA’s policies, procedures, and 

organizational structure are likely to ensure the adequate oversight of 

its workforce of air marshals, airline passenger and baggage screeners, 

and other security personnel, as well as other matters. We have 

testified before your committee and issued reports on TSA and aviation 

security that address issues included in your larger request. In an 

ongoing effort to provide real-time, constructive assistance to TSA, we 

provided TSA with our guides and reports on strategic planning and 

strategic human capital management. See related GAO products listed at 

the end of this report for a list of GAO reports, testimonies, guides, 

and other products related to TSA, transportation security, and 

results-oriented practices.



Results in Brief:



TSA has faced immense challenges in its first year of existence. In its 

first year, TSA has simultaneously started to build the infrastructure 

of a large organization as it focused primarily on meeting its aviation 

security deadlines. TSA reports that it met two of its most significant 

mandated deadlines--to deploy federal passenger screeners at airports 

across the nation by November 19, 2002 and to screen every piece of 

checked baggage for explosives by December 31, 2002.[Footnote 2] To 

date, TSA has recruited, hired, trained, and deployed over 44,000 

federal screeners to meet these deadlines. As TSA begins to take 

responsibility for security in the maritime and surface modes of 

transportation, its current and future challenge is to continue to 

build, sustain, and institutionalize the organizational capacity to 

help it achieve its current and future goals. In this regard, TSA has 

made an impressive start in implementing practices in:



* leadership commitment to creating a high-performing organization,



* strategic planning to establish results-oriented goals and measures,



* performance management to promote accountability for results,



* collaboration and communication to achieve national outcomes, and:



* public reporting and customer service to build citizen confidence.



These practices establish the foundation of a results-oriented culture 

that will remain critically important when TSA moves into the new DHS. 

Specifically, TSA has begun taking actions required in ATSA and used by 

leading organizations when they emphasize a focus on results. These 

actions lay the groundwork for “recommended next steps” that TSA can 

take to help reinforce a results-oriented culture. ATSA’s requirements, 

TSA’s actions and plans to implement them, and recommended next steps 

for each results-oriented practice are shown in table 1. We provided 

drafts of this report to officials from DOT, including TSA, for their 

review and comment. TSA’s Director of Strategic Management and Analysis 

provided oral comments on behalf of DOT and TSA generally agreeing with 

the contents, findings, and recommendations of the draft report. In 

addition to making minor technical clarifications, we made changes 

where appropriate to reflect progress TSA has made in the results-

oriented practices since the completion of our audit work.



Table 1: Summary of ATSA Requirements, TSA Actions and Plans, and 

Recommended Next Steps, by Results-Oriented Practice:



ATSA requirements: Leadership commitment to creating a high-performing 

organization: * Requires performance agreements between the Secretary 

of DOT and the Under Secretary of Transportation for Security and 

between the Under Secretary and TSA executives.; TSA actions and plans: 

Leadership commitment to creating a high-performing organization: * 

Stated leadership commitment to creating a results-oriented culture in 

its 180-day action plan.; * Expressed plans to use the Baldrige 

performance excellence criteria as a management tool to promote quality 

and performance.; * Established standardized performance agreements for 

TSA executives.; Recommended next steps: Leadership commitment to 

creating a high-performing organization: * Establish a performance 

agreement for the Under Secretary of Transportation for Security that 

articulates how bonuses will be tied to performance.; * Add 

expectations in performance agreements for top leadership to foster the 

culture of a high-performing organization..



ATSA requirements: Leadership commitment to creating a high-performing 

organization: * Requires a 5-year performance plan and annual 

performance report consistent with the principles of the Government 

Performance and Results Act.; TSA actions and plans: Leadership 

commitment to creating a high-performing organization: * Articulated 

vision, mission, values, strategic goal, and performance goals and 

measures.; * Developed automated system to collect performance data to 

demonstrate progress in meeting goals.; * Aligned aviation security 

performance goals and measures with DOT goals.; * Reported it submitted 

its first annual performance report.; Recommended next steps: 

Leadership commitment to creating a high-performing organization: * 

Establish security performance goals and measures for all modes of 

transportation as part of a strategic planning process that involves 

stakeholders.; * Apply practices that have been shown to provide useful 

information in agency performance plans..



ATSA requirements: Leadership commitment to creating a high-performing 

organization: * Requires a performance management system.; * Requires 

performance agreements for all employees that include organizational 

and individual goals.; TSA actions and plans: Leadership commitment to 

creating a high-performing organization: * Established an interim 

performance management system.; * Created standardized performance 

agreements for groups of employees that include organizational and 

individual goals and standards of performance.; Recommended next steps: 

Leadership commitment to creating a high-performing organization: * 

Build on the current performance agreements to achieve additional 

benefits.; * Ensure the permanent performance management system makes 

meaningful distinctions in performance.; * Involve employees in 

developing its permanent performance management system..



ATSA requirements: Leadership commitment to creating a high-performing 

organization: * Requires TSA to work within and outside the government 

to accomplish its mission.; * Establishes a Transportation Security 

Oversight Board to facilitate collaboration and communication.; TSA 

actions and plans: Leadership commitment to creating a high-performing 

organization: * Established Offices of Security Regulation and Policy, 

Communications and Public Information, Law Enforcement and Security 

Liaison, and Legislative Affairs to collaborate and communicate with 

stakeholders.; * Convened the Oversight Board, which has met twice.; * 

Stated plans to use memorandums of understanding and memorandums of 

agreement to formalize roles and responsibilities of TSA and other 

agencies in transportation security.; Recommended next steps: 

Leadership commitment to creating a high-performing organization: * 

Define more clearly the collaboration and communication roles and 

responsibilities of TSA’s various offices.; * Formalize roles and 

responsibilities among governmental entities for transportation 

security..



ATSA requirements: Leadership commitment to creating a high-performing 

organization: * Requires a 180-day action plan and two progress reports 

within 6 months of enactment.; TSA actions and plans: Leadership 

commitment to creating a high-performing organization: * Submitted 180-

day action plan and both progress reports within established time 

frames.; * Maintains a Web site to provide information to the public.; 

* Created ombudsman position to serve customers.; * Developed measures 

to track customer satisfaction.; * Reviewed and eliminated security 

procedures that do not enhance security or customer service.; * Stated 

plans to develop a customer satisfaction index to analyze customer 

opinions to improve performance.; Recommended next steps: Leadership 

commitment to creating a high-performing organization: * Fill the 

ombudsman position to facilitate responsiveness of TSA to the public.; 

* Continue to develop and implement mechanisms, such as the customer 

satisfaction index, to gauge customer satisfaction and improve customer 

service..



[End of table]



Source: GAO analysis.



Background:



Unlike other federal organizations that must transform their existing 

cultures, TSA has the opportunity to create a culture that fosters high 

performance from the outset. For TSA, this means creating a culture 

that focuses on:



* results rather than processes;



* matrixes rather than stovepipes;



* an external (citizen, customer, and stakeholder) perspective rather 

than an inward perspective;



* employee empowerment rather than micromanagement;



* risk management rather than risk avoidance; and:



* knowledge sharing rather than knowledge hoarding.



TSA is an organization facing immense challenges to simultaneously 

build the infrastructure of a large government agency responsible for 

security in all modes of transportation and meet unprecedented 

deadlines required in ATSA to federalize aviation security. Two of the 

most significant deadlines require TSA to:



* deploy federal passenger screeners at security checkpoints at 429 

airports across the nation by November 19, 2002, and:



* install explosives detection systems to screen every piece of checked 

baggage for explosives no later than December 31, 2002.



In July 2002, we testified before your committee on the progress TSA 

has made in enhancing aviation security and in meeting the deadlines to 

deploy federal screeners at security checkpoints and to install 

explosives detection systems.[Footnote 3] At that time, we reported 

that while TSA’s efforts were well underway to hire and train thousands 

of key security personnel, including federal screeners and security 

directors, TSA had experienced unexpected delays in finding and hiring 

security screener personnel who met the requirements of ATSA.[Footnote 

4] We also reported that while TSA had made progress in checking all 

bags for explosives and planning for the purchase and installation of 

explosives detection equipment, TSA had not kept pace with planned 

milestones to meet congressional deadlines for using explosives 

detection systems to screen 100 percent of checked baggage. In 

addition, we reported that TSA had not fully implemented the 

responsibilities required in ATSA such as the security of other modes 

of transportation, cargo security, and general aviation security. 

Finally, we also observed that the move of TSA from DOT to a DHS poses 

further challenges that may delay progress on meeting mandated 

deadlines and addressing other security vulnerabilities in the nation’s 

transportation system.



TSA and DOT leadership have also testified before the Congress at 

several hearings on challenges TSA was facing as it tried to meet its 

deadlines and other transportation security responsibilities while 

establishing itself as a federal organization.[Footnote 5] Leadership 

stated that one of TSA’s challenges is to build a large organization 

from the ground up. Specifically, in January 2002, TSA only had 

approximately 15 employees of the more than 60,000 it reported it would 

need by the end of 2002. In addition, the Under Secretary of 

Transportation for Security testified that at that time the 

congressionally mandated cap on the number of employees it can employ 

of 45,000 would limit its ability to meet the deadlines. TSA also 

testified on the need for additional funding to meet its security 

responsibilities and the delays it experienced in receiving this 

funding. According to TSA and DOT, delays in funding and restrictions 

on the use of the additional funding at that time had undermined TSA’s 

ability to meet the deadlines. DOT leadership stated that TSA is 

especially disadvantaged by operating under a continuing resolution 

because it does not have money from previous years to help bridge the 

gaps between programmatic needs and the funding it receives under the 

continuing resolution.



When the Congress created TSA, it required practices consistent with 

other government initiatives to restructure their agencies in order to 

instill results-oriented organizational cultures. In the United States 

and abroad, governments have restructured their agencies to improve the 

delivery of government services and clarify accountability for results. 

During the 1980s and 1990s, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation 

and Development reported that its member countries increased efforts to 

restructure their public sector organizations for results.[Footnote 6] 

Among member countries, restructured organizations represent about 50 

percent, sometimes as high as 75 percent, of public expenditure and 

public servants.



In 1988, the United Kingdom started to restructure its government 

agencies to increase their focus on accountability and improve customer 

service. Called “executive agencies,” these restructured agencies are 

still the predominant form of service delivery in the United Kingdom. 

As of December 2001, there were over 130 executive agencies covering 

more than three-quarters of the British civil service. In July 2002, 

the Prime Minister’s Office of Public Services Reform reviewed the 

performance of these executive agencies and set out to identify 

management principles that may have contributed to their 

success.[Footnote 7] The Prime Minister’s Office concluded that the 

restructured executive agency model has been a success and the 

management principles underlying the restructured agencies continue to 

be highly relevant. These principles are: (1) a clear focus on 

delivering specified goals within a framework of accountability, (2) 

responsibility for performance resting clearly with the chief executive 

and agency staff, and (3) an agency focus that is outward rather than 

inward.



In the 1990s, the Congress recognized the need to restructure federal 

agencies and to hold them accountable for achieving program 

results.[Footnote 8] To this end, the Congress established performance-

based organizations (PBOs), modeled after the United Kingdom’s 

executive agencies: the Office of Student Financial Assistance, United 

States Patent and Trademark Office, and Air Traffic Organization. 

Designed in statute, PBOs were to commit to clear management objectives 

and specific targets for improved performance. These clearly defined 

performance goals, coupled with direct ties between the achievement of 

performance goals and the pay and tenure of the head of the PBO and 

other senior managers, were intended to lead to improved performance. 

Specifically, the head of the PBO is appointed for a set term, subject 

to annual performance agreements, and eligible for bonuses for improved 

organizational performance.



Similarly for TSA, the Congress required an Under Secretary to be 

appointed for a 5-year term to manage TSA who is entitled to a bonus 

based on performance; measurable goals to be outlined in a 5-year 

performance plan and reported annually; a performance management system 

to include individual and organizational goals for managers and 

employees; an annual performance agreement for the Under Secretary, 

senior managers, and staff; an oversight board to facilitate 

communication and collaboration; and public reporting requirements to 

build citizen confidence.



TSA will be 1 of over 20 originating agencies or their components with 

differing missions, cultures, systems, and procedures that are to move 

into DHS. The newly created DHS is the most recent manifestation of the 

continuing consideration of how best to restructure government to 

respond to the challenges of the 21ST century. At a GAO-sponsored forum 

on mergers and transformation, participants observed that people and 

cultural issues are at the center of successful mergers and 

transformations.[Footnote 9] The importance of these issues should not 

be avoided, but aggressively addressed at the outset and throughout the 

process.



TSA Actions and Plans to Implement Selected Results-Oriented Practices:



Within its first year of existence, TSA has made an impressive start in 

implementing practices that can create a results-oriented 

organizational culture and help TSA as it begins to take responsibility 

for the security of the maritime and surface modes of transportation. 

These practices include:



* leadership commitment to creating a high-performing organization,



* strategic planning to establish results-oriented goals and measures,



* performance management to promote accountability for results,



* collaboration and communication to achieve national outcomes, and:



* public reporting and customer service to build citizen confidence.



TSA’s actions and plans to implement the results-oriented practices 

required in ATSA and recommended next steps that can help TSA build a 

results-oriented culture are described on the following pages.



Leadership Commitment to Creating a High-Performing Organization:



A critical element and the foundation of TSA’s successful 

implementation of results-oriented practices will be the demonstrated 

and sustained commitment of its top leaders. Ultimately, successful 

organizations understand that they must often change their culture to 

successfully transform themselves, and that such a change starts with 

top leadership. Top leadership involvement is essential to overcoming 

an organization’s natural resistance to change, marshalling the 

resources needed in many cases to improve management, and building and 

maintaining the organizationwide commitment to new ways of doing 

business. At a recent GAO-sponsored roundtable, we reported on the 

necessity to elevate attention, integrate various efforts, and 

institutionalize accountability to lead efforts to fundamentally 

transform an agency and address key management functions at the highest 

appropriate level in the organization.[Footnote 10] At TSA, the 

leadership faces a daunting challenge to create this results-oriented 

culture. From the outset, this challenge was exacerbated by the change 

in TSA’s head position, the Under Secretary of Transportation for 

Security, just 8 months after the organization was established. TSA has 

continually stated its commitment to becoming a high-performing 

organization, and has reinforced that commitment in its performance 

agreements for TSA executives.



TSA leadership has expressed its commitment to creating a results-

oriented organizational culture. Specifically, in its 180-day action 

plan report to the Congress outlining goals and milestones for defining 

acceptable levels of performance in aviation security, TSA stated that 

it is committed to “being a leading-edge, performance-based 

organization--an organization whose operative culture establishes 

performance expectations that support the mission, drives those 

expectations into organizational and individual performance plans, and 

collects objective data to assess its performance.”:



TSA leadership also plans to use the Baldrige performance excellence 

criteria as a management tool to promote an awareness of quality and 

performance in TSA.[Footnote 11] These criteria are: leadership, 

strategic planning, customer and market focus, information and 

analysis, human resource focus, process management, and business 

results. TSA leadership hired a former Baldrige award application 

examiner to be TSA’s Chief Quality Officer and to head the Office of 

Quality Performance. According to TSA officials, the Office of Quality 

Performance will serve as internal consultants to TSA management to 

help them use the Baldrige criteria as a tool to create a culture 

focused on performance.



To hold TSA’s leadership accountable for achieving results, ATSA 

requires TSA to establish a performance agreement between the Under 

Secretary and the Secretary of DOT that includes organizational and 

individual performance goals. A TSA official told us that as of 

November 2002, no performance agreement had been finalized for the 

Under Secretary since the current Under Secretary has been acting in 

the position.[Footnote 12] During times of transition, high-performing 

organizations recognize that performance agreements can reinforce 

accountability for organizational goals.[Footnote 13] To this end, when 

TSA moves into its new parent department, DHS, TSA can use performance 

agreements to maintain a consistent focus on its goals. ATSA also 

allows for the Under Secretary to receive a bonus for any calendar year 

up to 30 percent of the annual rate of pay, based on a performance 

evaluation. However, TSA’s interim performance management system does 

not specifically address performance bonuses for the head of TSA.



In addition, ATSA requires TSA to establish performance agreements 

between TSA’s Under Secretary and his or her executives that set 

organizational and individual performance goals. TSA has created a 

standardized performance agreement for TSA executives as a part of its 

interim performance management system. TSA’s executive agreements 

include both organizational and individual goals, as shown in figure 1. 

For example, each executive performance agreement includes an 

organizational goal such as to maintain the nation’s air security and 

ensure an emphasis on customer satisfaction. The agreement also 

includes individual goals, such as to meet or exceed requirements for 

satisfactory performance and to demonstrate commitment to civil rights. 

In addition, the agreement includes competencies, such as to provide 

leadership in setting the workforce’s expected performance levels and 

ensure that the executive’s work unit contributes to the accomplishment 

of TSA’s mission. TSA can strengthen these performance agreements by 

setting explicit targets that are directly linked to organizational 

goals.



Figure 1: Standardized Performance Agreement for TSA Executives:



[See PDF for image] 



[End of figure] 



Source: TSA.



Governmentwide, to help hold senior executives accountable for 

organizational results, federal agencies are to establish performance 

management systems that (1) hold senior executives accountable for 

their individual and organizational performance by linking performance 

management with the results-oriented goals of the Government 

Performance and Results Act (GPRA); (2) evaluate senior executive 

performance using measures that balance organizational results with 

customer satisfaction, employee perspectives, and any other measures 

agencies decide are appropriate; and (3) use performance results as a 

basis for pay, awards, and other personnel decisions. We have found 

that progress is needed in explicitly linking senior executive 

expectations for performance to results-oriented organizational goals 

and greater emphasis should be placed in fostering the necessary 

collaboration both within and across organizational boundaries to 

achieve results.[Footnote 14] Furthermore, a specific performance 

expectation to lead and facilitate change could be a critical element 

as agencies transform themselves to succeed in an environment that is 

more results oriented, less hierarchical, and more integrated.



Recommended Next Steps:



Establish a performance agreement for the Under Secretary of 

Transportation for Security that articulates how bonuses will be tied 

to performance. To hold the Under Secretary accountable for achieving 

results, DOT, or the new parent department DHS, should create a 

performance agreement for the Under Secretary that includes 

organizational and individual goals and also articulates how bonuses 

for the Under Secretary will be tied to his performance in achieving 

the goals in the performance agreement.



Add expectations in performance agreements for top leadership to foster 

the culture of a high-performing organization. Successful organizations 

understand that top leadership performance and accountability are 

critical to their success and to the success of the federal 

government’s transformation. TSA can strengthen its current performance 

agreements for top leadership, including the Under Secretary and senior 

executives, by adding performance expectations that:



* establish explicit targets directly linked to organizational goals,



* foster the necessary collaboration within and across organizational 

boundaries to achieve results, and:



* demonstrate commitment to lead and facilitate change.



Strategic Planning to Establish Results-Oriented Goals and Measures:



Strategic planning is a continuous, dynamic, and inclusive process that 

provides the foundation for the fundamental results the organization 

seeks to achieve. ATSA’s requirements for TSA are consistent with the 

results-oriented planning and reporting principles embodied in GPRA. 

GPRA provides a strategic planning and management framework intended to 

improve federal performance and hold agencies accountable for achieving 

results. Effective implementation of this framework requires agencies 

to clearly establish results-oriented performance goals in strategic 

and annual performance plans for which they will be held accountable, 

measure progress towards those goals, determine the strategies and 

resources to effectively accomplish the goals, use performance 

information to make the programmatic decisions necessary to improve 

performance, and formally communicate results in performance reports. 

Specifically, ATSA requires TSA to submit to the Congress a 5-year 

performance plan and an annual performance report, but does not specify 

when these documents are to be submitted to the Congress.



TSA has taken the first steps to establishing the performance planning 

and reporting framework consistent with GPRA. The starting point for 

the framework envisioned under GPRA is the strategic plan that 

describes an organization’s mission, outcome-oriented strategic goals, 

strategies to achieve these goals, and key factors beyond the agency’s 

control that could impact the goals’ achievement, among other things. 

According to TSA officials, TSA is currently developing its strategic 

plan. TSA has, however, made components of its plan public. TSA has 

articulated its mission, vision, and values. TSA’s mission is to 

protect the nation’s transportation systems to ensure freedom of 

movement for people and commerce. TSA’s vision is to continuously set 

the standard for excellence in transportation security through people, 

processes, and technologies and its values are integrity, innovation, 

courtesy and respect, competence, customer focus, dedication, 

diversity, and teamwork. In addition, TSA has set an overall strategic 

goal: to prevent intentional harm or disruption to the transportation 

system by terrorists or other persons intending to cause harm. To 

support this strategic goal, TSA has defined three performance goals:



* meeting the ATSA mandates to federalize transportation security,



* maintaining and improving aviation security, and:



* servicing TSA customers.



To demonstrate its progress toward meeting its performance goals, TSA 

established an initial set of 32 performance measures. For example, 

TSA’s primary performance measures for its performance goal to maintain 

and improve aviation security are the percentage of bags screened by 

explosives detection systems and the percentage of trained screeners. 

Other measures to complement these primary measures include the 

percentage of explosives detection systems deployed, the percentage of 

screeners with 60 hours of on-the-job training completed, and the 

percentage of screeners compliant with training standards. TSA plans to 

develop more outcome-oriented goals and measures in fiscal year 2003 

and is in the process of finalizing strategies to achieve its goals.



To report on its progress in meeting its performance goals and 

measures, TSA has begun to build the capacity to gather and use 

organizational performance information. TSA has installed an automated 

performance management information system, which became operational in 

April 2002 and is designed to collect and report data on TSA’s 

performance measures. Data will be collected from federal security 

directors, security screener supervisors, and headquarters officials 

and reported through Web-based reports designed for internal decision 

making and external reporting. According to TSA officials, the system 

will be expanded to include goals and measures related to all modes of 

transportation in upcoming fiscal years. As required by ATSA, TSA 

reported on November 19, 2002, that it submitted its first annual 

performance report.



TSA has linked its aviation security performance goals to those of its 

parent department, DOT, to provide a clear, direct understanding of how 

the achievement of its performance goals will lead to the achievement 

of DOT’s strategic goal for homeland security, as shown in figure 2. 

Specifically, TSA’s performance goals to federalize and maintain and 

improve aviation security are intended to contribute to DOT’s 

performance goal to “reduce vulnerability to crime and terrorism and 

promote regional stability” and its strategic goal on homeland 

security, to “ensure the security of the transportation system for the 

movement of people and goods and support the National Security 

Strategy.” As TSA establishes its performance goals for other modes of 

transportation, it should continue to align its goals with DOT’s goals. 

When TSA moves to DHS, it will be necessary to maintain goal alignment 

with its new parent department.



Figure 2: DOT and TSA Goal Alignment for Aviation Security:



[See PDF for image] - graphic text:



[End of figure] - graphic text:



GPRA requires agencies to consult with the Congress and solicit the 

views of other stakeholders as they develop their strategic 

plans.[Footnote 15] However, TSA has stated few plans to involve 

stakeholders in its strategic planning process. Such consultations 

provide an important opportunity for TSA and the Congress to work 

together to ensure that agency missions are focused, goal are specific 

and results oriented, and strategies and funding expectations are 

appropriate and reasonable. Results-oriented organizations also 

recognize that it is important to broaden stakeholder involvement to 

create a basic understanding among stakeholders of competing goals. As 

TSA works to meet its goals, it will continue to face ongoing 

challenges to balance aviation security against customer service. While 

TSA needs to screen passengers and baggage carefully to meet its goal 

to maintain the security of the aviation system, it must efficiently 

move customers and their baggage through the aviation system to 

minimize passenger inconvenience to encourage them to continue using 

air transportation.



Recommended Next Steps:



Establish security performance goals and measures for all modes of 

transportation as part of a strategic planning process that involves 

stakeholders. Stakeholder involvement, and specifically congressional 

consultation, is particularly important for TSA in its strategic 

planning process given the importance of its mission and the necessity 

to establish additional goals to address other modes of transportation. 

In addition, TSA operates in a complex political environment where 

there will be the ongoing need to balance the sometimes conflicting 

goals of security and customer service.



We identified approaches that can enhance the usefulness of 

consultations between TSA and the Congress that can also apply to 

consultations with external stakeholders.[Footnote 16] Among the 

approaches are the following.



* Engage the right people. Including people who are knowledgeable about 

the topic at hand, such as TSA officials who are knowledgeable about 

particular transportation modes and specific programs, is important 

when consulting with the Congress and other stakeholders.



* Address differing views. Stakeholders may have differing views on 

what they believe the level of detail discussed during consultation 

meetings should be. For example, participants may want to engage in 

discussion that goes beyond TSA’s mission to the appropriate balance 

between enforcing security and servicing passengers.



* Establish a consultation process that is iterative. All parties 

involved in transportation security recognize that the consultation 

process should be continuous and they should meet as many times as both 

sides feel are necessary to reach a reasonable consensus on TSA’s 

strategic and performance goals to address transportation security.



Apply practices that have been shown to provide useful information in 

agency performance plans. Results-oriented organizations focus on the 

process of performance planning rather than the planning documents 

themselves. GPRA was intended, in part, to improve congressional 

decision making by giving the Congress comprehensive and reliable 

information on the extent to which federal programs are fulfilling 

their statutory intent. We have identified practices that TSA can apply 

to ensure the usefulness of its required 5-year performance plan to TSA 

managers, the Congress, and other decision makers and interested 

parties.[Footnote 17] Table 2 outlines these practices.



Table 2: Summary of Opportunities to Help Ensure Useful Annual Plans 

and Applied Practices:



Opportunities to help ensure useful annual plans: Articulate a results 

orientation.; Applied practices: 1. Create a set of performance goals 

and measures that addresses important dimensions of program performance 

and balances competing priorities.; 2. Use intermediate goals and 

measures to show progress or contribution to intended results.; 3. 

Include explanatory information on the goals and measures.; 4. Develop 

performance goals to address mission-critical management problems.; 5. 

Show baseline and trend data for past performance.; 6. Identify 

projected target levels of performance for multiyear goals.; 7. Link 

the goals of component organizations to departmental strategic goals..



Opportunities to help ensure useful annual plans: Coordinate cross-

cutting programs.; Applied practices: 8. Identify programs that 

contribute to the same or similar results.; 9. Set complementary 

performance goals to show how differing program strategies are mutually 

reinforcing and establish common or complementary performance measures, 

as appropriate.; 10. Describe--briefly or refer to a separate document-

-planned coordination strategies..



Opportunities to help ensure useful annual plans: Show how strategies 

will be used to achieve goals.; Applied practices: 11. Link strategies 

and programs to specific performance goals and describe how they will 

contribute to the achievement of those goals.; 12. Describe strategies 

to leverage or mitigate the effects of external factors on the 

accomplishment of performance goals.; 13. Discuss strategies to resolve 

mission-critical management problems.; 14. Discuss--briefly or refer to 

a separate document--plans to ensure that mission-critical processes 

and information systems function properly and are secure..



Opportunities to help ensure useful annual plans: Show performance 

consequences of budget and other resource decisions.; Applied 

practices: 15. Show how budgetary resources relate to the achievement 

of performance goals.; 16. Discuss--briefly and refer to the agency 

capital plan--how proposed capital assets (specifically information 

technology investments) will contribute to achieving performance 

goals.; 17. Discuss--briefly or refer to a separate plan--how the 

agency will use its human capital..



Opportunities to help ensure useful annual plans: Build the capacity to 

gather and use performance information.; Applied practices: 18. 

Identify internal and external sources for data.; 19. Describe efforts 

to verify and validate performance data.; 20. Identity actions to 

compensate for unavailable or low-quality data.; 21. Discuss 

implications of data limitations for assessing performance..



[End of table]



Source: GAO/GGD/AIMD-99-69.



Performance Management to Promote Accountability for Results:



TSA has an opportunity to use its individual performance management 

system as a strategic tool to drive internal change and achieve 

external results. TSA, as a new organization, has a critical challenge 

in 

(1) integrating potentially more than 60,000 employees into a new 

organization, (2) creating a common culture, and (3) achieving its 

security, customer satisfaction, and related performance goals in an 

effective, efficient, and economical manner. The individual performance 

management system can be an essential tool in meeting all three of the 

above. To help agency leaders manage their people and integrate human 

capital considerations into daily decision making and the program 

results they seek to achieve, we developed a strategic human capital 

model.[Footnote 18] The model highlights the kinds of thinking that 

agencies should apply, as well as some of the steps they can take, to 

make progress in managing human capital strategically. In our model, we 

identify two critical success factors that can assist organizations in 

creating results-oriented cultures: (1) a “line of sight” showing how 

unit and individual performance link to organizational goals and (2) 

the inclusiveness of employees. TSA can apply these factors to its 

performance management system to help create a results-oriented 

culture.



ATSA requires TSA to establish a performance management system that is 

to strengthen the organization’s effectiveness by providing for the 

establishment of goals for managers, employees, and the organization 

that are consistent with the agency’s performance plan. TSA used the 

Federal Aviation Administration’s system until it established its own 

system in July 2002, when TSA leadership approved an interim employee 

performance management system. The interim system is to remain in place 

until a permanent system is created and implemented. As of November 

2002, TSA had not established a time frame for implementing its 

permanent performance management system.



TSA’s interim system provides specific requirements for planning 

individual performance, monitoring that performance, determining 

employee development needs, appraising performance, and recognizing and 

rewarding performance, as shown in figure 3. For example, at the 

beginning of the appraisal cycle, employees’ expectations are to be 

established using a performance agreement; throughout the cycle 

supervisors are to monitor performance; halfway through the performance 

cycle supervisors are to provide feedback to employees and identify 

employee development needs; and at the end of the cycle, supervisors 

are to appraise performance at two levels: fully satisfactory and 

unacceptable. Employees may then receive a bonus or other incentive if 

their performance is at the fully satisfactory level. TSA’s first 

appraisal cycle ended November 15, 2002.



Figure 3: TSA’s Interim Performance Management System:



[See PDF for image] - graphic text:



[End of figure] - graphic text:



In addition, ATSA requires that TSA’s performance agreements for its 

employees include individual and organizational goals. These 

performance agreements can help TSA align individual and organizational 

goals and establish the line of sight that helps create a results-

oriented culture. TSA has created standardized performance agreements 

for groups of employees including transportation security screeners, 

supervisory transportation security screeners, supervisors, and 

executives. These performance agreements include a consistent set of 

organizational goals, individual goals, and standards for satisfactory 

performance. Supervisors may customize performance agreements for the 

individual job by adding additional organizational and individual goals 

and standards of performance. For example, the standardized performance 

agreement for security screeners includes two organizational goals: (1) 

to improve and maintain the security of American air travel by 

effectively deterring or preventing successful terrorist (or other) 

incidents on aircraft and at airports, with minimal disruption to 

transportation and complete service to travelers and (2) to ensure an 

emphasis on customer satisfaction while maintaining the nation’s air 

security. In addition, the standardized performance agreement for 

security screeners includes an individual goal to consistently meet or 

exceed the basic proficiency requirements by:



* vigilantly carrying out duties with utmost attention to tasks that 

will prevent security threats,



* demonstrating the highest levels of courtesy to travelers and working 

to maximize their levels of satisfaction with TSA services,



* working as an effective team member at assigned post to ensure that 

security violations do not get past the team,



* contributing to the accomplishment of TSA’s mission and vision,



* behaving in a way that supports TSA’s values, and:



* demonstrating the highest level of concern for the civil rights of 

coworkers and the traveling public.



Finally, the agreement includes standards for satisfactory performance 

for security screeners. Standards include (1) completing all required 

training successfully and as scheduled, performing satisfactorily on 

required proficiency reviews, and passing operational testing 

satisfactorily and 

(2) performing security functions in an effective and timely manner in 

accordance with TSA prescribed guidelines.



As described in our strategic human capital model, in addition to and 

concurrent with the first critical success factor of creating a line of 

sight showing how unit and individual performance link to 

organizational goals, successful organizations involve employees to 

build results-oriented cultures. This critical success factor is 

especially timely for TSA as it transitions from its interim 

performance management system and finalizes its permanent system. 

Particularly when developing a new results-oriented performance 

management system, leading organizations have found that actively 

involving employees can build confidence and belief in the system. We 

reported that when reforming their performance management systems, 

agencies in other countries consulted a wide range of stakeholders 

early in the process, obtained feedback directly from employees, and 

engaged employee unions or associations.[Footnote 19]



Recommended Next Steps:



Build on the current performance agreements to achieve additional 

benefits. Successful organizations design and implement performance 

management systems that align individual employee performance 

expectations with agency goals so that individuals understand the 

connections between their daily activities and their organization’s 

success. While TSA has created standardized performance agreements for 

groups of employees as a part of its interim performance management 

system, it can also use its performance agreements to achieve benefits 

by doing the following.[Footnote 20]



* Strengthen alignment of results-oriented goals with daily operations. 

Performance agreements can define accountability for specific goals and 

help align daily operations with agencies’ results-oriented 

programmatic goals. As TSA continues to develop and gain experience 

with performance agreements, TSA should ensure an explicit link exists 

between individual performance expectations and organizational goals 

for all employees. For example, while TSA lists certain competencies 

for individuals that are related to organizational goals such as 

demonstrating the highest level of courtesy to travelers, the next step 

is to set individual targets to meet the organizational goals.



* Foster collaboration across organizational boundaries. Performance 

agreements can encourage employees to work across traditional 

organizational boundaries or “silos” by focusing on the achievement of 

organizationwide goals. For example, as TSA continues to assume 

responsibility for security in all modes of transportation, TSA can use 

employee performance agreements to set expectations that encourage 

employees to work collaboratively to achieve cross-cutting 

transportation security goals.



* Enhance opportunities to discuss and routinely use performance 

information to make program improvements. Performance agreements can 

facilitate communication about organizational performance and pinpoint 

opportunities to improve performance. TSA’s performance management 

process offers several opportunities to discuss an individual’s 

performance and how that individual can contribute to TSA’s goals when 

meeting to set performance expectations, reviewing midyear progress, 

and assessing performance at year-end. These formal expectation, 

feedback, and assessment sessions are important to clarify 

responsibility and accountability. As a next step, TSA can ensure that 

it uses its performance agreements as a critical component of its 

performance management process to have on-going, two-way consultations 

between employees and their supervisors. In other words, strategic 

performance management--a performance management system that is tied to 

organizational goals--is not just a once-or twice-a-year formal 

occurrence, but rather is ongoing and routine.



* Provide a results-oriented basis for individual accountability. 

Performance agreements can serve as the basis for performance 

evaluations. An assessment of performance against the performance 

agreement can provide TSA and its employees the data needed to better 

achieve organizational goals.



* Maintain continuity of program goals during transitions. Performance 

agreements help to maintain a consistent focus on a set of broad 

programmatic priorities during changes in leadership and organization. 

TSA can use its process for developing performance agreements as a tool 

to communicate priorities and instill those priorities throughout the 

organization during periods of transition.



Ensure the permanent performance management system makes meaningful 

distinctions in performance. In addition to providing candid and 

constructive feedback to help individual employees maximize their 

potential in understanding and realizing goals and objectives of the 

agency, an effective performance management system provides management 

with the objective and fact-based information it needs to reward top 

performers and the necessary information and documentation to deal with 

poor performers. Under TSA’s interim performance management system, 

employee performance is appraised at only two levels--fully 

satisfactory and unacceptable. We have observed that such a pass/fail 

system does not provide enough meaningful information and dispersion in 

ratings to recognize and reward top performers, help everyone attain 

their maximum potential, and deal with poor performers.[Footnote 21] As 

a next step, TSA should consider appraisal systems with more than two 

standards of performance. By using its performance agreements as the 

basis in making distinctions in performance, TSA can have objective and 

fact-based information and the documentation necessary to have an 

effective performance management system.



Involve employees in developing its permanent performance management 

system. TSA has the opportunity to create a culture that values the 

importance of employees to help TSA achieve its goals. Employee 

involvement improves the quality of the system by providing a front 

line perspective and helping to create organizationwide understanding 

and ownership. In addition, even after TSA develops its permanent 

performance management system, involving employees in the process can 

help employees perceive that the system is fair.



We have identified practices that organizations can apply to further 

involve employees.[Footnote 22] The practices TSA can adopt to promote 

inclusiveness and encourage employee ownership for the permanent 

performance management system include the following.



* Seek employee input. Leading organizations not only provide 

information to employees but also commonly seek their employees’ input 

on a periodic basis and explicitly address and use that input to adjust 

their human capital practices. As TSA matures as an organization it can 

collect feedback using employee satisfaction surveys, focus groups, 

employee advisory councils, and/or employee task forces.



* Involve employees in planning and sharing performance information. 

Involving employees in the planning process to develop agency goals 

helps to increase employees’ understanding and acceptance of them and 

improve motivation and morale. For TSA, employees’ understanding and 

acceptance of its goals is particularly important because they are to 

be held accountable for achieving the goals set out in their 

performance agreements.



Collaboration and Communication to Achieve National Outcomes:



Virtually all of the results that the federal government strives to 

achieve require the concerted and coordinated efforts of two or more 

agencies. Thus, similar to virtually all federal agencies, TSA must 

collaborate and communicate with stakeholders within and outside the 

government to achieve meaningful results, and participate in matrixed 

relationships--or networks of governmental, private sector, and 

nongovernmental organizations working together--to achieve its goals. 

This collaboration and communication will be even more important given 

the complex nature of national security-related goals.



ATSA requires TSA to collaborate and communicate with organizations 

across the government and in the private sector to accomplish its 

mission. For example, ATSA requires TSA to do the following.



* Work with the Federal Aviation Administration to establish procedures 

for notifying its Administrator and others of the identity of 

individuals known to pose, or suspected of posing, a risk of air piracy 

or terrorism or a threat to airline or passenger safety.



* Enter into memorandums of understanding with federal agencies or 

other entities to share or otherwise cross-check data on individuals 

identified on federal agency databases who may pose a risk to 

transportation or national security.



* Coordinate with federal agencies and air carriers to require air 

carriers to use information from government agencies to identify 

individuals on passenger lists who may be a threat to civil aviation or 

national security; and if such an individual is identified, notify 

appropriate law enforcement agencies, prevent the individual from 

boarding an aircraft, or take other appropriate action with respect to 

that individual.



TSA has established a number of offices to collaborate and communicate 

with external stakeholders.



* The Office of Security Regulation and Policy is to coordinate with 

TSA’s offices and stakeholders on policy, rulemaking, and customer 

service issues.



* The Office of Communications and Public Information is to serve as an 

advisor to senior leadership on the public impacts of major policy 

decisions, internal audience concerns, and community reaction to and 

civilian news media interest in TSA missions and functions.



* The Office of Law Enforcement and Security Liaison is to serve as the 

national level liaison with federal, state, and local law enforcement 

and the international community and is to administer TSA’s Freedom of 

Information Act requirement, which allows the public to request 

information about TSA policies, procedures, operations, and decisions, 

among other things and TSA’s Privacy Act requirement, which allows the 

public to request any records that the government has about the 

individual making the request.



* The Office of Legislative Affairs is to be responsible for working 

and communicating with the Congress.



TSA has experienced some challenges with collaboration and 

communication. According to TSA officials, TSA is still defining and 

clarifying the specific roles and responsibilities of the offices that 

are to communicate with stakeholders. As of December 2002, TSA did not 

have written guidance to provide information about TSA communication 

roles and responsibilities to other TSA employees or to external 

stakeholders. In addition, the Under Secretary testified that there 

were some problems with reaching stakeholders in the past, specifically 

the airlines and airports.[Footnote 23] The Under Secretary recognized 

that collaboration with these and other stakeholders is important to 

ensure aviation security and made a personal commitment that TSA will 

make a concerted effort to communicate better with stakeholders. In 

September 2002, we briefed the staff of the Committee on Transportation 

and Infrastructure, U.S. House of Representatives, that some officials 

at selected airports told us that they had not received clear and 

comprehensive guidance from TSA on issues concerning the feasibility of 

meeting the baggage screening deadline.



TSA officials that we spoke to are aware of the importance of 

collaboration and communication across the government. According to TSA 

officials, the primary tools TSA will use to formally collaborate with 

governmental entities are memorandums of agreement and memorandums of 

understanding. They are developing memorandums of agreement with the 

other modal administrations within DOT. TSA officials told us that they 

also plan to develop memorandums of agreement and memorandums of 

understanding with local law enforcement agencies, the Department of 

Defense, the Department of State, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, 

the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the Federal Emergency Management 

Agency, and the Customs Service, among others. They told us that the 

purposes of the memorandums are to delineate clear lines of authority 

and responsibility between parties; improve services to DOT’s modal 

administrations, other federal, state, and local agencies, 

nongovernmental stakeholders, and the American public; and achieve 

national performance security goals, among other purposes. TSA plans to 

complete the memorandums no later than March 1, 2003.



As an additional mechanism to facilitate collaboration and 

communication, ATSA established the Transportation Security Oversight 

Board. According to ATSA, the Board, which must meet at least every 3 

months, should consist of cabinet heads; directors; high-ranking 

officials and/or their designees from DOT, the Department of Defense, 

the Department of Justice, the Department of the Treasury, and the 

Central Intelligence Agency; and presidentially appointed 

representatives from the National Security Council and the Office of 

Homeland Security. The Secretary of Transportation is to be the 

chairperson of the Board.[Footnote 24] The Board’s responsibilities 

include, among other things, reviewing transportation plans; 

facilitating the coordination of intelligence, security, and law 

enforcement activities affecting transportation; and facilitating the 

sharing of intelligence, security, and law enforcement information 

affecting transportation. The Board, established within DOT, met twice 

in 2002. TSA officials noted that the Board is an excellent mechanism 

to share information with national security agencies across government 

and has helped focus the national security community on the threats to 

the transportation system, which TSA believes is a critical element of 

meeting the mandates in ATSA.



Recommended Next Steps:



Define more clearly the collaboration and communication roles and 

responsibilities of TSA’s various offices. To help ensure collaboration 

and communication with stakeholders are consistent and mutually 

reinforcing, TSA should more fully define and clarify the collaboration 

and communication responsibilities of the many offices that interact 

with its stakeholders. TSA should ensure both internal TSA staff and 

external stakeholders can identify who is responsible for collaboration 

and communication at TSA.



Formalize roles and responsibilities among governmental entities for 

transportation security. Finalizing memorandums of agreement and 

memorandums of understanding with the other modal administrations 

within DOT as well as other government agencies as appropriate can help 

TSA successfully manage the necessary matrixed relationships to achieve 

security in all modes of transportation. For example, agreements 

between TSA and the modal administrations can address such issues as 

separating responsibilities for standards and regulations, funding, 

coordinating with customers, and implementing future security 

initiatives. Although the memorandums may change when TSA moves to DHS, 

TSA should continue to make progress to formalize its roles and 

responsibilities until the transition takes place.



Public Reporting and Customer Service to Build Citizen Confidence:



Federal agencies can promote greater transparency of government by 

publicizing what they intend to achieve and by being held accountable 

for achieving those results. Such transparency can improve the 

confidence of the American people in the capabilities of the federal 

government. Improving public confidence is especially critical for TSA 

as it works to achieve its goals of improving transportation security.



ATSA required TSA to issue specific reports to the Congress on its 

activities and progress in establishing and meeting its goals. 

Specifically, ATSA required TSA to provide to the Congress, within 180 

days of enactment of the legislation, an action plan with goals and 

milestones that was to outline how acceptable levels of performance for 

aviation security will be achieved. In accordance with the time frames 

outlined in ATSA, TSA submitted the action plan to the Congress on May 

19, 2002, and has made this report available to the public on its Web 

site. The action plan, entitled “Performance Targets and Action Plan, 

180 Day Report to Congress,” made public TSA’s strategic and 

performance goals, TSA’s performance measures, and the performance 

measurement information system.



ATSA also required two progress reports within 6 months of the 

enactment of the legislation. TSA released these reports within the 

established time frame. The first progress report was to describe TSA’s 

progress to date on the evaluation and implementation of actions listed 

in the legislation. TSA submitted this progress report, entitled 

“Report to Congress on Enhanced Security Measures,” on May 19, 2002, 

and made the report available to the public on its Web site. Some of 

the actions TSA reported it was evaluating include the following.



* Establish a uniform system of identification for all state and local 

law enforcement personnel for use in obtaining permission to carry 

weapons in aircraft cabins and in obtaining access to a secured area of 

an airport.



* Establish requirements to implement trusted passenger programs and 

use available technologies to expedite the security screening of 

passengers who participate in such programs.



* Provide for the use of technologies to enable the private and secure 

communication of threats to aid in the screening of passengers and 

other individuals on airport property who are identified on any state 

or federal security-related database for the purpose of having an 

integrated response of various authorized airport security forces.



The second progress report was to describe the deployment of passenger 

and baggage screening systems. TSA submitted this report on May 18, 

2002, and has made nonsensitive portions of the report available on its 

Web site. The report, entitled “Deployment of Screening Systems 

Strategy & Progress,” provided the Congress with TSA’s progress on and 

strategy for meeting the mandated deadlines to deploy federal screeners 

at security checkpoints at 429 airports and to have systems in place 

for screening every piece of checked baggage for explosives. For 

example, TSA reported that at that time it had identified security 

screener standards; selected private contractors to recruit, assess, 

and train security screeners; developed a preliminary plan for 

deploying federal screeners to the airports; developed an initial 

screening checkpoint design; and reviewed available and emerging 

explosives detection technology. The report did not include all of the 

information required in ATSA. For example, ATSA required specific 

information such as the dates of installation of each system to screen 

all checked baggage for explosives and the date each system is 

operational.



Since TSA has issued the statutorily required action plan and progress 

reports, it has continued to publicly report on its progress. 

Specifically, TSA created a Web site that provides information for 

customers and the public, including updates on its progress toward 

meeting the deadlines in ATSA; speeches, statements, and testimonies by 

TSA and DOT leadership; information on aviation security technology 

such as explosives detection systems; fact sheets on TSA contractors; 

frequently asked questions related to TSA’s policies and procedures; 

information for the traveling public; and information on employment 

opportunities with TSA. For example, a private citizen could find out 

when TSA would be hiring security screeners at her or his local 

airport, how to apply for a position with TSA, and what objects are 

prohibited and permitted to be carried onto an airplane.[Footnote 25]



In addition, TSA created an Office of Communications and Public 

Information. The purpose of this office is to provide information to 

the general public concerning TSA, its people, programs, policies, and 

events. To facilitate this mission, the Office of Communications and 

Public Information maintains a call center to receive and respond to 

inquiries from the public. This office also performs a variety of other 

functions. For example, the office develops statements, position 

papers, policy releases, media alerts, and marketing plans to inform 

and educate the public.



TSA has taken several actions that are intended to focus on customer 

satisfaction and be responsive to customer concerns in delivering 

critical and sensitive services. TSA established an ombudsman position 

to, among other things, serve external customers. Specifically, TSA’s 

ombudsman is responsible for recommending and influencing systemic 

change where necessary to improve TSA operations and customer service. 

As of November 2002, TSA is recruiting to fill this position. We have 

reported that through the impartial and independent investigation of 

citizens’ complaints, federal ombudsmen help agencies be more 

responsive to the public, including people who believe their concerns 

have not been dealt with fairly or fully through normal 

channels.[Footnote 26] Ombudsmen may recommend ways to resolve 

individual complaints or more systematic problems, and may help to 

informally resolve disagreements between the agency and the public.



In addition, TSA is tracking performance on its customer service. For 

example, TSA’s primary performance measure for customer satisfaction is 

the average wait time and percentage of passenger complaints per 1,000 

passengers.[Footnote 27] Other measures to gauge customer satisfaction 

include the percentage of flights delayed due to security issues, the 

percentage of incidents/interventions per 1,000 passengers, the number 

of weapons seized per 1,000 passengers, and the number of seats delayed 

due to security issues, among others.



As part of its ongoing challenge to balance security against customer 

service, TSA is reviewing existing security procedures in order to 

eliminate those that do not enhance security or customer service. For 

example, the Under Secretary testified that TSA has recently eliminated 

two procedures to reduce customers’ “hassle factor” at airports. In 

August 2002, TSA allowed passengers to carry beverages in paper or foam 

polystyrene containers through walk-through metal detectors and 

prohibited screeners from asking passengers to drink or eat from any 

containers of food or liquid as a security clearance procedure. TSA 

also eliminated the requirement for the airlines to ask a series of 

security-related questions to customers at check-in. In addition, TSA 

recently lifted the existing rule that prohibits parking within 300 

feet of airport terminals. TSA has replaced this rule with parking 

security measures specific to each airport and linked to the national 

threat level.



Lastly, TSA is also planning to create a customer satisfaction index 

(CSI) for aviation operations, which includes collecting customer 

information from national polls, passenger surveys at airports, the TSA 

call center, and customer feedback at airports. TSA intends to use data 

from the CSI to improve performance. As a first step, TSA conducted 12 

focus groups with air travelers to help it understand the aspects of 

customer experiences that influence satisfaction with and confidence in 

aviation security. TSA learned from the focus groups that:



* the federalization of aviation security significantly increased the 

confidence of passengers;



* key attributes that drive increased satisfaction and confidence 

include attentiveness of screeners, thoroughness of the screening 

process, professionalism of the workforce, and consistency of the 

process across airports;



* wait time was not a significant driver of satisfaction, and 

participants said they would be willing to wait longer if they thought 

it would make them more secure;



* the lack of checked baggage screening reduces confidence; and:



* secondary screening processes are a significant driver of reduced 

satisfaction.



The results of the focus groups will help TSA develop the passenger 

surveys to be used to collect data for the CSI. TSA intends to 

implement the CSI for aviation operations in 2003 and to expand the CSI 

to include other stakeholders, such as airport operators, air carriers, 

and customers of other modes of transportation.



Recommended Next Steps:



Fill the ombudsman position to facilitate responsiveness of TSA to the 

public. To ensure TSA is as responsive to the public as possible and is 

able to identify and resolve individual complaints and systematic 

problems, TSA should fill its ombudsman position as soon as high 

quality candidates can be identified.



Continue to develop and implement mechanisms, such as the CSI, to gauge 

customer satisfaction and improve customer service. TSA has identified 

customer satisfaction as one of its three annual performance goals. By 

combining data on its service delivery from a number of sources, such 

as the CSI, TSA will be able obtain a robust picture of customer 

satisfaction, which can be used to improve performance. TSA should 

complete the planning and developing of the CSI and begin its 

implementation.



Concluding Observations:



Never has a results-oriented focus been more critical than today, when 

the security of America’s citizens depends so directly and immediately 

on the results of many federal programs. TSA has faced immense 

challenges in its first year of existence to build the infrastructure 

of a large organization and meet mandated deadlines to federalize 

aviation security. As TSA begins to take responsibility for security in 

the maritime and surface modes of transportation, its current and 

future challenge is to build, sustain, and institutionalize the 

organizational capacity to help it achieve its current and future 

goals. As TSA moves into the newly created DHS, TSA has an opportunity 

to continue to foster a results-oriented culture. In this regard, TSA 

has started to put in place the foundation of this results-oriented 

culture through:



* leadership commitment to creating a high-performing organization,



* strategic planning to establish results-oriented goals and measures,



* performance management to promote accountability for results,



* collaboration and communication to achieve national outcomes, and:



* public reporting and customer service to build citizen confidence.



This foundation can serve TSA well in DHS and help TSA to focus on and 

achieve its mission to protect the nation’s transportation systems to 

ensure freedom of movement for people and commerce.



Recommendations for Executive Action:



We recommend that the Secretary of Transportation, in conjunction with 

the Under Secretary of Transportation for Security, continue TSA’s 

leadership commitment to creating a high-performing organization that 

includes next steps to establish a performance agreement for the Under 

Secretary that articulates how bonuses will be tied to performance and 

to add expectations in performance agreements for top leadership to 

foster the culture of a high-performing organization.



We recommend that the Under Secretary of Transportation for Security 

take the next steps to continue to implement the following results-

oriented practices.



* Strategic planning to establish results-oriented goals and measures 

that includes next steps to establish security performance goals and 

measures for all modes of transportation as part of a strategic 

planning process that involves stakeholders and to apply practices that 

have been shown to provide useful information in agency performance 

plans.



* Performance management to promote accountability for results that 

includes next steps to build on the current performance agreements to 

achieve additional benefits, to ensure the permanent performance 

management system makes meaningful distinctions in performance, and to 

involve employees in developing its performance management system.



* Collaboration and communication to achieve national outcomes that 

includes next steps to define more clearly the collaboration and 

communication roles and responsibilities of TSA’s various offices and 

to formalize roles and responsibilities among governmental entities for 

transportation security.



* Public reporting and customer service to build citizen confidence 

that includes next steps to fill the ombudsman position to facilitate 

responsiveness of TSA to the public and to continue to develop and 

implement mechanisms, such as the CSI, to gauge customer satisfaction 

and improve customer service.



Agency Comments:



We provided drafts of this report in December 2002 to officials from 

DOT, including TSA, for their review and comment. TSA’s Director of 

Strategic Management and Analysis provided oral comments on behalf of 

DOT and TSA generally agreeing with the contents, findings, and 

recommendations of the draft report. TSA’s Director of Strategic 

Management and Analysis provided minor technical clarifications and we 

made those changes where appropriate. In addition, she provided updated 

information on TSA’s progress in its strategic planning, collaboration 

and communication, and customer service since the completion of our 

audit work. We added that information where appropriate.



As agreed with your office, unless you publicly announce its contents 

earlier, we plan no further distribution of this report for 30 days 

from the date of this letter. At that time, we will provide copies of 

this report to the Secretary of Transportation, the Under Secretary of 

Transportation for Security, the Director of the Office of Homeland 

Security, the Director of the Office of Personnel Management, and the 

Director of the Office of Management and Budget. We will also make 

copies available to others upon request. In addition, the report will 

be available at no charge on the GAO Web site at http://www.gao.gov.



Signed by:



If you have any questions concerning this report, please contact me or 

Lisa Shames on (202) 512-6806. Marti Tracy was a key contributor to 

this report.



J. Christopher Mihm

Director, Strategic Issues:



Signed by J. Christopher Mihm



[End of section]



Appendixes:



[End of section]



Appendix I: Objective, Scope, and Methodology:



The objective of our review was to describe the Transportation Security 

Administration’s (TSA) actions and plans for implementing the results-

oriented practices required in the Aviation and Transportation Security 

Act (ATSA) and recommend next steps for TSA to build a results-oriented 

organizational culture and to establish a positive control environment. 

To identify results-oriented practices and recommend next steps, we 

reviewed our models, guides, reports, and other products on strategic 

planning and performance measurement, strategic human capital 

management, transformation efforts, and other related areas. See 

related GAO products listed at the end of this report for a list of our 

products in these areas. We next analyzed ATSA in relation to our 

products to identify any results-oriented practices that were 

statutorily required in the legislation. In addition, we reviewed TSA 

and Department of Transportation missions, performance goals and 

measures, performance agreements, policies and procedures, and 

organizational charts and other relevant documentation. To describe 

TSA’s status in implementing these results-oriented practices, we 

interviewed 25 officials from various TSA offices including strategic 

planning, human capital, training, budget, public affairs, and policy, 

among others. We also visited Baltimore-Washington International 

airport after it was transitioned to federal control to talk to front-

line managers about their responsibilities and specifically their role 

in providing performance data to headquarters. We developed the 

recommended next steps by referring to our models, guides, reports, and 

other products on results-oriented practices and identifying additional 

practices that were associated with and would further complement or 

support current TSA efforts. We performed our work from May through 

September 2002 in accordance with generally accepted government 

auditing standards.



[End of section]



Related GAO Products:



[End of section]



The following list provides information on recent GAO products related 

to the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), transportation 

security, and the results-oriented practices discussed in this report. 

These and other GAO products can be found at www.gao.gov.



TSA and Transportation Security:



Mass Transit: Federal Action Could Help Transit Agencies Address 

Security Challenges. GAO-03-263. Washington, D.C.: December 13, 2002.



Port Security: Nation Faces Formidable Challenges in Making New 

Initiatives Successful. GAO-02-993T. Washington, D.C.: August 5, 2002.



Aviation Security: Transportation Security Administration Faces 

Immediate and Long-Term Challenges. GAO-02-971T. Washington, D.C.: July 

25, 2002.



Aviation Security: Information Concerning the Arming of Commercial 

Pilots. GAO-02-822R. Washington, D.C.: June 28, 2002.



Aviation Security: Deployment and Capabilities of Explosive Detection 

Equipment. GAO-02-713C. Washington, D.C.: June 20, 2002. (CLASSIFIED):



Leadership Commitment to Creating a High-Performing Organization:



Highlights of a GAO Forum: Mergers and Transformation: Lessons Learned 

for a Department of Homeland Security and Other Federal Agencies. GAO-

03-293SP. Washington, D.C.: November 14, 2002.



Highlights of a GAO Roundtable: The Chief Operating Officer Concept: A 

Potential Strategy to Address Federal Governance Challenges.  GAO-03-

192SP. Washington, D.C.: October 4, 2002. :



Managing for Results: Using Strategic Human Capital Management to Drive 

Transformational Change. GAO-02-940T. Washington, D.C.: July 15, 

2002. :



Managing for Results: Federal Managers’ Views Show Need for Ensuring 

Top Leadership Skills. GAO-01-127. Washington, D.C.: October 20, 2000.



Management Reform: Elements of Successful Improvement Initiatives. GAO/

T-GGD-00-26. Washington, D.C.: October 15, 1999.



Strategic Planning to Establish Results-Oriented Goals and Measures:



Performance Reporting: Few Agencies Reported on the Completeness and 

Reliability of Performance Data. GAO-02-372. Washington, D.C.: April 

26, 2002.



Agency Performance Plans: Examples of Practices That Can Improve 

Usefulness to Decisionmakers. GAO/GGD/AIMD-99-69. Washington, D.C.: 

February 26, 1999.



Agencies’ Annual Performance Plans Under the Results Act: An Assessment 

Guide to Facilitate Congressional Decisionmaking. GAO/GGD/AIMD-

10.1.18. Washington, D.C.: February 1998.



Managing For Results: Enhancing the Usefulness of GPRA Consultations 

Between the Executive Branch and Congress. GAO/T-GGD-97-56. Washington, 

D.C.: March 10, 1997. :



Agencies’ Strategic Plans Under GPRA: Key Questions to Facilitate 

Congressional Review. GAO/GGD-10.1.16. Washington, D.C.: May 1997. :



Executive Guide: Effectively Implementing the Government Performance 

and Results Act. GAO/GGD-96-118. Washington, D.C.: June 1996.



Performance Management to Promote Accountability for Results:



Results-Oriented Cultures: Using Balanced Expectations to Manage Senior 

Executive Performance. GAO-02-966. Washington, D.C.: 

September 27, 2002.



Results-Oriented Cultures: Insights for U.S. Agencies from Other 

Countries’ Performance Management Initiatives. GAO-02-862. Washington, 

D.C.: August 2, 2002.



A Model of Strategic Human Capital Management. GAO-02-373SP. 

Washington, D.C.: March 15, 2002.



Human Capital: Practices That Empowered and Involved Employees. GAO-01-

1070. Washington, D.C.: September 14, 2001.



Managing for Results: Emerging Benefits From Selected Agencies’ Use of 

Performance Agreements. GAO-01-115. Washington, D.C.: October 30, 2000.



Human Capital: Using Incentives to Motivate and Reward High 

Performance. GAO/T-GGD-00-118. Washington, D.C.: May 2, 2000.



Collaboration and Communication to Achieve National Outcomes:



Homeland Security: Effective Intergovernmental Coordination Is Key to 

Success. GAO-02-1011T. Washington, D.C: August 20, 2002.



Homeland Security: Intergovernmental Coordination and Partnership Will 

Be Critical to Success. GAO-02-900T. Washington, D.C.: July 2, 2002.



Managing for Results: Barriers to Interagency Coordination. GAO/GGD-00-

106. Washington, D.C.: March 29, 2000.



Managing For Results: Using the Results Act to Address Mission 

Fragmentation and Program Overlap. GAO/AIMD-97-146. Washington, D.C.: 

August 29, 1997. :



Public Reporting and Customer Service to Build Citizen Confidence:



Managing for Results: Using GPRA to Assist Oversight and 

Decisionmaking. GAO-01-872T. Washington, D.C.: June 19, 2001.



Human Capital: The Role of Ombudsmen in Dispute Resolution. 

GAO-01-466. Washington, D.C.: April 13, 2001.



Managing for Results: The Statutory Framework for Performance-Based 

Management and Accountability. GAO/GGD/AIMD-98-52. Washington, D.C.: 

January 28, 1998.



(450146):



FOOTNOTES



[1] U.S. General Accounting Office, Highlights of a GAO Forum: Mergers 

and Transformation: Lessons Learned for a Department of Homeland 

Security and Other Federal Agencies, GAO-03-293SP (Washington, D.C.: 

Nov. 14, 2002).



[2] The Homeland Security Act of 2002, Public Law 107-296, Nov. 25, 

2002, the legislation that created DHS, amends this requirement. 

According to the legislation, if, in his discretion or at the request 

of an airport, the Under Secretary of Transportation for Security 

determines that TSA is not able to deploy explosives detection systems 

required in ATSA by December 31, 2002, then for each airport for which 

the Under Secretary makes this determination, the Under Secretary shall 

submit to specific congressional committees a detailed plan for the 

deployment of the number of explosives detection systems at that 

airport necessary to meet the requirement as soon as practicable at 

that airport but no later than December 31, 2003. Also, the Under 

Secretary shall take all necessary action to ensure that alternative 

means of screening all checked baggage are implemented until the 

requirements have been met. TSA reports that as of December 31, 2002, 

about 90 percent of all checked baggage will be screened using 

explosives detection systems or explosives trace detection equipment 

and the remaining checked baggage will be screened using alternative 

means.



[3] U.S. General Accounting Office, Aviation Security: Transportation 

Security Administration Faces Immediate and Long-Term Challenges, GAO-

02-971T (Washington, D.C.: July 25, 2002).



[4] ATSA requires that federal security screener personnel have a 

satisfactory or better score on a federal security screening personnel 

selection examination; be a U.S. citizen; possess a high school 

diploma, general equivalency diploma, or experience that the Under 

Secretary has determined to be sufficient for the individuals to 

perform the duties of the position; have basic aptitudes and physical 

abilities, including color perception, visual and aural acuity, 

physical coordination, and motor skills; have English proficiency to 

include reading, speaking, and writing in English; have the ability to 

demonstrate daily a fitness for duty without impairment due to illegal 

drugs, sleep deprivation, medication, or alcohol; successfully pass an 

employment investigation background check (including a criminal history 

record check); not pose a national security risk or threat; and 

satisfactorily complete all initial, recurrent, and appropriate 

specialized training required by the security program. The requirement 

for U.S. citizenship was subsequently changed by Public Law 107-296,

Nov. 25, 2002, to include legal residents of the United States.



[5] Statement of Admiral James Loy, Acting Under Secretary of 

Transportation for Security before the Commerce, Science, and 

Transportation Committee, U.S. Senate on 

September 10, 2002; Statement of Stephen J. McHale, Deputy Under 

Secretary of Transportation for Management and Policy, Transportation 

Security Administration, before the Committee on Government Reform, 

U.S. House of Representatives in Atlanta, Georgia on August 7, 2002; 

Statement of the Honorable Norman Y. Mineta, Secretary of 

Transportation before the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 

Transportation,

U.S. Senate on July 25, 2002; Statement of the Honorable Norman Y. 

Mineta, Secretary of Transportation before the Subcommittee on 

Aviation, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, U.S. House of 

Representatives on July 23, 2002.



[6] Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Distributed 

Public Governance: Agencies Authorities And Other Autonomous Bodies, 

Preliminary Draft (Nov. 14, 2001). 



[7] The Prime Minister’s Office of Public Services Reform, Better 

Government Services: Executive Agencies in the 21ST Century (London: 

2002).



[8] U.S. General Accounting Office, Federal Student Aid: Additional 

Management Improvements Would Clarify Strategic Direction and Enhance 

Accountability, GAO-02-255 (Washington, D.C.: Apr. 30, 2002); 

Performance-Based Organizations: Lessons Learned From the British Next 

Steps Initiative, GAO/T-GGD-97-151 (Washington, D.C: July 8, 1997); and 

Performance-Based Organizations: Issues for the Saint Lawrence Seaway 

Development Corporation Proposal, GAO/GGD-97-74 (Washington, D.C: May 

15, 1997).



[9] GAO-03-293SP.



[10] U.S. General Accounting Office, Highlights of a GAO Roundtable: 

The Chief Operating Officer Concept: A Potential Strategy To Address 

Federal Governance Challenges, GAO-03-192SP (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 4, 

2002).



[11] The Baldrige performance excellence criteria are used as the basis 

of the Baldrige Award, which is given by the President of the United 

States to organizations that are judged to be outstanding in seven 

criteria. The Congress established the award program to recognize 

organizations for their achievements in quality and performance and to 

raise awareness about the importance of quality and performance as a 

competitive edge.



[12] The acting Under Secretary of Transportation for Security was 

sworn in on November 25, 2002.



[13] U.S. General Accounting Office, Managing for Results: Emerging 

Benefits From Selected Agencies’ Use of Performance Agreements, GAO-01-

115 (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 30, 2000).



[14] U.S. General Accounting Office, Results-Oriented Cultures: Using 

Balanced Expectations to Manage Senior Executive Performance, GAO-02-

966 (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 27, 2002).



[15] U.S. General Accounting Office, Agencies’ Strategic Plans Under 

GPRA: Key Questions to Facilitate Congressional Review, GAO/GGD-10.1.16 

(Washington, D.C.: May 1997).



[16] U.S. General Accounting Office, Managing for Results: Enhancing 

the Usefulness of GPRA Consultations Between the Executive Branch and 

Congress, GAO/T-GGD-97-56 (Washington, D.C.: Mar. 10, 1997).



[17] U.S. General Accounting Office, Agency Performance Plans: Examples 

of Practices That Can Improve Usefulness to Decisionmakers, GAO/GGD/

AIMD-99-69 (Washington, D.C.: Feb. 26, 1999) and Agencies’ Annual 

Performance Plans Under the Results Act: An Assessment Guide to 

Facilitate Congressional Decisionmaking, GAO/GGD/AIMD-10.1.18 

(Washington, D.C.: February 1998).



[18] U.S. General Accounting Office, A Model of Strategic Human Capital 

Management, GAO-02-373SP (Washington, D.C.: Mar. 15, 2002).



[19] U.S. General Accounting Office, Results-Oriented Cultures: 

Insights for U.S. Agencies from Other Countries’ Performance Management 

Initiatives, GAO-02-862 (Washington, D.C.: Aug. 2, 2002).



[20] GAO-01-115.



[21] U.S. General Accounting Office, FBI Reorganization: Initial Steps 

Encouraging but Broad Transformation Needed, GAO-02-865T (Washington, 

D.C.: June 21, 2002).



[22] U.S. General Accounting Office, Human Capital: Practices That 

Empowered and Involved Employees, GAO-01-1070 (Washington D.C.: Sept. 

14, 2001).



[23] Testimony of Admiral James Loy, Acting Under Secretary of 

Transportation for Security before the Commerce, Science, and 

Transportation Committee, U.S. Senate on July 25, 2002.



[24] The Homeland Security Act of 2002 reestablishes the Board within 

DHS, replaces the representative from the Office of Homeland Security 

with the Secretary of Homeland Security or the Secretary’s designee, 

and designates the chairperson of the Board as the Secretary of 

Homeland Security. 



[25] See www.tsa.gov. 



[26] U.S. General Accounting Office, Environmental Protection: Issues 

for Consideration in the Reorganization of EPA’s Ombudsman Function, 

GAO-02-859T (Washington, D.C.: 

June 25, 2002).



[27] TSA reports that, at airports where data are available, it met 

DOT’s performance goal that 95 percent of passengers wait less than 10 

minutes to pass through airport checkpoints through October 2002.



GAO’s Mission:



The General Accounting Office, the investigative arm of Congress, 

exists to support Congress in meeting its constitutional 

responsibilities and to help improve the performance and accountability 

of the federal government for the American people. GAO examines the use 

of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; and provides 

analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help Congress make 

informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO’s commitment to 

good government is reflected in its core values of accountability, 

integrity, and reliability.



Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony:



The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no 

cost is through the Internet. GAO’s Web site ( www.gao.gov ) contains 

abstracts and full-text files of current reports and testimony and an 

expanding archive of older products. The Web site features a search 

engine to help you locate documents using key words and phrases. You 

can print these documents in their entirety, including charts and other 

graphics.



Each day, GAO issues a list of newly released reports, testimony, and 

correspondence. GAO posts this list, known as “Today’s Reports,” on its 

Web site daily. The list contains links to the full-text document 

files. To have GAO e-mail this list to you every afternoon, go to 

www.gao.gov and select “Subscribe to daily E-mail alert for newly 

released products” under the GAO Reports heading.



Order by Mail or Phone:



The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2 

each. A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent 

of Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or 

more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. 

Orders should be sent to:



U.S. General Accounting Office



441 G Street NW,



Room LM Washington,



D.C. 20548:



To order by Phone: 	



	Voice: (202) 512-6000:



	TDD: (202) 512-2537:



	Fax: (202) 512-6061:



To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs:



Contact:



Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov



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



Public Affairs:



Jeff Nelligan, managing director, NelliganJ@gao.gov (202) 512-4800 U.S.



General Accounting Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 Washington, D.C.



20548: