Home / Leadership Journal / Main Homeland Security Site

The Blog @ Homeland Security

The Blog @ Homeland Security provides an inside-out view of what we do every day at the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. The Blog lets us talk about how we secure our nation, strengthen our programs, and unite the Department behind our common mission and principles. It also lets us hear from you.

Monday, March 29, 2010

DHS Efficiency Review Turns One: CBP Employees Work Together to Save Millions

As we celebrate the first anniversary of DHS’ Efficiency Review this week, we’re going to spotlight a few of the many DHS employees who are using their creativity and experience every day to cut costs, streamline operations and promote greater accountability, transparency and customer satisfaction across the Department.

Robert Namejko and Richard Winkler of Customs and Border Protection’s (CBP) Office of Administration and Judy Shetler and Dora Shomette of CBP’s Office of Internal Affairs are great examples of employees working together to make a difference. Together, these four employees identified millions of dollars in cost avoidances by lowering the costs of background investigations.

According to Dora, “there was a need to unify our background investigation contracts to ensure that all contractors were working from the same rules and regulations, and eliminate requirements that were no longer relevant or essential.”

By combining Dora and Judy’s security expertise with Robert and Richard’s experience with procurement issues, CBP was able to cut the costs of the contracts for background investigation services by almost $3.2 million in fiscal year 2010 while reducing the average required time to complete a case from 60 to 40 days.

As the second year of the Efficiency Review gets underway, we’re sure that CBP and DHS will identify even more efficiencies as a result of Dora, Judy, Robert and Richard’s continued efforts to seek innovative ways to make the most of taxpayer dollars.

Labels: ,

posted by DHS @ 10:09 AM  

Share |

8 Comments:

  • At March 29, 2010 12:06 PM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

    Saving money is not only important, it is a responsibility we owe taxpayers. But efficiency is not entirely about saving money and we must be sure not only that we are not being "penny wise and pound foolish," also that we do not let the easy metric of money saved dominate harder to count benefits from spending. Case in point: a printer outside my office has been unavailable for two or three weeks because of a faulty network card, and it appears it will be at least a few more weeks before the card will be replaced because, we are told, of delays built into our procurement procedures. Is this because procurement is understaffed or because special scrutiny is required with an eye to saving money? Regardless, the printer that doesn't work allows two sided printing and is black and white. The printer next to it, which tends to get used by default, is color and prints on only one side. Are monetary costs like these even recognized when we consider our bureaucratic purchase practices, or do we just focus on the most visible outlays?
    Also we should be certain that we are not saving money on the backs of our employees. It is fine to cut 80 to 90% of the costs of business class travel if what is beng eliminated are trips within the United States which are short enough that business class travel is indeed a luxury. But on flights overseas where people must perform the day after they arive and need to be rested to be at their peak, business class travel may be more than a luxury as it can have implications for a traveler's health and performance. Yet I know of travelers who have had to go coach to places like Singapore and Australia because even though rules allowed business class travel budgets did not. Money was saved, but at the traveler's personal expense with potential health implications and perhaps at some cost to performance. More trivially, when we visit foreign embassies or are in other countries typically there is coffee and pastries or other snacks served, or if over the noon hour a lunch. It is embarassing when we cannot reciprocate in kind, and unfair when we do reciprocate but only because a supervisor has paid for refreshments personally. Our policies regarding travel and snacks which sometimes forbid or make it difficult to arrange to pay expenses that are ordinary and expected in the business and academic worlds and with governments far poorer than ours, do seem to save money, but this may be because the large costs of employee turnover and diminished productivity due to lowered morale are almost impossible to attribute to individual money-saving policies, though collectively the policies contribute to such outcomes. Finally, we lose huge amounts of time to various inefficient bureaucratic demands and inadequate IT services, including unnecessary levels of required approvals, the required use of systems like Fed Traveller, the proliferation of different passwords and even IDs on different systems such that passwords are frequently misremembered, etc. We don't address the costs of such systems because they are hard to measure while the gains when the rare cheat or error is caught can be highlighted. Yet if we effectively diminished bureaucratic burdens and improved IT services we could improve morale, decrease turnover andnot only accomplish more but also get by with fewer staff, giving the taxpayer a better bargain for his or her buck.

     

  • At March 29, 2010 5:54 PM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

    thank you!ny name is keith J. nielsen/i am/AN AMERICAN BORN CITIZEN!/wy wife&her Family defected from the former Sov>uN.i asker her y she never VOTED?because there was 1 canidate?and dont vote off2 the GULAG!shevoter 4 the first time 4 barak obama.i rember/when it was punch 10!!!!/sincerly KeithJ.NIELSEN/ty GOD BLESS AMERICA!and istill rember the duk& cover exercises/@6014 n.kilpatrick!!!!

     

  • At March 30, 2010 5:33 AM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

    Efficiency ???

    In Philadelphia International Airport: There is one flight, US Airways 797 from Isreal that comes in every day around 0530 hours. Officers are getting ordered in on their second days off to come in for Overtime. 12 Officers and 1 supervisor and sometimes all 12 offiers are on Overtime for one flight on their Regular Schedule days off !!!!!

     

  • At March 30, 2010 10:32 AM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

    I COMMEND THE AGENCY FOR ATTEMPTING TO BE FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE AND FOR THESE INDIVIDUALS NAMED AS INITIATORS OF COST SAVING IDEAS. AFTER OVER 30 YEARS WITH THE GOVERNMENT I QUESTION IF CREDIT IS BEING GIVEN TO THE TRUE INNOVATORS. I HAVE SEEN ON MORE THAN ONE OCCASSION CREDIT BEING BESTOWED UPON INDIVIDUALS THAT HAVE DEEP LOYALTIES TO UPPER MANAGEMENT AND HEADQUARTERS OR ARE MANAGEMENT THEMSELVES THAT HAD NO INVOLVEMENT IN THE INITIAL IDEA. THIS OCCURS BECAUSE CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS BRING FORWARD THESE IDEAS AS THEIR OWN AND NEGLECT TO GIVE CREDIT WHERE IT ORIGINATED OR NEGLECT TO BRING IT FORWARD AT ALL. IF AN EMPLOYEE IDENTIFIES AN AREA THAT NEEDS CORRECTION AND RECOMMENDS SOMETHING TO CORRECT IT THERE IS NO GUARANTEE THAT THEY WILL BE PART OF THE PROCESS TO CORRECT IT. THERE IS NO GUARANTEE THAT THEIR SUPERIOR WILL EVEN PUT FORWARD THE IDEA AS MANY ARE RELUCTANT TO SUGGEST SUCH CHANGE AS THEY ARE UNFAMILIAR WITH THE AREA. THIS LEAVES THE KNOWLEDGEABLE EMPLOYEE WHO MAKES THE SUGGESTION AT THE MERCY OF A POSSIBLE UNKNOWING SUPERVISOR THAT WOULD RATHER TAKE NO ACTION THAN PUBLICLY DISPLAY THEIR INADEQUICIES AND APPEAR ILL INFORMED ON SOMETHING. IF AN IDEA IS FOLLOWED THROUGH WITH IT SPECIFIC INDIVIDUALS ARE USUALLY HAND PICKED TO COMPLETE THOSE TASK AND IT USUALLY DOESN'T INCLUDE THE INDIVIDUAL WHO CAME UP WITH THE IDEA. IT APPEARS SUCH PROJECTS ARE RESERVED FOR SPECIFIC INDIVIDUALS TO HELP PROMOTE THEM BECAUSE OF THEIR TIES TO OTHERS. THIS GOES ON ROUTINELY AND THE FRONT LINE GUYS WHO BRING ATTENTION TO SUCH A SPECIFIC IDEA ARE LEFT TO STAND BY AND WATCH, WHICH IS WHY MORAL IS SO LOW. SINCE EMPLOYEES ARE BURDENED WITH THE "CHAIN OF COMMAND" REQUIREMENTS THAT PROHIBIT COMMUNICATION WITH ANYONE THAT IS A HIGHER GRADE LEVEL ONE CAN NEVER REAL VERIFY IF THEIR IDEAS WERE HONESTLY FOLLOWED UP BY OTHERS AS THEIR OWN OR EVEN BROUGHT FORWARD AT ALL. THAT IS UNTIL ANOTHER IS REWARDED FOR AN IDEA THAT WAS INITIATED BY THEM AS IN THE CASE WITH SOME RECENT AWARDS GIVEN AT HEADQUARTERS. MIND YOU I AM NOT SAYING THAT EVERYONE OF THESE AWARDS HAVE BEEN GIVEN IN ERROR BUT I KNOW SOME PEOPLE ARE ARE SITTING OUT IN THE FIELD SAYING I BROUGHT THAT TO SO AND SO'S ATTENTION AND NOW THESE PEOPLE ARE BEING HONORED FOR IT!
    PR

     

  • At March 30, 2010 3:12 PM , Anonymous Penny Magnotto said...

    I am so sick of these "feel-good" articles and junkets we have to read or hear about DHS!!! Why do we even have DHS and/or ICE? We have next to "0" (zero) security at our borders/ports! There is a 24/7 bloodbath occurring at our border with Mexico. A husband and father rancher, Robert Krentz, was violently executed on his own property a few days ago, and we've heard NOT ONE WORD about it, yet, Napolitano continues to assure everyone within earshot that our border is secure. Let's see...I'd lay odds there's criminal illegal alien involvement here! Do ya THINK??? By now, there should have been a public disclosure by Janet Napolitano regarding this latest display of brutality by our "neighbors" to the South. We have lost another American to the third-world mongrel nation to our south. By now, Secretary Napolitano should have mobilized the National Guard, for starters, and arranged for military back-up! A scant few of us know that the NG has been requested by former Colorado Congressman Tom Tancredo. How much longer will we put up with violent criminal attacks on America? When will we really mean it when we say our borders are secure? When will we KNOW what's entering and leaving our own ports? How much more money will we spend foolishly on "technology" to guard our sovereign nation from foreign attack/invasion? Who, pray tell, are the idiots who insist on calling Mexico our ally in this war on drugs and illegal immigration? DHS is a pointless, ineffective Agency, seemingly without the focus or intelligence to keep our country safe. Where can we go for help? What should we do to remedy this outrage? Who can we count on? While we continue to send mealy-mouthed warnings to our kids about celebrating Spring in Mexico, the violent beat goes on and on and on..................STOP THIS INSANITY!!!!!!!!

     

  • At April 14, 2010 12:23 PM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

    CBP's upper management as well as DHS upper management should rescind the payout of end-of-year "cash awards / bonuses" to its employees, from the top down. Let's face it; we make very good money as officers, especially when assigned overtime. Not only that, but, everyone who has worked at a port of entry knows in some cases (most), management prioritizes or gives awards to people who realistically are undeserving, just because of friendship or because the officer does not question their authority. Of course, some employees that are more hard-working, efficient, or deserving do not get any awards just because they are not in the good graces of some. That was the issue with our prior Immigration Inspectors before and after the CBP merger; where they were exploited by their supervisor and never received anything in return. Some were actually happy to not receive anything, because they loved their job and knew they had earned their salary at the end of the day, and there was no ambuguity or favoritism. Also, the concept of monetary gratification does not advance the work in a sustained manner, because the moment the top 20% producers stop receiving benefits or awards, the dedication and the productivity stops,gets postponed, or passed down or deflected to the people who, although consistent and productive with their work (mid-tier = 60% of the job population), never actually received any type of award, and in actuality, probably provided and/or communicated the basis for the excellent ideas generated by the top 20% performers in the first place. On another issue, CBP's leadership hierarchy should be more consistent with its Border Patrol counterpart. 99% of the leadership hierarchy for the USBP comes from CBP agents/personnel who had at one point worked in the field and actually have a lot of hands-on-knowledge and field experience, for the most part. Most of CBP's leadership in HQ is people that may have worked for different cabinet agencies within the goverment or from the private sector, some of which have never donned a uniform or have never really worked in the "field". Some of our top leadership have experience managing goverment facilities/programs that have nothing to do with law enforcement, much less CBP, or any vestige of police, inspectional, or investigative work, yet they tell us how to do our job. In my opinion, CBP should gradually replace the leadership to reflect our status, a uniformed agency within CBP, with core CBP leadership. All other managers with no field or core CBPO exerience, should manage technical offices or programs geared toward mission support or human resources. Finally, the people we hire "off the street" or from other agencies or from other selective processes should be hired with the knowledge that there will not be any additional incentives you are already being paid for in order to produce. It was your condition of employment to begin with anyway. There are other ways to compensate good work, i.e. promotions within the unit, letters of appreciation, gift cards, etc. I believe that by forgoing the share awards program from the top down will save the Agency millions, if not billions a year. Thanks for giving me a chance to express my beliefs in this blog.

     

  • At April 14, 2010 12:34 PM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

    S-1. Thank you for providing us a way to communicate our ideas via this blog. Another way DHS and CBP could save vast sums of money yearly is to stop rotating instructors out of their details at the Academy. Many of the instructors at the CBP Academies have already settled at their place of employment and would like to remain there indefinitely, or have a choice of leaving for a different post without pressure, their individual chice to move on. This could save the goverment as much as $50,000 to $100,000 per instructor that gets transferred in/out of the Academies. Of course, it is understood that AC for the Office of Training and Development has the final say so in this matter, however, imagine the positive impact that this will have overall for management and staff.

     

  • At April 16, 2010 6:16 PM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

    Penny? You wrote that DHS and ICE are useless. Have you visited and ICE Office or even had the priviledge to visit a DHS Office? Have you been a witnees as to what goes on behind the scenes? Have you spoken to the administration section of one of these offices? Have you ever spoken to a Deportation Officer? I work for DHS/ICE in the administration section of detention and removal. I can guarantee you that the percentage of good things and accomplishments we make certainly do out weight the percentages of the downfalls that you see. The job I do is important and vital. You didn't mention your job title or the section of the government you work for. My guess is that you do work for the Federal Government because you are on this site. I support every office within the Federal Government because we are all needed. It's a shame you do not feel the same way.

    On the topic: Every little bit of monetary savings helps, as long as we don't sacrifice safety and security. Here is an example of what we do in our office. Instead of ordering note pads, we cut scrap paper in 1/4's and create our own notes pads. We watch what we print because color cartridges are expensive. We only use half of our lights in the office. Empty file folders are recycled and so are the metal file inserts. I could list everything but I'll stop now. Being frugal pays off. Kudos for the efforts of everyone trying to save money.

    There is a ton of waste in every business and the waste needs to be accounted for and it begins at the top on down.

     

Post a Comment

Thank you for leaving a comment at the Blog @ Homeland Security. Submitted Comments will be reviewed before posting. See more about our Comment Policy.

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home