Detailed Information on the
Federal Emergency Management Agency: National Security Assessment

Perform an assessment of program using performance data and independent analysis to identify impediments and make aggressive recommendations to improve performance.

Continue to improve documentation and data collection efforts related to annual performance goals.

Develop measures to assess efficiencies and cost effectiveness in program execution and facility investments.

Measure: Percentage of Federal Departments and Agencies with fully operational Continuity of Operations (COOP) capabilities.

Explanation:Departments & Agencies that have sufficient resources to perform their essential functions at an alternate facility as stated in their COOP Plan.

Measure: Percentage of Federal Departments and Agencies with fully operational Continuity of Government (COG) capabilities.

Explanation:Departments and Agencies that have sufficient personnel, resources, equipment, and communication capabilities to carry out their primary mission essential functions at an alternate site as stated in the COG Operations Plan.

Is the program purpose clear?

Explanation: The purpose of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Office of National Security Coordination (ONSC) is to serve as the lead agent for Federal Executive Branch continuity and contingency programs. As such, ONSC is responsible for formulating guidance and establishing common standards for agencies to use in developing viable, executable continuity and contingency plans; facilitating interagency coordination as appropriate; and overseeing and assessing the status of continuity and contingency capabilities within Federal Executive Branch agencies. This purpose is defined in Presidential Decision Directive (PDD) 67, Enduring Constitutional Government and Continuity of Government Operations, dated 21 October 1998, and Executive Order (EO) 12656, Assignment of Emergency Preparedness Responsibilities, dated 18 November 1988, which establish ONSC as the lead agency for these programs.

Evidence: Primary PDD-67, Enduring Constitutional Government and Continuity of Governmental Operations. Executive Order 12656, Assignment of Emergency Preparedness Responsibilities. Supplementary National Security Act of 1947 - was the precursor of the current ONSC program authorities and established the NS Resources Board, which ultimately became our office. Homeland Security Act of 2002 - transfers all of the authorities for national security programs from the FEMA Director to the Secretary of DHS who in turn delegated these authorities back to the Director, FEMA. Executive Order 12472, Assignment of National Security and Emergency Preparedness and Telecommunications Functions - identifies our role in Emergency Communications especially in the management of EAS. Executive Order 13228, Establishing the Office of Homeland Security and Homeland Security Council - refines our authorities already identified in Executive Order 12656. Presidential Memorandum, Communications with the American Public during times of National Emergency, September 15, 1995. FCC Title 47, Chapter 1, Part 2, October 1, 1998. FPC 65, Federal Executive Branch Continuity of Operations, dated July 1999. HSPD-1 - Establishes Offices that direct ONSC to take action. Provides basis for direction. Homeland Security Presidential Directive 5, Management of Domestic Incidents, March 12, 2002. DHS MD 9300.1 - Delegates original FEMA authorities from DHS back to FEMA.

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

Explanation: ONSC meets the need for the Federal Executive Branch to have in place a comprehensive and effective program to ensure continuity of essential Federal functions in an "all-hazards" environment. The changing threat environment - coupled with events such as September 11, 2001, the London subway bombings, the unpredictability of natural disasters such as Hurricane Katrina, and the looming threat of pandemic influenza - has emphasized the importance of continuity and contingency programs. ONSC has responded with new and revised continuity and contingency programs to respond to this more complex threat environment through the development of policy and guidance, training, status reporting, tests and exercises, assessments, and technology solutions. The evidence provided below documents a sample of the complex threats faced today that substantiates the need for continuity and contingency programs provided by FEMA, ONSC.

Evidence: 9-11 Commission Report Hurricane Katrina After Action Reports National Response Plan (NRP)

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

Explanation: The continuity and contingency programs administered by ONSC are neither redundant nor duplicative of any other Federal, state, local, or private efforts as they relate to Federal Executive Branch continuity and contingency programs. ONSC has the sole statutory responsibility for certain Executive Branch continuity and contingency programs at multiple layers of government. While other organizations play a critical role in continuity and contingency programs, ONSC programs clearly occupy the sole lead role.

Evidence: Executive Order 12656, Assignment of Emergency Preparedness Responsibilities. PDD-67, Enduring Constitutional Government and Continuity of Governmental Operations - is a classified document that generally directs us to lead the Federal Government COOP/COG program. DHS MD 9300.1 - Delegates original FEMA authorities from DHS back to FEMA

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

Explanation: In its role as a coordinating organization as outlined in PDD 67, ONSC assists other Executive Branch departments and agencies with continuity and contingency programs. These continuity and contingency programs implemented by ONSC are based on Executive Branch policy, directives, and guidance. ONSC is constrained to a large extent by this predetermined policy guidance. However, within its purview of responsibility, ONSC ensures that design flaws do not exist within its continuity and contingency programs through established tests, exercises, corrective action programs, and oversight and audit programs. GAO has a different view of our role and responsibilities. They have considered ONSC to be a regulatory body with more direction and control over other department and agencies' roles and responsibilities. However, establishing ONSC as a regulatory body would impede ONSC's effectiveness in assisting and guiding other departments and agencies in building their own continuity and contingency programs.

Evidence: Forward Challenge 04 AAR Annual GAO reviews

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

Explanation: ONSC resources are solely and completely focused on continuity and contingency efforts. The beneficiaries of these programs are the Executive Branch directly and the interagency community peripherally. ONSC sponsors and funds training and exercise venues that develop efficiencies and foster cooperation between Federal, state, and local agencies. The purpose of these efforts is to ensure timely, adequate, and complete responses for both continuity and contingencies in all-hazard emergency management. ONSC resources provide program documentation, test training and exercises, infrastructure/logistics, information technologies/communications, assessments, interagency/regional support, and as required, contract support. The program requirements have evolved over the past five years and subsidies have ensured success and continued effective continuity and contingency efforts.

Evidence: The Government Accountability Office reported that over the past three years ONSC has developed and fielded numerous assistance documents, and test, training, and exercise programs and activities in support of Federal Executive Branch continuity and contingency programs. According to Federal departments and agencies in the field, ONSC's support for this program has made a significant and positive contribution to their ability to conduct continuity operations, even in the face of the nation's worst natural disasters. For example, as part of its overall national preparedness program, FEMA conducted COOP Manager Train-the-Trainer courses in New Orleans, Houston and Miami, among many other cities, in 2004 and 2005. Feedback from the Federal senior leaders indicated that this training and associated exercises made a positive impact on the Federal Government's ability to recover from the disasters. For example, Hurricane Katrina cleared the New Orleans area on Monday, August 29th, 2005. By late Tuesday and early Wednesday morning of that week, most Federal departments and agencies were reporting to FEMA that they were capable of and performing their essential functions and providing essential services from continuity or devolution sites.

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

Explanation: ONSC has established clear, salient program objectives for continuity and contingency programs. The measurable outcomes of these objectives serve to ensure continuity of operations across the Federal Executive Branch and to ensure timely and appropriate actions across the interagency community in response to all-hazard emergency management to ensure survival of an enduring constitutional government. These measures of effectiveness are managed through the budget process as well as oversight of program documentation, test training and exercises, infrastructure/logistics, and information technologies/communications. The measurable outcome from continuity and contingency programs is the demonstrated ability to meet the needs of the Executive Branch and the support of the interagency community. Through biennial exercises across the Federal Executive Branch, continuity and contingency capabilities are continually monitored and improved to ensure increased readiness. These outcome-oriented performance measures are being captured and validated within the future exercise planning efforts. Individual department and agency capability development is fostered through both training and exercises.

Evidence: The FY 2006 FEMA Annual Performance Plan, and the FY 2008-2012 Fiscal Year Homeland Security Plan (FYHSP) for the Office of National Security Coordination defines the long-term performance measures to maintain a specified operational capability to guarantee the survival of an enduring constitutional government. The critical element to this requirement is that contingencies have an immediate, appropriate response and continuity of operations remains constant. Although there have been no long-term requirements that would have tested these plans, the exercises and short-duration events have proven these capabilities to be robust and effective. Therefore, our outcome measures focus more on the preparedness of our key customers (i.e., the organizations within the Executive Branch) and their ability to respond appropriately, should the need to reconstitute arise. The main performance measure is listed as, "Percentage of designated Federal departments and agencies headquarters with specified operational continuity and contingency capabilities."

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

Explanation: The ONSC has established as ambitious a goal as possible for designated Federal Executive Branch departments and agencies by requiring each to meet 100% operational capability for continuity and contingency requirements by fiscal year 2008. These capabilities include personnel, resources, training, and demonstrated proficiencies.

Evidence: The FY 2006 FEMA Annual Performance Plan, and the FY 2008-2012 Fiscal Year Homeland Security Plan (FYHSP) for the Office of National Security Coordination defines the long-term performance measures to maintain a specified operational capability to guarantee the survival of an enduring constitutional government.

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

Explanation: ONSC develops and sponsors venues for training, education, exercises, and conferences that serve to enhance the capabilities of each of the departments and agencies within the Federal Executive Branch. These annual, on-going events serve to meet the long-term goal of attaining 100% capability of these organizations. Additionally, the formats established for the Federal Executive Board and Associations foster understanding and develop awareness to bolster capabilities. Although not currently in place, ONSC will be developing measures to determine training performance effectiveness. These measures will shape future training needs and course development to meet the needs of the Federal Executive Branch. These performance indicators will in turn help to modify and compliment the training standards that are being offered to the various departments and agencies. The indicators of training effectiveness will also shape the ONSC resource allocation to be consistent with performance based budgeting.

Evidence: ONSC developed, delivered, and continues to provide extensive and comprehensive continuity training to departments and agencies since the update to Federal Preparedness Circular 65. Many of these courses provide train-the-trainer modules enabling the courses to be provided to expanded audiences. The Table below presents the number of personnel trained from all Federal departments and agencies in the various continuity courses. Course Personnel Trained COOP Awareness Course 7,221 Introduction to COOP 4,770 COOP Managers Train the Trainer Course 1,627 Instructors Building Design for National Security (Risk Assessment) Train the Trainer Course 265 Students 27 Instructors Exercise Design Course 14,129 ONSC, in conjunction with the Inter Agency COOP Working Group (IA CWG), created a Test, Training, and Exercise (TT&E) Subgroup through which FEMA and other Federal departments and agencies make recommendations and coordinate their continuity training activities. Composed of 22 members representing the interagency community, and chaired jointly by the Director, ONSC Plans Division and a representative chosen from the interagency community, the TT&E Subgroup provides recommendations to ONSC and the IA CWG on COOP tests, training, and exercises activities. A primary focus of this Subgroup is development of the Master Interagency COOP Test, Training, and Exercise Plan, which serves as an implementation guide for the Interagency COOP TT&E program. This document provides a common TT&E framework for the nation's COOP program??outlining responsibilities, presenting training goals, and describing the program's components.

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

Explanation: FY2008-2012 Future Year Homeland Security Program (FYHSP) Performance Measure: Percent of Federal departments and agencies with fully operational continuity and contingency capabilities. Based on the FY2008-2012 FYHSP plan for the Office of National Security Coordination, the annual goals for the percentage of all Federal departments and agencies having fully operational continuity and contingency capabilities are 95% for FY 2006, and 100% by FY 2008 through FY 2012. The ONSC does not establish specified targets for training courses, conferences, and seminars, because annual activities are in response to identified requirements from the Federal Executive Branch and the interagency community.

Evidence: Annual measures are analyzed and additional measures are adjusted based on past performance. An aggressive and ambitious program has been designed to preclude a straight line annual measurement system or a reduction in goals to be measured. FY 2006 FEMA Annual Performance Plan; FY2008-2012 FYHSP plan for ONSC detail requirements for the following performance measures: ??X Exercise After Action Reviews (AARs). ??X Continuity reporting on 30 departments and agencies to demonstrate capabilities. ??X Interagency Alert and Notification for both tests and real-time continuity requirements. ??X DHS????s ability to achieve current year exercise objectives. ??X DHS????s twelve organizational elements demonstrate viable continuity supporting plans. ??X DHS????s ability to demonstrate heightened capabilities under continuity plans.

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

Explanation: The primary function of ONSC as a coordinating body is to develop capabilities of the specified Federal Executive Branch department and agencies. One of the key methods to execute this function is to chair an interagency continuity working group. This working group serves to promote policy recommendations, identify tools and resources for capability enhancements, and to coordinate exercise activities. Our partners (the Federal departments and agencies) demonstrate their commitment to the long-term goal of preparedness through participation in the ONSC offered training, lectures, working groups, and exercises. Additionally, Exercise FORWARD CHALLENGE 2006 enabled Federal Departments and Agencies to validate and assess COOP plans, procedures and policies; validated and tested interagency COOP communications procedures and capabilities; fulfilled the annual continuity exercise and training requirements of EO 12656, PDD 67, and FPC 65; exercised full COOP capability across the Federal Executive Branch.

Evidence: ONSC works with partners in development of all program capabilities through various committees and working groups. These working groups foster the realization of each of the programs long-term continuity and contingency goals. TOPOFF 4 CPX - Continuity Component Draft Evaluation Plan (EVALPLAN) ; and Exercise FORWARD CHALLENGE 2006 Exercise Plan (EXPLAN)

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

Explanation: The ONSC programs for continuity and contingencies are sensitive and unique and do not lend themselves to routine inspection. However, the Government Accountability Office has conducted successive evaluations of continuity operations that have served to provide clear direction for improvements to the programs. These independent, high quality evaluations by the GAO have highlighted many successes as well as opportunities for improvement by ONSC.

Evidence: GAO report titled, "Continuity of Operations: Agency Plans Have Improved, But Better Oversight Could Assist Agencies in Preparing for Emergencies" dated April 28, 2005. This report contained detailed evidence regarding: -Major federal agencies used sound practices to identify and validate their essential functions -Agencies made progress since 2002 in improving compliance with FEMA guidance -Agency continuity of operations plans addressed the use of telework arrangements during emergencies

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

Explanation: ONSC has established clear, salient program objectives for continuity and contingencies. The measurable outcomes of these objectives serve to ensure continuity of operations across the Federal Executive Branch and to ensure timely and appropriate actions across the interagency community in response to all-hazard emergency management to ensure survival of an enduring constitutional government. These measures of effectiveness are managed through the budget process as well as oversight of program documentation, test training and exercises, infrastructure/logistics, and information technologies/ communications. The measurable outcome from continuity and contingency programs is the demonstrated ability to meet the needs of the Executive Branch and to support of the interagency community. As a requirement within the Department of Homeland Security, FEMA/ONSC budget requests are linked directly to plans and performance through a system known as Planning, Programming, Budgeting & Execution (PPBE). PPBE uses strategic planning to drive the process. Resources are identified and committed to priorities, multi-year programs with valid annual and long-term performance goals and measures are established, and programs are managed through meaningful program reviews. Also each component of DHS plans activities and initiatives at least 5 years into the future in a system called Future Years Homeland Security Program (FYHSP). The FYSHP involves setting long-term goals for each program that establishes the bar for performance and links directly to the Strategic Plan. Yearly milestones are set forth in each program area to guide planning and budgeting direction. This process creates milestones to demonstrate a cycle of achievement towards the long-term goals.

Evidence: ONSC annual Spending Plan contains explicit requirements for the development of continuity and contingency program training, exercises, assessments, infrastructure development, telecommunications upgrades, and supporting programs. DHS Strategic Plan DHS Secretary Priorities FEMA Strategic Plan EP&R/FEMA Under Secretary Priorities

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

Explanation: ONSC has begun an overarching strategic planning process that evaluates the organizational framework and charts a way ahead to establish a vision for future success; redefines its current, unique mission requirements; establishes challenging, realistic goals to meet the vision; and the result of these efforts will be the establishment of clearly defined performance measures that will continue to challenge the organization and ensure mission success.

Evidence: ONSC continues to meet and exceed expectations from the Federal Executive Branch, yet it strives for continued growth as an organization. Recent efforts to evaluate and improve the strategic framework of ONSC have highlighted some areas of focus. In addition to the efforts to improve ONSC performance, the biennial exercises are focusing on greater participation and feedback from participating agencies. These efforts have resulted in immediate enhancement of capabilities as well as documented after action comments. In this holistic approach, ONSC continues to improve readiness across the Federal Executive Branch. Although these planning efforts are currently on-going, the end result of these efforts will be a revised strategy and performance based measures of effectiveness.

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

Explanation: ONSC has been developing for the past two years, and is now preparing to adopt, a program called the Readiness Reporting System (RRS) that will serve to automate the monthly collection of partner reports on preparedness. This system is designed to provide senior government officials real-time information on the readiness posture of Federal Executive Branch department and agency continuity preparedness. Currently, the partners provide information on a case-by-case basis following events or scheduled exercises. The information flows through a formal reporting chain that is synthesized by ONSC to evaluate the effectiveness of their programs.

Evidence: The Readiness Reporting System (RRS) contract was awarded in 2002. The purpose of the contract of the RRS was to develop an automated system by which departments and agencies could report on their continuity and contingency readiness status. The first of three spirals (implementing steps) will be operational in 2006.

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

Explanation: ONSC partners with both Federal agencies and contractor support to meet all mission support requirements. The interagency communities play an important role as well as share the responsibilities for the development, conduct, and assessment of annual exercises, which are used to evaluate performance. In the development of these programs, on a quarterly basis, each subprogram is required to report on the status of its appropriated funds. The milestones and priorities laid out at the beginning of the fiscal year are tracked to determine activity, progress and appropriate utilization of funding. Planning and programmatic changes are made throughout the year, based on progress and the efficiency of activities. In some cases, projects are curtailed and discontinued, and funding is reprogrammed to more critical and promising areas, when progress cannot be demonstrated. The milestones and priorities are considered to be work plans for the managers and are part of their regular performance evaluations. This information is reported on a quarterly basis through the FYHSP. Future spending allocations, planning, and resources will be determined by subprogram performance. The Mount Weather Emergency Operations Center obtains annual funding through the rental of space to COOP tenants, both within DHS and with other Federal agencies. The rental agreements are five-year memorandum of understandings with interagency agreements negotiated annually. Oversight is provided through the Working Capital Fund Board of Directors to approve the five year budget plan and review of the current year budget execution. The Working Capital Fund Chairman is currently the Chief Financial Officer of FEMA.

Evidence: FYHSP; Quarterly Performance Report; PPBS Training Presentation; TOPOFF 4 CPX - Continuity Component Draft Evaluation Plan (EVALPLAN); and Exercise FORWARD CHALLENGE 2006 Exercise Plan (EXPLAN)

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

Explanation: Within ONSC, our resource allocation decisions are guided by our priorities. Once priorities have been established, budgets are developed that indicate funding requirements for fulfilling annual milestones and long-term goals. All funding is executed using a spending plan based on program priorities and planned activities. Managed by Quarterly Performance Reviews and Briefings, which include a summary of successes and roadblocks to determine overall program and Agency performance; budget status and procurement rate; performance measures and milestone status. Each subprogram plans in order to complete most financial obligations in a responsible manner by the third quarter of the fiscal year. Each quarter, the subprograms report their financial information under the categories of spending plan amount, allocation, commitment, obligation, amount remaining in accounts and percentage remaining.

Evidence: ONSC annual Spending Plan contains requirements for the development of continuity and contingency program training, exercises, assessments, infrastructure development, telecommunications upgrades, and supporting programs. DHS Strategic Plan DHS Secretary Priorities FEMA Strategic Plan EP&R/FEMA Under Secretary Priorities FYHSP; Quarterly Performance Report

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

Explanation: Competitive procurement and the use of pilot programs are the primary methods utilized by ONSC to ensure the best and most effective use of public funds. By pursuing best business practices and maintaining strict performance goals, ONSC has established a history of effective and efficient use of allocated funds. The program will work to develop a measure of efficiency.

Evidence: FEMA has a "no cost" agreement with XM Radio Satellite to distribute Emergency Alert System (EAS) messages to the Primary Entry Point (PEP) radio stations nationwide. The Digital Emergency Alert System (DEAS) sends messages via data casting technology over the PBS and local public television frequencies. There is no cost to the government for this as the FCC under the EAS provisions covers it. Geo-Targeting Alert System is a joint venture between FEMA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). We are using NOAA's weather data over their FX collaborative system drawing shape files to geo-target a reverse 911 call out through an Emergency Telephone Network (ETN). These and other pilot programs serve to provide tremendous capability without direct costs to the program.

Does the program collaborate and coordinate effectively with related programs?

Explanation: While there are no "related" programs, ONSC coordinates continuity planning, readiness, and contingency programs with the White House Military Office, the Homeland Security Council, the National Operations Center, the Inter-agency Advisory Council, the Inter-agency (IA) COOP Working Group, the Small Agency Council, and the Enduring Constitutional Government Coordinating Council (ECGCC). Similarly, ONSC provides templates to the Executive Branch departments and agencies to assist and increase effectiveness related to COOP planning, implementation, activation, and readiness. ONSC partners with both Federal agencies and contractor support to meet all mission support requirements. The interagency communities play an important role as well as share the responsibilities for the development, conduct, and assessment of annual COOP exercises. They initiate and coordinate exercise planning with ONSC; assist in reviewing key exercise materials; assist in establishing exercise staffing requirements and in obtaining agency resource commitments; review and provide comments, as appropriate, on the exercise evaluation requirements and exercise After-Action Reports. Joint accomplishments of collaboration would include Exercise Pinnacle contingency exercise, TOPOFF 4 command post exercise, and Exercise Forward Challenge 2006.

Evidence: PDD-67, Enduring Constitutional Government and Continuity of Governmental Operations - is a classified document that generally directs us to lead the Federal Government COOP/COG program. Executive Order 12656, Assignment of Emergency Preparedness Responsibilities. TOPOFF 4 CPX - Continuity Component Draft Evaluation Plan (EVALPLAN); and Exercise FORWARD CHALLENGE 2006 Exercise Plan (EXPLAN)

Does the program use strong financial management practices?

Explanation: As a requirement within the Department of Homeland Security, FEMA/ONSC budget requests are linked directly to plans and performance through a system known as Planning, Programming, Budgeting & Execution (PPBE). PPBE uses strategic planning to drive the process. Resources are identified and committed to priorities, multi-year programs with valid annual and long-term performance goals and measures are established, and programs are managed through meaningful program reviews. Also each component of DHS plans activities and initiatives at least 5 years into the future in a system called Future Years Homeland Security Program (FYHSP). The FYSHP involves setting long-term goals for each program that establishes the bar for performance and links directly to the Strategic Plan. Yearly milestones are set forth in each program area to guide planning and budgeting direction. This process creates milestones to demonstrate a cycle of achievement towards the long-term goals. Operating within this established process described above, ONSC maintains fiscal accountability through quarterly budget reviews held with Division Directors and supporting staff. Budget expenditures are monitored through the Integrated Financial Management Information System (IFMIS) in order to track and project program spending against approved obligations. These financial practices allow for the re-allocation of funds from under executed projects to other "unfunded" priorities. These financial controls ensure ONSC strategic priorities are funded within the limits of its budget.

Evidence: FEMA CFO financial plans and practices. DHS Strategic Plan DHS Secretary Priorities FEMA Strategic Plan EP&R/FEMA Under Secretary Priorities

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

Explanation: ONSC has made tremendous strides in assessing the continuity and contingency programs from a systematic and strategic framework. In the development of these strategies, there have been a number of shortfalls or deficiencies identified by the ONSC leadership. These shortfalls tie directly to their mission and executive function thus must be resolved. The staff has identified some very specific areas that could have near-term solutions for lasting results. These areas include the Readiness Reporting System (RRS), Integrated Public Alert and Warning System (IPAWS), and the inclusion of the Small Agency Council within the Interagency COOP Working Group to bring them into continuity planning. These identified shortfalls have been addressed directly and immediately to promote the ONSC programs.

Evidence: All below listed pilot projects are funded with supplemental one-time money that will be exhausted in FY2007. These projects are not on ONSC's baseline budget. FEMA is overseeing several IPAWS pilot project initiatives as follows: 1) Digital Emergency Alert System (DEAS) using public television stations for broadcast purposes; 2) Geo-Targeted Alert System (GTAS) is a joint venture between FEMA and NOAA to geo-target alerts and warnings to the public; 3) Web Alert and Relay Network (WARN) is a new DHS capability for the public to opt-in through a web portal for public alert and warning information; 4) Emergency Alert System (EAS) satellite upgrade will provide survivable nationwide satellite connectivity for EAS signal distribution. RRS is under contract and will be fielded in the near-term.

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

Explanation: ONSC has made tremendous strides in achieving its long-term performance goal of promoting designated departments and agencies of the Executive Branch to attain fully operational continuity and contingency capabilities. These efforts have brought these organizations from 80% capability in FY2003 to where it is projected that 100% will meet their performance goals by FY2008. These percentages are consistent with the performance measures within the FY2008-2012 FYHSP plan for the Office of National Security Coordination that expects 95% of the Executive Branch departments and agencies to have fully operational continuity capabilities by FY2006 and 100% by FY2008, to continue through FY2012. Although the reported operational readiness percentages are below these stated goals, many of the required capabilities have been met through continued training, updated ONSC guidance to improve procedures, direct ONSC support, and exercise outcomes. The key shortfalls that are keeping these percentages lower than desired are primarily due to facility limitations and not the agencies efforts. The Homeland Security Council expanded capability reporting requirements to include enhanced, redundant communications. The capability assessments include the ability to operate from remote locations, and this is the principal shortcoming of the departments and agencies. Until continuity and contingency operations can be conducted with secure communications from alternate locations, their operational readiness will continue to be reported below target. Resolution to this shortfall is a priority for ONSC and its partners and there has been significant progress in developing these capabilities.

Evidence: Improved continuity program, training, and communications capabilities have been targeted as priorities in the long-term performance goal. Measures were adopted that include the provision of training opportunities and documentation support to designated department and agency personnel. They also include the provision of support documentation to designated department and agency personnel. ONSC sponsored exercises (Quiet Strength; Forward Challenge; Interagency regional exercises; National Capital Region exercises known as Determined Challenge) as well as annual GAO audits demonstrate capability development of the target agencies. The FY2008-2012 FYHSP for ONSC establishes program goals for the next five years. Nationwide continuity training implementation results: Course Personnel Trained COOP Awareness Course 7,221 Introduction to COOP 4,770 COOP Managers Train the Trainer Course 1,627 Instructors Building Design for National Security (Risk Assessment) Train the Trainer Course 265 Students 27 Instructors Exercise Design Course 14,129

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

Explanation: The designated Executive Branch departments and agencies have demonstrated operational continuity and contingency capabilities that have far exceeded previously reported operational competencies. Although reported operational readiness percentages are below stated goals, through continued training, improved documentation, direct ONSC support, and exercise lesson-learned, these agencies continue to make improvements. Recently, the Homeland Security Council expanded the requirements for contingency and continuity assessments which include enhanced, redundant secure communications. These changes have had a direct impact on the operational readiness reporting of the departments and agencies. Resolution to this shortfall is a priority for ONSC and its partners and there has been significant progress in developing these capabilities.

Evidence: Forward Challenge, full-scale interagency continuity exercises provide the vehicle to assess the preparedness of our partners. In February 2005, ONSC conducted capability assessments of ten of the major departments and agencies at the direction of Homeland Security Council. In addition, with each change to the continuity readiness levels in response to real-world events/threats, departments and agencies report their operational capability to the ONSC. ONSC sponsored exercises (Quiet Strength; Forward Challenge; Interagency regional exercises; National Capital Region exercises known as Determined Challenged) as well as annual GAO audits demonstrate capability development of the target agencies.

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

Explanation: ONSC reviews continuity capabilities by focusing on the areas of guidance, training, exercises, and assessments. During these reviews, categories examined include response to and performance during exercises, participation in quarterly alert tests, and the ability of partners to maintain updated Emergency Relocation Group alert rosters, among others. As our partners improve their capabilities, they gain efficiencies by demonstrating improved performance. Similarly, ONSC works diligently each year to do more with its annual budget. Budget analysts within ONSC research ways to provide services in a more cost-effective manner. In turn, ONSC has provided more services/capabilities, of higher quality, to Executive Branch departments and agencies despite minimal annual increases to the organization's budget from FY2003 through FY2006. Lastly, the continuity training program was specifically designed to improve efficiencies and cost-effectiveness by providing Train-the-Trainer Courses. Instead of ONSC providing continuity training to all Federal partners, we provide Train-the-Trainer Courses to the training personnel within those Federal organizations. ONSC provides the learning tools for them to train their personnel within their departments and agencies. Also, ONSC provides web-based continuity training, so that anyone from wherever they are located can take a desired course. These efforts gain efficiencies through cooperation with partners and provide cost benefits while increasing overall preparedness.

Evidence: A multi-year strategy and program management plan has been developed to forecast FEMA's future requirements for training, documentation, and communications. An effective life cycle plan ensures that all equipment is functional and replaced as required to maintain a state-of-the-market capability. In addition, the continuity training program is focused on train-the-trainer deliveries, providing a cadre of certified instructors to participating departments and agencies. These instructors are given the resources necessary to deliver the course materials within their own organizations. This method increases opportunities for training to all agencies while simultaneously reducing overhead for both ONSC and the supported organizations. Course Personnel Trained to Date: ?? COOP Awareness Course - 7,221 ?? Introduction to COOP - 4,770 ?? COOP Managers Train the Trainer Course - 1,564 Instructors ?? Building Design for National Security (Risk Assessment) Train the Trainer Course - 265 Students / 27 Instructors ?? Exercise Design Course - 18,192

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

Explanation: While there are no "related" programs, ONSC coordinates continuity planning and readiness with contingency programs, the White House Military Office, the Homeland Security Council, the Homeland Security Operations Center, the Inter-agency Incident Management Group, the Inter-agency (IA) COOP Working Group, the Small Agency Council, and the Enduring Constitutional Government Coordinating Council (ECGCC). Similarly, the Office of National Security Coordination provides templates to the Executive Branch departments and agencies to assist and increase effectiveness related to COOP planning, implementation, activation, and readiness.

Evidence: Executive Order 12656, Assignment of Emergency Preparedness Responsibilities. PDD-67, Enduring Constitutional Government and Continuity of Governmental Operations. DHS MD 9300.1 - Delegates original FEMA authorities from DHS back to FEMA.

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

Explanation: The ONSC programs for continuity and contingencies are sensitive and unique and do not lend themselves to routine inspection. However, the Government Accountability Office has conducted successive evaluations of continuity operations that have served to provide clear direction for improvements to the programs. These independent, high quality evaluations by the GAO have highlighted many successes as well as opportunities for improvement by ONSC.

Evidence: GAO report titled, "Continuity of Operations: Agency plans Have Improved, but Better Oversight Could Assist Agencies in Preparing for Emergencies" dated April 28, 2005. This report contained detailed evidence regarding: -Major federal agencies used sound practices to identify and validate their essential functions -Agencies made progress since 2002 in improving compliance with FEMA guidance -Agency continuity of operations plans addressed the use of telework arrangements during emergencies