DHS Does Not Know Its Total Investment in R&D, and Policies and Guidance Could Help Define and Oversee R&D Efforts

		DHS Does Not Know Its Total Investment in R&D

DHS does not know how much all of its components invest in R&D,  making it difficult to oversee R&D efforts across the department. According to DHS budget officials, S&T, DNDO, and the Coast Guard are  the only components that conduct R&D and, according to our analysis,  they are the only components that report budget authority, obligations, or  outlays for R&D activities to OMB as part of the budget process. However, we identified an additional $255 million in R&D obligations by  other DHS components. Specifically:
S&T reported receiving $50 million in reimbursements from other DHS  components, such as U.S. Our analysis identified that DHS components, outside of S&T, DNDO,  and the Coast Guard, obligated $151 million to DOE national  laboratories for R&D-related projects (44 percent of total DHS  spending at the national laboratories in fiscal year 2011). As a result, it is  difficult to identify the department’s total investment in R&D, which limits  DHS’s ability to oversee components’ R&D efforts and align them with  agencywide R&D goals and priorities. S&T Coordinates Some R&D at DHS, but DHS R&D Is Fragmented and Overlapping, Increasing the Risk of Unnecessary Duplication

S&T has coordinated R&D efforts across DHS to some extent, but the  department’s R&D efforts are fragmented and overlapping, which  increases the risk of unnecessary duplication. We identified 35 instances  of overlap among contracts that DHS components awarded for R&D  projects, but did not identify instances of duplication among these  contracts. Additionally, DHS has not developed a policy defining who is  responsible for coordinating R&D and what processes should be used to  coordinate it, and S&T does not have mechanisms to track all R&D  activities at DHS. Developing a policy defining the roles and  responsibilities for coordinating R&D, and establishing coordination  processes and a mechanism to track all R&D projects could help DHS  mitigate existing fragmentation and overlap, and reduce the risk of  unnecessary duplication. DHS R&D Is Fragmented and Overlapping, Increasing the Risk of Unnecessary Duplication

R&D at DHS is inherently fragmented because several components within  DHS—S&T, the Coast Guard, and DNDO—were each given R&D  responsibilities in law, and other DHS components may pursue and  conduct their own R&D efforts as long as those activities are coordinated  through S&T. S&T awarded four separate contracts to develop advanced algorithms  for explosives detection, while TSA also awarded contracts to develop  algorithms to evaluate images for explosives. However, other component officials we interviewed did not view S&T’s  coordination practices as positively. Conclusions

Conducting R&D on technologies is a key component of DHS’s efforts to  detect, prevent, and mitigate terrorist threats and is vital to enhancing the  security of the nation. Multiple entities across DHS conduct various types  of R&D in pursuit of their respective missions, but DHS does not have a  department-wide policy defining R&D or guidance directing components  how to report R&D activities and investments. Furthermore, DHS has taken some steps to coordinate R&D  efforts across the department, but does not have a cohesive policy  defining roles and responsibilities for coordinating R&D and mechanisms  to track all DHS R&D projects. Such policies and guidance could be included as  an update to the department’s existing acquisition directive and should  include the following elements: a well-understood definition of R&D that provides reasonable  assurance that reliable accounting and reporting of R&D resources  and activities for internal and external use are achieved, a description of the department’s process and roles and  responsibilities for overseeing and coordinating R&D investments and  efforts, and a mechanism to track existing R&D projects and their associated  costs across the department. How much does the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) invest  in research and development (R&D) and to what extent does it have  policies and guidance for defining R&D and overseeing R&D  resources and efforts across the department? To determine how much DHS invests in R&D and the extent that it has  policies and guidance for defining R&D and overseeing R&D resources  and efforts across the department, we reviewed DHS’s budget and  congressional budget justifications to identify R&D investments reported  from fiscal years 2011 through 2013. To determine the extent that R&D is coordinated within DHS to prevent  overlap, fragmentation, and unnecessary duplication, we
Reviewed component R&D plans and project documentation.
Why GAO Did This Study

Conducting R&D on technologies for detecting, preventing, and mitigating terrorist threats is vital to enhancing the security of the nation. Since its creation, DHS has spent billions of dollars researching and developing technologies used to support its missions including securing the border, detecting nuclear devices, and screening airline passengers and baggage for explosives, among others. Within DHS, S&T conducts R&D and is the component responsible for coordinating R&D across the department, but other components, such as the Coast Guard and DNDO, also conduct R&D to support their respective missions. GAO was asked to identify (1) how much DHS invests in R&D and the extent to which DHS has policies and guidance for defining R&D and overseeing R&D resources and efforts across the department, and (2) the extent to which R&D is coordinated within DHS to prevent overlap, fragmentation, or unnecessary duplication. GAO reviewed information on DHS R&D budgets, contracts, and DHS spending on R&D at DOE national laboratories for fiscal years 2010 through 2012. GAO also reviewed DHS R&D plans and project documentation, and interviewed DHS headquarters and component officials.

What GAO Found

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) does not know the total amount its components invest in research and development (R&D) and does not have policies and guidance for defining R&D and overseeing R&D resources across the department. According to DHS, its Science & Technology Directorate (S&T), Domestic Nuclear Detection Office (DNDO), and U. S. Coast Guard are the only components that conduct R&D and, according to GAOs analysis, these are the only components that report budget authority, obligations, or outlays for R&D activities to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) as part of the budget process. However, GAO identified an additional $255 million in R&D obligations by other DHS components. For example, S&T reported receiving $50 million in reimbursements from other DHS components to conduct R&D. Further, 10 components obligated $55 million for R&D contracts to third parties and $151 million to Department of Energy (DOE) national laboratories for R&D-related projects, but these were not reported as R&D to OMB. According to DHS, it is difficult to identify all R&D investments across the department because DHS does not have a department wide policy defining R&D or guidance directing components how to report all R&D spending and activities. As a result, it is difficult for DHS to oversee components R&D efforts and align them with agency wide R&D goals and priorities. Developing specific policies and guidance could assist DHS components in better understanding how to report R&D activities, and better position DHS to determine how much the agency invests in R&D to effectively oversee these investments.
S&T has taken some steps to coordinate R&D efforts across DHS, but the department's R&D efforts are fragmented and overlapping, which increases the risk of unnecessary duplication. R&D at DHS is inherently fragmented because S&T, the Coast Guard, and DNDO were each given R&D responsibilities in law, and other DHS components may pursue and conduct their own R&D efforts as long as those activities are coordinated through S&T. S&T uses various mechanisms to coordinate its R&D efforts including component liaisons, component R&D agreements, joint R&D strategies, and integrated R&D product teams composed of S&T and component officials. However, GAO identified 35 instances of overlap among contracts that DHS components awarded for R&D projects. For example, S&T and the Transportation Security Administration both awarded overlapping contracts to different vendors to develop advanced algorithms to detect the same type of explosive. While GAO did not identify instances of unnecessary duplication among these contracts, DHS has not developed a policy defining who is responsible for coordinating R&D and what processes should be used to coordinate it, and does not have mechanisms to track all R&D activities at DHS that could help prevent overlap, fragmentation, or unnecessary duplication. For example, S&T did not track homeland security-related R&D activities that DHS components contracted through DOE national laboratories from fiscal year 2010 through 2013; thus, it could not provide information on those contracts. Developing a policy defining the roles and responsibilities for coordinating R&D, and establishing coordination processes and a mechanism to track all R&D projects could help DHS mitigate existing fragmentation and overlap, and reduce the risk of unnecessary duplication.

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends that DHS develop policies and guidance for defining, reporting and coordinating R&D activities across the department; and that DHS establish a mechanism to track R&D projects. DHS concurred with GAOs recommendations.