TSA revised and updated its Standard Operating Procedures (SOP)  for the program. TSA developed a 2011 strategic implementation plan. Challenges Affecting TSA Assessment Efforts

Even with TSA’s efforts to enhance the program, challenges remain in  several areas: gaining access to some foreign airports, developing an  automated database to manage program information, prioritizing and  providing training and technical assistance, and expanding the scope of  TSA’s airport assessments to include all-cargo operations, as discussed  below. For example,  following the October 2010 discovery of explosive devices in air cargo  packages bound for the United States from Yemen, TSA loaned six hand- held explosives trace detection devices to Yemen in an expedited fashion  as a response to an emergent threat to help enhance the government’s  passenger and cargo screening processes. Some Number of Foreign Airports Complied with ICAO Standards, but TSA Could Better Use Its Assessment Results

		Some Foreign Airports Complied with ICAO Standards, but TSA Identified Serious Noncompliance Issues at Other Airports

Based on our analysis of the results of TSA’s foreign airport assessments  conducted during fiscal year 2006 through May 9, 2011, some number of  the foreign airports TSA assessed complied with all of TSA’s aviation  security assessment standards. Common areas of noncompliance included weaknesses in airport access  controls and passenger and baggage screening. For  example, our analysis showed that some number of regions of the world  had no airports with egregious noncompliance while some regions had  several such airports. TSA Has Not Yet Analyzed Its Assessment Results to Identify Trends and Better Inform Future Activities

TSA has not taken steps to analyze or evaluate its foreign airport  assessment results in the aggregate to identify regional and other trends  over time, which could assist the agency in informing and prioritizing its  future activities. TSA has one internally  funded program in place that is specifically intended to provide aviation  security training and technical assistance to foreign aviation security  officials. Moreover, with analysis of airport assessment results, TSA could better  inform its risk management decision making by identifying trends and  security gaps, and target capacity building efforts accordingly. Opportunities Exist to Clarify Airport Assessment Criteria, Further Target Airport Assessments, and Systematically Identify Security Best Practices

While TSA has taken a number of steps to improve and streamline its  foreign airport assessment program since our 2007 report, opportunities  exist for TSA to make additional improvements in several key areas. This is particularly important given that these scores  represent an overall assessment of an airport’s level of compliance or  noncompliance with ICAO standards that TSA has deemed critical to  airport security, and also are a key component of TSA foreign airport risk- ranking determinations. Although we recognize the  inherently subjective nature of the standards, providing TSA decision  makers with more specific criteria and definitions for determining a foreign  airport’s level of compliance with ICAO standards would provide greater  assurance that such determinations are consistent across airports over  time. In addition, TSA officials we spoke with identified opportunities for TSA to  increase program efficiency by conducting more targeted airport  assessments. For example,  while accompanying TSA inspectors during an airport assessment, we  observed TSA inspectors being briefed on various passenger screening  processes, technologies, and equipment that were comparable to, and in  some cases may have exceeded, those used in the U.S. We believe  establishing a mechanism to systematically compile and analyze this type  of information could help ensure TSA is more effectively able to assist  foreign airports in meeting ICAO standards and improve security  practices, as well as identify security practices and technologies that may  be applicable to enhancing the security of U.S. airports. For example, developing a mechanism to evaluate assessment results to  determine security trends and patterns could enable TSA to target and  prioritize future assessment activities, including training and other  capacity building resources. Moreover, establishing criteria and guidance  for determining the vulnerability of individual foreign airports would  provide for greater consistency of these vulnerability ratings across  airports over time. DHS concurred with the third recommendation that TSA consider the  feasibility of conducting more targeted assessments and systematically  compiling information on aviation security best practices. Appendix I: Scope and Methodology

To examine the efforts made by the Transportation Security  Administration (TSA) to determine whether foreign airports that provide  service to the United States are maintaining and carrying out effective  security measures, we addressed the following questions: (1) to what  extent has TSA taken steps to enhance its foreign airport assessment  program since 2007, and what challenges remain; (2) what are the results  of TSA’s foreign airport assessments, and to what extent does TSA use  the results of these assessments to guide its future assessment activities;  and (3) what opportunities, if any, exist to enhance the value of TSA’s  foreign airport assessment program?
Why GAO Did This Study

International flights bound for the United States continue to be targets of terrorist activity, as demonstrated by the October 2010 discovery of explosive devices in air cargo packages bound for the United States from Yemen. The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) is responsible for securing the nation's civil aviation system, which includes ensuring the security of U.S.-bound flights. As requested, GAO evaluated (1) the steps TSA has taken to enhance its foreign airport assessment program since 2007, and any remaining program challenges; (2) TSA's assessment results, including how TSA uses the results to guide future efforts; and (3) what opportunities, if any, exist to enhance the program. To conduct this work, GAO reviewed foreign airport assessment procedures and results, interviewed TSA and foreign aviation security officials, and observed TSA conduct a foreign airport assessment. While these interviews and observations are not generalizable, they provided insights on TSA's program. This is the public version of a sensitive report GAO issued in September, 2011. Information that TSA deemed sensitive has been omitted.

What GAO Found

Since 2007, TSA has taken a number of steps to enhance its foreign airport assessment program, some of which were taken in response to GAO's prior recommendations. For example, TSA updated its policies and methodologies used to guide and prioritize its assessment efforts, and implemented tools to track its annual assessment schedule, airport assessment results, and foreign government progress in resolving security deficiencies previously identified during the assessments. However, challenges remain in gaining access to some foreign airports, developing an automated database to better manage program information, prioritizing and providing training and technical assistance to foreign countries, and expanding the scope of TSA's airport assessments to include all-cargo operations. TSA has various efforts under way to address these challenges. Based on GAO's analysis of TSA's foreign airport assessments conducted from fiscal year 2006 through May 2011, some foreign airports complied with all of TSA's aviation security assessment standards; however, TSA has identified serious noncompliance issues at a number of foreign airports. Common areas of noncompliance included weaknesses in airport access controls and passenger and baggage screening. Moreover, GAO's analysis showed variation in airport compliance across geographic regions and individual security standards, among other things. For example, GAO's analysis showed that some number of regions of the world had no airports with egregious noncompliance while other regions had several such airports. However, TSA has not yet taken steps to evaluate its assessment results to identify regional and other trends over time. Developing a mechanism to evaluate its assessment results could help support TSA's priorities for aviation security training and technical assistance, inform its risk management decision making by identifying any trends and security gaps, and target capacity building efforts. Opportunities also exist for TSA to make additional program improvements in several key areas. For example, the agency has not developed criteria and guidance for determining foreign airport vulnerability ratings. This is particularly important given that these ratings are a key component for how TSA determines each foreign airport's risk level. Providing TSA decision makers with more specific criteria and definitions could provide greater assurance that such determinations are consistent across airports over time. In addition, there are opportunities for TSA to increase program efficiency and effectiveness by, for example, conducting more targeted foreign airport assessments and systematically compiling and analyzing security best practices. Taking such actions could help TSA better focus its assessments to address areas of highest risk, and identify security best practices and technologies that may be applicable to enhancing the security of both foreign and domestic airports.

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends that TSA develop a mechanism to evaluate its assessment results to identify any trends, and target resources and future activities; establish criteria for determining foreign airport vulnerability ratings; and consider the feasibility of conducting more targeted assessments and compiling information on aviation security best practices. DHS agreed with the recommendations.