The  board has identified information-sharing gaps and developed a list of key  initiatives to help address those gaps, but additional steps could help  DHS sustain these efforts. DHS has also made progress in developing  and implementing DHS’s Information Sharing Segment Architecture, but  has not yet fully developed this architecture. DHS Has Advanced Key Information-Sharing Initiatives, but Progress Has Slowed for Half of Them in Part because of Funding Constraints

Since DHS developed its list of key information-sharing initiatives, many  of those initiatives have proceeded and met interim program milestones. However, DHS officials  stated that the board’s involvement has kept some of these initiatives  from experiencing funding cuts. As a  result, DHS is taking steps to institutionalize some of its policies and  practices, including developing key strategies and plans, that will be  important in planning and managing its information-sharing efforts. DHS Has Taken Steps to Track Information- Sharing Efforts, but Has Not Yet Fully Assessed How They Have Improved Sharing

DHS is tracking the progress key information-sharing initiatives are  making toward interim milestones but the department generally does not  track when the initiatives will be completed, so as to make course  corrections if completion dates are delayed, or assess what impact they  are having on achieving needed sharing. DHS has not yet developed measures that determine the impact of  sharing on its homeland security efforts, but plans to develop more  meaningful ways to assess information-sharing results and progress  toward achieving its vision. DHS is tracking the  implementation progress of key information-sharing initiatives, but the  department does not track how close the initiatives are to completion and  could better assess how the initiatives are improving information sharing  or helping DHS achieve its 2015 vision, which includes ensuring that the  right information gets to the right people at the right time. However, determining and documenting initiative  completion dates and assessing how initiatives affect sharing, where  feasible, would help the board better track progress in implementing the  initiatives, make any necessary course corrections if completion dates are  delayed, and demonstrate how initiatives enhance information sharing  and homeland security. First, DHS has begun to assess  the extent to which its technology programs have implemented critical  information-sharing capabilities. However, this plan does not detail— and DHS officials said that they have not determined—the specific  capabilities each particular program must implement for DHS to conclude  that it has improved information sharing enough to achieve the 2015  information-sharing vision. Conclusions

Ensuring that terrorism-related information is shared in an efficient  manner with stakeholders across all levels of government, the private  sector, and foreign countries is a challenging and critical task. For example, in its Roadmap Implementation Guide  or other policies and procedures, documenting processes for identifying  information-sharing gaps and the results; documenting and implementing  a process for analyzing the root causes of those gaps; and establishing  and documenting a process for potential future use for identifying,  assessing, and mitigating the risk of removing an incomplete initiative  from the list would provide DHS with an institutional record to better  replicate, and therefore sustain, its information-sharing efforts. To improve DHS’s ability to track and assess key information-sharing  initiatives, direct the Information Sharing and Safeguarding Governance  Board to incorporate into the board’s existing tracking process  milestones with time frames that initiatives must achieve to be  considered complete, where feasible, and information to show the  impact initiatives are having on information sharing, and direct the Information Sharing and Safeguarding Governance  Board and the Office of the CIO to include in the mechanism the  board is developing to track programs’ achievement of key  capabilities the specific capabilities certain programs must  implement in order to achieve the department’s 2015 information- sharing vision. In commenting on  the report, DHS stated that it concurred with all five recommendations  and identified actions taken or planned to implement them. To determine the extent to which DHS has made  progress in achieving its information-sharing mission, we analyzed  relevant strategic planning documents, such as DHS’s January 2011  Integrated Strategy for High Risk Management, the DHS Information  Sharing Strategy, the 2007 National Strategy for Information Sharing, and  the Office of Intelligence & Analysis (I&A) Strategic Plan 2011-2018. To determine the extent to which DHS has developed information-sharing  plans and identified key efforts, we analyzed documents related to DHS’s  plans and initiatives for sharing, such as DHS’s list of key information- sharing initiatives, and analyzed documents from one initiative—the Law  Enforcement Information Sharing Initiative (LEISI)—which is led by DHS’s  U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
Why GAO Did This Study

Recent planned and attempted acts of terrorism on U.S. soil underscore the importance of the need to ensure that terrorism-related information is shared with stakeholders across all levels of government in an effective and timely manner. DHS, through its Office of Intelligence and Analysis, has responsibility for sharing this information and has established an information-sharing vision for 2015which includes ensuring that the right information gets to the right people at the right time. GAO was asked to examine the extent to which DHS (1) has made progress in achieving its information-sharing mission, and (2) tracks and assesses information-sharing improvements. GAO analyzed relevant DHS documents, such as strategic planning documents and those related to DHSs governance structure, among others, and interviewed DHS officials.

What GAO Found

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has made progress in achieving its information-sharing mission, but could take additional steps to improve its efforts. Specifically, DHS has demonstrated leadership commitment by establishing a governance board to serve as the decision-making body for DHS information-sharing issues. The board has enhanced collaboration among DHS components and identified a list of key information-sharing initiatives. The board has also developed and documented a process to prioritize some of the initiatives for additional oversight and support. However, because DHS has not revised its policies and guidance to include processes for identifying information-sharing gaps and the results; analyzing root causes of those gaps; and identifying, assessing, and mitigating risks of removing incomplete initiatives from its list, it does not have an institutional record that would help it replicate and sustain those information-sharing efforts. Overall, DHSs key information-sharing initiatives have progressed, and most have met interim milestones. However, progress has slowed for half of the 18 key initiatives, in part because of funding constraints. For example, 5 of DHSs top 8 priority information-sharing initiatives currently face funding shortfalls. The board has not been able to secure additional funds for these initiatives because they ultimately compete for funding within the budgets of individual components, but DHS officials noted that the boards involvement has kept some initiatives from experiencing funding cuts. DHS is also developing plans that will be important in managing its information-sharing efforts, such as a revised strategy for information sharing and a related implementation plan.
DHS has taken steps to track its information-sharing efforts, but has not yet fully assessed how they have improved sharing. Specifically, DHS is tracking the implementation progress of key information-sharing initiatives, but the department does not maintain completion dates and does not fully assess the impact initiatives are having on sharing. Determining and documenting initiative completion dates and how initiatives affect sharing, where feasible, would help the board better track progress in implementing the initiatives and make any necessary course corrections if completion dates are delayed. Further, DHS has begun to assess the extent to which its technology programs, systems, and initiativeswhich include the key information-sharing initiativeshave implemented critical information-sharing capabilities, such as secure user access authorization. However, DHS has not yet determined the specific capabilities each particular program must implement for DHS to conclude that it has improved information sharing enough to achieve its information-sharing vision for 2015. Establishing the level of capabilities programs must implement could help DHS prioritize programs, and track and assess progress toward its vision. In addition, DHS is in the process of implementing customer feedback measures on the usefulness of information provided and has taken steps to assess customers information needs. DHS has not yet developed measures that determine the impact of its information-sharing efforts on homeland security, but plans to develop ways to assess information-sharing results toward achieving its 2015 vision. DHSs time frames for completing this effort are to be included in forthcoming plans currently being developed.

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends that DHS revise its policies and guidance to include processes for identifying information-sharing gaps, analyzing root causes of those gaps, and identifying, assessing, and mitigating risks of removing incomplete initiatives from its list; better track and assess the progress of key information-sharing initiatives; and establish the level of capabilities programs must implement to meet its vision for 2015. DHS agreed with these recommendations and identified actions taken or planned to implement them.