	Background

The PSOB program provides death, disability, and education benefits to  eligible public safety officers and their families in the event of the officer’s  death or permanent and total disability in the line of duty. The PSOB program is administered by the PSOB Office, a unit of the  Bureau of Justice Assistance within DOJ’s Office of Justice Programs. In 2009, GAO Identified Issues with Timeliness of Claims Processing, Program Awareness, and DOJ’s Monitoring of Program Performance

		Death and Education Claims Were Processed Faster Than Disability Claims

Based on the sample we used for our 2009 report, we estimated that the  PSOB Office closed and approved the different types of claims at varying  rates. Specifically, the average length was 7  months to a year for death claims, 4 to 6 years for disability claims, and 7  to 10 years for education claims associated with approved death claims. At the time of our report, most  of these claims were being processed on paper but the PSOB office had  plans to and subsequently implemented an automated information  management system in an effort to help ensure efficient claims  processing and improve available data on claims. In 2009, Public Safety Organizations In Selected States Expressed Concerns about Program Awareness, Difficulties Establishing Eligibility, and Perceived Long Wait Times for Benefits

In 2009, we reported that state and local officials from police and fire  department and other public safety officer organizations did not always  know about PSOB program benefits, particularly disability and education  benefits. In particular, representatives of 15 of the 44 organizations we  spoke with mentioned a lack of awareness about disability and education  benefits, while officials from another 6 organizations were concerned that  their constituents had a general lack of knowledge of the PSOB program. DOJ Did Not Monitor PSOB Program Performance in 2009

At the time of our 2009 report, the PSOB Office had not followed  government guidelines for performance monitoring. As a result, the program had little  accountability. To strengthen PSOB’s accountability and enhance awareness of  the program and its benefits, we recommended in 2009 that the Bureau of  Justice Assistance establish appropriate performance goals and  measures and use reliable data to monitor and publicly report on the  program’s performance. DOJ agreed with these recommendations. PSOB Office Has Taken Some Actions to Monitor Performance Since 2009, but a Recent OIG Report Identified Continuing Problems

DOJ has taken steps to implement program improvements. By 2014, we  observed that the Bureau of Justice Assistance had posted two PSOB  performance measures and related data on its public website in  consultation with public safety stakeholder groups: average time for the  PSOB program to receive basic required documents, and average time  for the PSOB program to determine a claim. The Bureau subsequently  posted additional performance measures on its public website, including  average number of days to assign a PSOB Outreach Specialist and  percentage of claims determined within 1 year. While posting data on  these performance measures represents an improvement, as of April  2016, the Bureau of Justice Assistance has not taken the additional step  of publishing performance goals—which specify the desired level of  performance—for the PSOB program. We continue to believe that the  Bureau of Justice Assistance should publish performance goals to help  the public gauge how well the program is working and enhance  stakeholder awareness of the program. In addition, in its July 2015 report, DOJ’s OIG raised questions about  claims processing times and performance measurement. The OIG concluded that it did not believe that the PSOB  Office’s database, as a management tool, was adequate to evaluate  efficiencies in processing or to identify potential causes of timeliness  problems. The OIG made four recommendations to DOJ to address these  findings, and DOJ agreed with all four recommendations. While DOJ has taken some steps to address these  issues, continued attention is needed to help ensure accountability for  achieving program goals.
Why GAO Did This Study

The PSOB program, administered by the Department of Justice's Bureau of Justice Assistance, provides three types of benefits (death, disability, and education) to public safety officers and their eligible family members in cases of line-of-duty death or disability. GAO's 2009 report (GAO-10-5) examined the timeliness of claims processing and the extent to which the program followed government guidelines for monitoring program performance. The report made two recommendations to DOJ. DOJ's OIG issued a report in 2015 that provided updated information on the concerns raised by GAO in 2009.
This testimony summarizes key findings of GAO's October 2009 report on the PSOB program and DOJ's actions to implement GAO's recommendations from that report. For its 2009 report, GAO reviewed a generalizable sample of 233 PSOB claims that were opened during fiscal years 2006 to 2008, reviewed relevant agency documents, and interviewed PSOB program officials, representatives of advocacy organizations, and state and local officials in five selected states. For this statement, GAO also reviewed DOJ's actions to date and the findings from the DOJ OIG's 2015 report on the PSOB program.

What GAO Found

GAO's 2009 report on the Public Safety Officers' Benefits (PSOB) program— created to provide certain benefits in cases of public safety officers' death or total disability in the line of duty—identified issues with the timeliness of claims processing, program awareness, and performance measurement. Specifically, GAO found that death and education claims were processed faster than disability claims. GAO estimated that the Department of Justice's (DOJ) PSOB Office generally had processed education and death claims in under a year while disability claims took between 17 and 26 months. In 2009, most claims were being processed on paper, and DOJ had plans to establish an automated claims system to help ensure more efficient claims processing and improve available claims data. This system has since been established.
GAO's 2009 report also identified issues with awareness of program benefits and adherence to federal guidelines for performance monitoring. In particular, representatives of 15 of the 44 public safety organizations GAO spoke with mentioned a lack of awareness about disability or education benefits, while officials from another 6 organizations were concerned that their constituents had a general lack of knowledge of the program. Moreover, GAO found that because DOJ had not set strategic goals and measures for the program, monitored performance, or reported results, the program had little accountability. To enhance claimant awareness and program accountability, GAO recommended that DOJ establish appropriate performance measures and goals for the PSOB program and use reliable data to monitor and report on program performance.
DOJ agreed with GAO's recommendations and has taken some steps to address them. Specifically, by 2014, DOJ had established two PSOB performance measures and posted data for these measures on its public website. DOJ subsequently posted data for additional performance measures on its website, including average number of days to assign a PSOB Outreach Specialist and percentage of claims determined within 1 year. While posting data on these measures represents an improvement, as of April 2016, DOJ had not taken the additional step of publishing performance goals—which specify the desired level of performance--for the PSOB program. GAO continues to believe that publishing performance goals is a key step in gauging how well the program is working and enhancing stakeholder awareness of the program.
Findings from a 2015 report by DOJ's Office of Inspector General (OIG) highlighted the program's continuing problems in the timeliness of claims processing and reporting of reliable program performance data. The OIG concluded that it did not believe that the PSOB Office's database, as a management tool, was adequate to evaluate efficiencies in processing or to identify potential causes of timeliness problems. The OIG made four recommendations to DOJ to address these concerns, and DOJ agreed with the recommendations. Continued attention to these issues by DOJ is needed to help ensure accountability for achieving the program's goals.

What GAO Recommends

GAO is not making any new recommendations in this testimony.