Local  municipalities differ in their history of multijurisdiction cooperation. The UASI provides support to metropolitan  areas designated by DHS as high-threat areas. Collaborative Organizations and Strategic Planning Foster Regional Coordination

As corroborated by officials with whom we met, collaborative regional  organizations that include a wide range of stakeholders from multiple  jurisdictions and disciplines contribute to successful regional coordination  for a variety of public programs. Where Consistent with Civic and Political Traditions, Flexible Approaches Can Enhance Regional Organizations

Metropolitan regions differ in their civic and political traditions. Two examples follow. Such plans can guide grant expenditures. Finally, federal financial assistance for coordination  activities can provide important support. Some Federal Requirements Support Regional Organizations

Federal grantor agencies support the existence of regional organizations by  requiring the grantee to establish such an organization before receiving  federal funds. For example, federal transportation law  requires an MPO to write metropolitan transportation improvement plans  before federal highway and transit funds can be allocated. Federal Grant Requirements for Comprehensive Strategic Planning with Measurable Objectives and Resource Alignment Encourage Effective Regional Coordination

Some federal grant programs require strategic plans as a precondition for  receiving federal grant dollars to encourage regional coordination, but for  the plans to be effective they should include measurable objectives and  corresponding resource alignment. For example,  the coordination activities of MPOs are paid in part with federal  transportation funds. NCR Emergency Preparedness Effort Can Benefit from Comprehensive Planning and Application of Standards

Our observations about regional coordination in the implementation of  federal programs in metropolitan areas we visited are applicable to the  efforts to coordinate homeland security in the NCR. As envisioned in the current UASI plans, the NCR’s  UASI program may be on the way to developing multilayered regional  coordination structures for the UASI. According to comments provided by DHS and as discussed at a September  1, 2004, meeting of the UASI governance structures SPG and CAOs  Committee, the UASI governance structure now plans to address these  issues by gathering information from Maryland, Virginia, and the District of  Columbia on funding sources other than UASI, how the funds were  allocated and for what purposes, and how they were distributed by  jurisdiction. Fourth, some grants fund the costs of regional organizations, thereby  providing additional incentives for localities to collaborate  interjurisdictionally. Regional approaches for homeland security continue to evolve quickly, but  the nation is still in the early stages of building institutions and processes to  address emergency preparedness. Based on our work and given the important role that regional  planning and governance can play in improving national preparedness,  these developments warrant continued congressional monitoring and  oversight. The Deputy Mayor/City Administrator of Washington, D.C., also provided  comments. He also commented  that the NCR is unique compared to the six metropolitan areas we chose  for detailed analysis because only the NCR (1) involves two states and a  governmental entity that combines state and local functions; (2) contains  monuments and memorials that are the most visible symbols of our  national strength and patriotism that, if attacked, would create a  perception of vulnerability on the part of the federal government; and (3) is  the seat of the federal government, creating a partnership between the  national government and state and local governments. Scope and Methodology

Our overall goal for this engagement was to identify features of regional  collaboration in urban areas outside of the National Capital Region (NCR)  that could be transferred to homeland security efforts in the NCR and  elsewhere. Based on these various considerations and recommendations, we  identified the Dallas-Fort Worth, Los Angeles, San Francisco Bay, New  York, Philadelphia, and Tampa-St. Petersburg areas as sites meeting one or  more of these criteria and selected them for a more detailed analysis of  regional coordination across a variety of federal programs. We understand that the report has not been fully reviewed within GAO and is, therefore subject to revision.In general, the report describes factors that enhance regional coordination in selected metropolitan areas, the features of federal programs that enhance regional emergency preparedness coordination, and how to incorporate regional coordination for emergency preparedness features from other metropolitan areas into the NCR. The report also recognizes the importance of strategic plans developed by regional organizations can be effective tools to focus resources and efforts to address problems.
Why GAO Did This Study

As requested, GAO reviewed coordination practices in various metropolitan areas to find regional programs with lessons learned that could be applied in the National Capital Region (NCR) and elsewhere. We addressed the following questions: (1) In selected metropolitan areas, what factors enhance regional coordination? (2) What features of federal programs enhance regional emergency preparedness coordination? (3) How does regional coordination for emergency preparedness in the NCR incorporate features from other areas and federal programs? For detailed analysis, we selected Dallas, Los Angeles, New York, Philadelphia, San Francisco, and Tampa-St. Petersburg--considered by DHS to be high-threat urban areas because of their population and critical infrastructure, among other factors. We also analyzed regional coordination in the planning and implementation of transportation and environmental programs because of their history of requiring such collaboration. DHS and the District of Columbia's Deputy Mayor/City Administrator generally agreed with our report regarding the characteristics of regional coordination and that the NCR's Urban Area Security Initiative governance structure was relatively advanced.

What GAO Found

GAO's analysis of federal program documents and plans, and interviews with federal, state, and local officials in six metropolitan areas revealed several factors that characterize effective regional coordination of federally supported efforts. Regional coordination efforts are enhanced by the presence of a collaborative regional organization that includes representation from many different jurisdictions and different disciplines. Also, when regional civic and political traditions foster interjurisdictional coordination, flexibility in the membership and geographic area of the regional organization can enhance collaborative activities. In addition, a comprehensive strategic plan with measurable goals and objectives helps focus resources and efforts to address problems. Finally, funding regional organizations provides incentives for their collaborative planning activities. The federal government can provide support for regional coordination. In particular, through its grant design and requirements, it encourages structures and practices associated with effective regional efforts. For example, federal transportation law requires the existence of metropolitan planning organizations (MPO) before transportation funds can be awarded. Some programs have recognized the importance of flexibility by allowing local jurisdictions to organize themselves in ways consistent with their regional environment. For example, the DHS' Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI) grant program allowed three San Francisco Bay programs to pool some of their grant resources to establish a regionwide UASI effort. Moreover, some federal grants require regional organizations to prepare plans that guide funding decisions. Transportation law, for example, requires MPOs to prepare transportation improvement plans as a condition for awards. Finally, federal financial support can facilitate coordination activities. Several programs, including the MPO program, provide such support. The characteristics of effective regional coordination we identified are applicable to the NCR's efforts to coordinate emergency preparedness. If implemented as planned and as observed in its early stage, the NCR's UASI program would include a collaborative regional organization. However, as we reported in May 2004, the NCR did not include a full array of homeland security grants in its planning. The NCR's UASI program plans to address those issues by identifying non-UASI funding sources and collecting information about the funding allocations, expenditures, and purposes, as well as data on spending by NCR jurisdiction. DHS and UASI officials believe these data will enable program managers to avoid duplication of expenditures and to better utilize program funds. Regional approaches are changing quickly, and the nation is still in the early stages of building regional institutions across the country to deal with homeland security issues. Those important developments warrant continued congressional monitoring and oversight.