These systems are intended to provide secure, reliable, mission-critical  voice communications in a variety of environments, scenarios, and  emergencies. In written responses to our survey, agencies reported that  they prefer to continue to use equipment from the same manufacturers for  various reasons, including ensuring compatibility of new LMR equipment  with existing system requirements and reducing the need for training on  new equipment and systems. Not all federal agencies that responded to our survey reported a need for  LMR interoperability with one another, but most agencies mutually and  independently agreed whether or not they require it. About 68 percent of the ratings from agencies that mutually agreed on the  need to communicate with each other using LMR reported having good or  excellent LMR interoperability. While Standardized Equipment and Training Help, Proprietary Features and Other Factors Continue to Hinder Interoperability

		Standardized Technology and Training Help Enhance Interoperability

The use of standards-based and multi-band LMR equipment and training  and exercises have helped to enhance interoperability, according to  agencies we surveyed. With respect to standards-based equipment,  almost all of the agencies that use LMR equipment to communicate with  other agencies have partially or fully implemented the use of P25- compliant LMR devices, according to our survey. Another LMR technology—the multiband radio (including dual, tri- and  quad-band devices)—operates on multiple public-safety radio bands and  can help to enhance interoperability across users on different parts of the  radio spectrum. In particular, the following factors continue to limit agencies’  progress in achieving interoperability with partner agencies: (1) the use of  proprietary features and encryption in devices, (2) the limited use of  interoperability channels, (3) the lack of standard operating procedures,  and (4) the limited investments in LMR systems and devices. For example, 13 agencies reported using two or more  different vehicles, and three agencies reported using four different  vehicles. A Category Management Approach to Procurement Could Lower LMR Costs and Improve Interoperability

While some agencies that responded to our survey reported using  contract vehicles, many reported that they do not coordinate with other  agencies before purchasing new LMR equipment. However, in response to our survey, nearly 40 percent of agencies (22 of  57) reported that they have not coordinated procurement activities of LMR  devices and related equipment with other federal agencies within the past  5 years, such as by identifying common technical requirements before  purchasing new LMR equipment. These items make  up more than half of the federal government’s overall expenditures and  agencies often purchase and manage these items in a fragmented and  inefficient manner, according to OMB. However, OMB officials acknowledged that a category management  approach to LMR procurement may save the government money while  also supporting the goal of enhanced LMR interoperability among  agencies, largely because it would require agencies to identify their  common technical requirements and purchase equipment in larger  quantities through fewer transactions. Including LMR equipment in OMB’s  category management initiative may enable the federal government to  more fully leverage its aggregate buying power to obtain the most  advantageous terms and conditions for LMR procurements and realize  cost savings. For example, many of the agencies that engage in coordinated  procurement also reported a better general level of LMR interoperability. This duplication of  procurement efforts for similar goods and services imposes significant  costs to agencies. To address this issue, OMB’s  Office of Federal Procurement Policy directs agencies to implement  category management as a way to manage spending across government  for commonly purchased goods and services. By including  LMR equipment in the category management initiative, the federal  government may be able to more fully leverage its aggregate buying  power to save money and obtain the most advantageous terms and  conditions for LMR procurements while also helping agencies to more  effectively communicate in their day-to-day operations and when  responding to emergencies. Specifically, we  reviewed (1) LMR systems and devices used by selected federal  agencies and the state of LMR interoperability among these agencies; (2)  factors that help and hinder interoperability among agencies that use  LMR; and (3) selected agencies’ practices for procuring LMR systems. The initial list of federal agencies was identified by the civilian  participating members of the Emergency Communications Preparedness  Center (ECPC) and confirmed by e-mail; we did not survey agencies  from the Department of Defense. We interviewed  officials from federal agencies with responsibilities related to emergency  communications and procurement of LMR equipment, including DHS; the  National Telecommunications and Information Administration and the  National Institute of Standards and Technology, within the Department of  Commerce; the Federal Communications Commission; the General  Services Administration; the Office of Management and Budget; and  administrators of the ECPC.
Why GAO Did This Study

Public safety personnel across the nation rely on LMR to share information and coordinate their emergency response efforts. LMR systems are intended to provide secure, reliable, mission-critical voice communications in a variety of environments, scenarios, and emergencies; however, LMR interoperability—the ability to communicate across agencies—has been a long-standing challenge at all levels of government.
GAO was asked to examine federal agencies’ LMR interoperability and procurement practices. GAO examined (1) LMR equipment used by federal agencies and the state of LMR interoperability among these agencies; (2) factors that help and hinder LMR interoperability among agencies; and (3) agencies’ LMR procurement practices. GAO surveyed civilian federal agencies, identified through their membership in the Emergency Communications Preparedness Center (57 agencies fully responded to the survey and one agency provided a partial response); reviewed Department of Homeland Security planning documents related to interoperability; and interviewed federal agency officials with responsibilities related to emergency communications and procurement of LMR equipment. GAO also reviewed OMB initiatives to improve federal procurement.

What GAO Found

Federal agencies GAO surveyed generally use land mobile radio (LMR) equipment to meet their core missions, such as public safety, emergency management, or firefighting. More than two-thirds of the 57 agencies GAO surveyed reported using equipment from the same manufacturer because, for example, they believe doing so will help ensure compatibility of new LMR equipment with existing system requirements. Most agencies GAO surveyed were consistent in identifying each other as agencies with which they have or have not needed LMR interoperability over the past 5 years. Of the agencies that identified the need to communicate with each other, about two-thirds reported generally having a good or excellent level of LMR interoperability.
The use of standards-based and multi-band LMR equipment has helped to enhance interoperability among agencies, but the use of proprietary features and other factors continue to hinder interoperability. Almost all of the agencies that GAO surveyed reported using LMR equipment that meets voluntary technical standards, which have improved interoperability. Further, almost half of these agencies reported using multiband radios, which operate on multiple public-safety radio bands, to enhance interoperability. However, agencies reported several factors continue to limit their progress in achieving interoperability with other federal agencies. These factors include the use of proprietary features and encryption in devices and limited investments in LMR systems and devices. For example, about half of the agencies surveyed reported that the use of proprietary features within LMR devices has hindered interoperability.
Nearly half of the agencies GAO surveyed reported using pre-approved vendors with established prices to acquire LMR equipment, mainly through contracts sponsored by the Departments of Homeland Security and the Interior. While this approach can facilitate cost savings and interoperability, many of these agencies reported purchasing equipment through multiple agreements, a practice that can reduce these benefits. About 40 percent of agencies GAO surveyed reported using sole-source procurement or independent approaches. According to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), in general, agencies often purchase and manage items in a fragmented and inefficient manner. This approach can result in duplication of effort, which imposes significant costs on federal agencies. OMB has directed agencies to implement “category management” as an improved way to manage spending across government for commonly purchased goods and services. This approach enables the government to leverage its purchasing power and realize cost savings. However, OMB’s category management initiative does not include LMR equipment even though federal agencies spend millions of dollars annually purchasing such equipment. By including LMR equipment in OMB’s category management initiative, the government could more fully leverage its aggregate buying power to obtain the most advantageous terms and conditions for LMR procurements. OMB officials agreed that a category management approach to LMR procurement might save the government money while supporting the goal of enhanced interoperability among agencies that require it, but OMB has not examined the feasibility of applying this approach to the procurement of LMR equipment.

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends that OMB examine the feasibility of including LMR in its category management initiative. OMB generally agreed with GAO’s recommendations.