A letter of reprimand  describes the unacceptable conduct that is the basis for a disciplinary  action, and represents the least severe form of disciplinary action. TSA Investigated and Adjudicated Approximately 9,600 Misconduct Cases from Fiscal Years 2010 through 2012

According to TSA employee misconduct data that we analyzed, TSA  investigated and adjudicated 9,622 employee misconduct cases from  fiscal years 2010 through 2012. From fiscal years 2010 through 2012,  the annual number of TSA misconduct cases increased from 2,691 to  3,408. In that same period, TSA’s workforce of OSO employees at the  airport/field level grew by about 3,200 employees. As highlighted in table 1, two offense categories accounted for about half  of all cases—attendance and leave, which accounted for 32 percent of  the cases, and screening and security, which accounted for 20 percent of  the cases. Charges for screening- and security-related incidents pertain to violating  SOPs, including failing to conduct security or equipment checks, and  allowing patrons or baggage to bypass screening. As shown in figure 2, 47  percent of the cases that we analyzed resulted in letters of reprimand,  while 31 percent of the cases resulted in suspensions of a definite  duration. Additionally, in 17 percent of the cases, the employee was  removed by TSA. Weaknesses in Procedures Impede TSA’s Ability to Monitor Employee Misconduct Cases

TSA has taken steps to help manage the investigations and adjudications  process, but developing and implementing procedures in four areas could  help the agency better monitor misconduct cases: (1) verifying that  misconduct adjudications are compliant with policies and procedures, (2)  recording case information on all adjudication decisions, (3) tracking the  time to complete all phases of the investigations and adjudications  process, and (4) identifying allegations not adjudicated by the agency. However, TSA does not have a review process to verify that TSA  staff at airports are consistently following these requirements. These airports  are not recording case outcomes that result in no penalty in the database  because TSA has not provided guidance requiring such tracking. Developing and issuing guidance for TSA staff at  airports on the need to record all misconduct case outcomes in the  Integrated Database would emphasize management’s view of the  importance of staff including such information to provide a complete  record of adjudication decisions. For example, we  reviewed a random sample of 50 allegations of employee misconduct  referred from DHS OIG to TSA in fiscal year 2012 and found 2 out of 50  allegations that were not adjudicated by TSA. As a result of our review, TSA subsequently made  adjudication decisions on these allegations; 1 of the adjudication  decisions resulted in a 14-day suspension for the employee because of  disruptive behavior in the workplace, and the other adjudication decision  resulted in no penalty. The results from GAO’s sample cannot be  generalized to the entire population of referrals from DHS OIG to TSA;  however they raise questions as to whether there could be additional  instances of allegations that TSA had not adjudicated in the population of  over 1,300 allegations of TSA employee misconduct that DHS OIG  referred to TSA for action in fiscal year 2012. Specifically, TSA  does not have a process to conduct reviews of misconduct cases to verify  that TSA staff at airports responsible for adjudicating employee  misconduct comply with policies and procedures, nor does the agency  record the outcomes of all cases or track the cycle time to complete the  investigations and adjudications process. Recommendations for Executive Action

To improve TSA’s management and oversight of efforts to address  allegations of employee misconduct, we recommend that the  Administrator of TSA take the following four actions, consistent with  standards for internal control, to establish a process to conduct reviews of misconduct cases to verify  that TSA staff at airports are complying with policies and procedures  for adjudicating employee misconduct, develop and issue guidance to the field clarifying the need for TSA  officials at airports to record all misconduct case outcomes in the  Integrated Database, establish an agency-wide policy to track cycle times in the  investigations and adjudications process, and develop reconciliation procedures to identify allegations of employee  misconduct not previously addressed through adjudication. In response to our recommendation that TSA  develop reconciliation procedures to identify allegations of employee  misconduct not previously addressed through adjudication, DHS  concurred with the recommendation. Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

This report (1) summarizes data on Transportation Security  Administration (TSA) employee misconduct cases, and (2) examines the  extent to which TSA has taken actions to manage and oversee the  investigations and adjudications process.
Why GAO Did This Study

DHS's TSA employs approximately 56,000 personnel to ensure security at about 450 TSA-regulated airports nationwide. News media have reported allegations of misconduct by TSA employees, including theft. GAO was asked to review TSA's policies and procedures for addressing employee misconduct. This report (1) summarizes data on TSA employee misconduct cases, and (2) examines the extent to which TSA has taken actions to manage and oversee the investigations and adjudications process. Adjudication is the process through which TSA determines whether the evidence is sufficient to propose and sustain a charge of misconduct, and determines the appropriate penalty. GAO reviewed TSA procedures, analyzed TSA misconduct data from fiscal years 2010 through 2012, and analyzed a random, nongeneralizable sample of 50 allegations referred from the DHS OIG to TSA to identify follow up actions.

What GAO Found

According to Transportation Security Administration (TSA) employee misconduct data that GAO analyzed, TSA investigated and adjudicated approximately 9,600 cases of employee misconduct from fiscal years 2010 through 2012. From fiscal years 2010 through 2012, the annual number of TSA misconduct cases increased from 2,691 to 3,408. In that same period, TSA's workforce of Office of Security Operations employees at the airport level grew by about 3,200 employees. Two offense categories accounted for about half of all cases--(1) attendance and leave, which accounted for 32 percent, and (2) screening and security, which accounted for 20 percent. Charges for screening and security related incidents pertain to violating standard operating procedures, including not conducting security or equipment checks, and allowing patrons or baggage to bypass screening. TSA's guidance delineates common employee charges, along with a suggested range of penalties. Forty-seven percent of the cases that GAO analyzed resulted in letters of reprimand, which describe unacceptable conduct that is the basis for a disciplinary action; 31 percent resulted in suspensions of a definite duration; and 17 percent resulted in the employee's removal from TSA. The remaining cases covered a variety of outcomes, including indefinite suspensions.
While TSA has taken steps to help manage the investigations and adjudication process, such as providing training to TSA staff at airports, additional procedures could help TSA better monitor the investigations and adjudications process. For example, TSA does not have a process for conducting reviews of misconduct cases to verify that TSA staff at airports are complying with policies and procedures for adjudicating employee misconduct. Without a review process, it is difficult to determine the extent to which deficiencies, if any, exist in the adjudications process. Further, TSA does not record all misconduct case outcomes, including cases that resulted in corrective action or no penalty, in its Integrated Database (TSA's centralized case management system) because the agency has not issued guidance requiring the recording of all outcomes. Issuing guidance to TSA staff at airports about recording all case outcomes in the database would emphasize management's view of the importance of staff including such information to provide a more complete record of adjudication decisions. Moreover, TSA does not have reconciliation procedures--that is, procedures to follow up on completed misconduct investigations to ensure that the agency has identified cases requiring adjudication. According to a random sample of 50 allegations referred from the Department of Homeland Security Office of Inspector General (DHS OIG) to TSA in fiscal year 2012, GAO found that 2 were not adjudicated by TSA. As a result of GAO's review, TSA made adjudication decisions on these allegations,1 of which resulted in a 14-day suspension for the employee because of disruptive behavior in the workplace. The results from GAO's sample cannot be generalized to the entire population of over 1,300 allegations referred from DHS OIG to TSA in fiscal year 2012; however, they raise questions as to whether there could be additional instances of allegations referred to TSA in this population that the agency has not adjudicated. A senior TSA official agreed that establishing reconciliation procedures would help TSA identify allegations of misconduct that require adjudication.

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends, among other things, that TSA establish a process to conduct reviews of misconduct cases to verify that TSA staff at airports are complying with policies and procedures for adjudicating employee misconduct, develop and issue guidance to the field clarifying the need for TSA officials at airports to record all misconduct case outcomes in the Integrated Database, and develop reconciliation procedures to identify allegations of employee misconduct not previously addressed through adjudication. DHS concurred with the recommendations and TSA is taking actions in response.