DHS is a Work in Progress
August / September 2008
Volume 6 Number 4
In the seven years since September. 11, the Department of Homeland Security has emerged as America's multi-billion dollar bulwark against terrorism, natural disasters and other destructive forces.
The agency, created in 2003 and initially beset by organizational chaos, finally seems to have found its footing in Washington. DHS now has an annual budget of more than $50 billion and multiple divisions capable of rooting out danger in the air, on land or at sea.
"It is no accident that we have not suffered a major terrorist attack on U.S. soil since Sept. 11, 2001," Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff told a congressional committee earlier this year. "It is the result of the president's leadership, the support of congress and the hard work and constant vigilance of hundreds of thousands of men and women—€”including the employees at DHS—€”who are working tirelessly both at home and overseas to protect our country."
But not everyone is so impressed with the department's progress. Members of congress still berate the agency in recent months for being too slow to adopt new technology and failing to adequately share information among different law enforcement divisions.
A major part of the agency's $50 billion budget—€”nearly $900 million—€”is earmarked for science and technology and the development and acquisition of high-tech tools to keep America safe. But due to White House and congressional belt-tightening, that number is actually down from the $1.3 billion the agency spent just two years ago.
Thomas Cellucci, chief commercialization officer at DHS and a scientist and entrepreneur himself, told Innovation that the agency's effort to acquire cutting-edge technology for its myriad security programs is never-ending.
DHS is always on the lookout for the latest and greatest tool to scan cargo at a port, detect explosives in an airport or unravel a plot to cripple the nation's computer-driven economy.
"It's a work in progress," Cellucci said.
Much of the technology DHS is seeking is being done in the private sector, at research universities and, of course, at the national laboratories. Within the S&T directorate at DHS are six different divisions. They are:
—€ Explosives
—€ Chemical and biological
—€ Border and maritime security
—€ Command, control and interoperabililty
—€ Human factors, which aim to improve detection and understanding of human threats
—€ Infrastructure/geophysical
Of those areas, chemical and biological threat detection technology remains the most pressing need, Cellucci said.
"A large portion of the budget is still going into chem-bio and I think it would be fair to say that's an area where we have a number of unsatisfied needs, particularly in the biological area," he explained.
DHS also wants to continuously improve its interoperability, or the ability to communicate and use similar technology across different divisions of the agency and different branches of law enforcement.
"Interoperability is still an issue because there are so many potential stakeholders in that," Cellucci said. "Think about all the local state and tribal entities in this country that need to respond to either a natural disaster or terrorist attack."
Senator Susan Collins, a Maine Republican, said in July that communication among various agencies remains one the biggest challenges facing the department.
"There is a broad consensus that there remain cultural and bureaucratic hurdles to be overcome that are impeding the free flow of information from the federal government to state and local law enforcement," she said.
Nuclear detection is yet another major area of concern. The Global Nuclear Detection Architecture—€”a system of detection technology and interdiction activities conducted by the Departments of Energy, State, Defense and Homeland Security—€”isn't performing as well as it could. DHS' Domestic Nuclear Detection Office is the coordinating agency.
A Government Accountability Office report issued in July said that "a number of coordination, technological and management challenges" exist for the agencies responsible for the global architecture, while the Congressional Research Service recently reported that accurate information about the performance and benefits of the architecture's component programs is "difficult to generate, measure or even estimate."
"The system we have in place now, I conclude, is not complete," Senator Joe Lieberman, chairman of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs, said at a hearing in mid-July. "Our global nuclear detection architecture may have both needless redundancies and/or dangerous gaps, which in this case is the worst of both worlds."
Cellucci declined to comment on nuclear security gaps.But he said those who want to help the Department of Homeland Security procure effective technology generally should study the agency's needs first.
"Don't automatically shotgun the department," Celluci advised. "Instead of really spending time trying to determine what our unsatisfied needs some people tend to do a technology push—€”I have a solution looking for a problem.
"It's much more effective to learn what the problems are and then offer solutions," Cellucci said.
But until recently the agency wasn't very helpful in letting the private sector know what those needs were.
"In fairness to the private sector, we have not been that good at articulating our needs," he said. "We are now working at that." He said the department is eager to work with the private sector to close "capability gaps."
"These are the areas where we like to work with a public-private sector partnership," he said, adding that when the system works like it should everybody wins.
"The private sector wins because we give them the detailed requirements plus a conservative estimate of market potential," he said. "The public sector wins because nobody is better at commercializing widely distributed projects than the private sector and the taxpayer wins because we do this in a cost-effective and efficient way."
DHS doesn't have an in-house technology development arm, so the agency leans on the national laboratories when shopping for devices that can help mitigate the effects of a bomb or organized cyber attack, for example.
"We are a conduit to an advanced network of laboratories," Cellucci said. "They play a vital role and are our partners. I spend a lot of time talking to the scientists and engineers at the national laboratories."
Tom Michael reports from Washington for Innovation.
Copyright © 2012 | Innovation America