Federal Air Marshal Service Still an Agency in Transition
Jim Kouri, CPP
December 08, 2005
The US Federal Air Marshal Service has undergone a number of changes in recent years, including a 2003 transfer from the Transportation Security Administration to the US Immigration and Customs Enforcement Bureau, and a 2005 transfer from ICE back to TSA.
The US Congress requested the General Accounting Office to investigate and analyze these transitions and their impact upon FAMS's effectiveness. Also, the GAO was asked to analyze other issues including air marshal retention.
A key aspect of federal air marshals' operating procedures is the discreet movement through airports as they check in for their flight, transit screening checkpoints, and board the aircraft.
The Department of Homeland Security made limited progress in achieving the intended objectives of its transfer of FAMS to ICE, which included developing methods to increase the air marshal ranks through cross-training ICE agents (also known as "surge" capacity), and enhancing federal air marshals' career opportunities in order to decrease turnover.
Specifically, DHS had developed some surge capacity by cross-training a number of ICE agents but suspended these efforts in October 2004 in response to congressional concerns that the cross-training was an ineffective use of resources and training. DHS indicated that it would continue to support the surge effort, but had not determined whether and when it would resume cross-training to support this initiative.
Although DHS recognized that federal air marshals' career opportunities were limited, it had not developed plans to expand them through investigative or other duties. Moreover, DHS had not determined how these transition objectives would be met because it had not developed an overall strategy to include implementation goals, measures, and a timeline to help target performance shortfalls and suggest midcourse corrections--a key practice for a successful transformation.
DHS also had not developed a communication strategy to create shared expectations and report related progress on the transition to employees and others with an interest in air marshal effectiveness -- another key practice. With its return of FAMS to TSA, DHS's prior experience in transferring FAMS to ICE can provide useful information on key practices to consider in effecting a successful transition.
FAMS lacks adequate management controls to help ensure that mission-related incidents that affect air marshals' ability to operate discreetly are recorded, tracked, and addressed.
For example, FAMS has not developed a written policy that establishes criteria for when and how federal air marshals are to complete mission reports on incidents they encounter during their missions. In addition, FAMS lacks adequate controls to ensure that the outcome of actions taken to address these incidents was communicated to the federal air marshals who originally reported them.
Not providing such information may serve to discourage federal air marshals from submitting future reports. FAMS officials have acknowledged that FAMS lacks written policies to govern the use and management of mission reports and stated that FAMS plans to develop such policies in the near future.
Sources: US Department of Homeland Security, Transportation Security Administration, General Accounting Office, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Federal Law Enforcement Training Center, National Security Institute, National Association of Chiefs of Police, American Federation of Police
The US Congress requested the General Accounting Office to investigate and analyze these transitions and their impact upon FAMS's effectiveness. Also, the GAO was asked to analyze other issues including air marshal retention.
A key aspect of federal air marshals' operating procedures is the discreet movement through airports as they check in for their flight, transit screening checkpoints, and board the aircraft.
The Department of Homeland Security made limited progress in achieving the intended objectives of its transfer of FAMS to ICE, which included developing methods to increase the air marshal ranks through cross-training ICE agents (also known as "surge" capacity), and enhancing federal air marshals' career opportunities in order to decrease turnover.
Specifically, DHS had developed some surge capacity by cross-training a number of ICE agents but suspended these efforts in October 2004 in response to congressional concerns that the cross-training was an ineffective use of resources and training. DHS indicated that it would continue to support the surge effort, but had not determined whether and when it would resume cross-training to support this initiative.
Although DHS recognized that federal air marshals' career opportunities were limited, it had not developed plans to expand them through investigative or other duties. Moreover, DHS had not determined how these transition objectives would be met because it had not developed an overall strategy to include implementation goals, measures, and a timeline to help target performance shortfalls and suggest midcourse corrections--a key practice for a successful transformation.
DHS also had not developed a communication strategy to create shared expectations and report related progress on the transition to employees and others with an interest in air marshal effectiveness -- another key practice. With its return of FAMS to TSA, DHS's prior experience in transferring FAMS to ICE can provide useful information on key practices to consider in effecting a successful transition.
FAMS lacks adequate management controls to help ensure that mission-related incidents that affect air marshals' ability to operate discreetly are recorded, tracked, and addressed.
For example, FAMS has not developed a written policy that establishes criteria for when and how federal air marshals are to complete mission reports on incidents they encounter during their missions. In addition, FAMS lacks adequate controls to ensure that the outcome of actions taken to address these incidents was communicated to the federal air marshals who originally reported them.
Not providing such information may serve to discourage federal air marshals from submitting future reports. FAMS officials have acknowledged that FAMS lacks written policies to govern the use and management of mission reports and stated that FAMS plans to develop such policies in the near future.
Sources: US Department of Homeland Security, Transportation Security Administration, General Accounting Office, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Federal Law Enforcement Training Center, National Security Institute, National Association of Chiefs of Police, American Federation of Police
Print
Email
