1

Introduction and Background

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is a large, complex federal organization whose mission is of the utmost importance: securing the nation. The more than 200,000 men and women who make up the DHS workforce have responsibilities that include preventing terrorist attacks from threats both foreign and domestic; securing the nation’s borders on land, air, and sea; safeguarding transportation systems; providing (or administering) immigration and citizenship benefits; responding to natural disasters; ensuring cybersecurity; overseeing nuclear detection; and more. Those vast responsibilities rely on a workforce that is trained, equipped, and ready to perform many tasks. Their jobs can be highly stressful in that many work in dynamic and risky environments. Their performance in such environments will directly affect the security of our nation, so the readiness and resilience of the DHS workforce is of critical importance to the mission of DHS.

The DHS Office of Health Affairs (OHA) asked the Institute of Medicine (IOM) to review its current workforce resilience efforts, identify gaps, and provide recommendations for a 5-year strategic plan for its workforce resilience program. To address that request, the IOM formed the Committee on Department of Homeland Security Workforce Resilience (see Box 1-1 for the complete statement of task from OHA). At the committee’s first meeting, OHA expressed concern that it was not reaching the level of impact that it had hoped to achieve in its resilience program. It relayed to the committee its desire for guidance and strategic direction from the IOM, recognizing the need for advice on policy, programs, and measurement from outside the department. Acknowledging the tremendous burdens placed on DHS employees every day, OHA staff



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 19
1 Introduction and Background The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is a large, complex federal organization whose mission is of the utmost importance: securing the nation. The more than 200,000 men and women who make up the DHS workforce have responsibilities that include preventing terrorist attacks from threats both foreign and domestic; securing the nation’s bor- ders on land, air, and sea; safeguarding transportation systems; providing (or administering) immigration and citizenship benefits; responding to natural disasters; ensuring cybersecurity; overseeing nuclear detection; and more. Those vast responsibilities rely on a workforce that is trained, equipped, and ready to perform many tasks. Their jobs can be highly stressful in that many work in dynamic and risky environments. Their performance in such environments will directly affect the security of our nation, so the readiness and resilience of the DHS workforce is of critical importance to the mission of DHS. The DHS Office of Health Affairs (OHA) asked the Institute of Med- icine (IOM) to review its current workforce resilience efforts, identify gaps, and provide recommendations for a 5-year strategic plan for its workforce resilience program. To address that request, the IOM formed the Committee on Department of Homeland Security Workforce Resili- ence (see Box 1-1 for the complete statement of task from OHA). At the committee’s first meeting, OHA expressed concern that it was not reach- ing the level of impact that it had hoped to achieve in its resilience pro- gram. It relayed to the committee its desire for guidance and strategic direction from the IOM, recognizing the need for advice on policy, pro- grams, and measurement from outside the department. Acknowledging the tremendous burdens placed on DHS employees every day, OHA staff 19

OCR for page 19
20 A READY AND RESILIENT WORKFORCE FOR DHS BOX 1-1 Committee on Department of Homeland Security Workforce Resilience Statement of Task An ad hoc committee will conduct a study and prepare a report on how to improve the resilience (physical and mental well-being) of the Depart- ment of Homeland Security (DHS) workforce, and identify the elements of a 5-year strategic plan for the DHSTogether program. The report will build on existing analysis of current capabilities, best-known practices, and gaps in current resilience programs. Specifically, the committee will  Explore existing tools for improved workforce resilience, including a review of employer resilience programs which includes, but not ex- clusively, military and law enforcement. o Assess current policies, programs, activities, and resources that address employee resilience across DHS.  Identify resilience gaps in the DHS workforce and recommend activ- ities to close those gaps.  Develop the elements of a 5-year strategic plan with year-by-year recommended activities to close those gaps. o Priority activities will be identified based on potential impact, to enable DHS to make choices based on the value of the activity.  Identify measures and metrics to track continuous improvements and to mark successful implementation of DHSTogether and the im- proving resilience of the DHS workforce. and leadership expressed a genuine desire to support the workforce in a comprehensive way. The committee commends DHS for recognizing the importance of its workforce in achieving the DHS mission and request- ing support for this vital task. In this chapter, the committee provides background information on the history and makeup of DHS and the workforce challenges that it faces, an overview of the study process and how the committee ad- dressed its task, and background information on DHS’s current activities related to workforce resilience, including efforts in employee engage- ment, employee assistance, and peer support.

OCR for page 19
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND 21 WHAT IS RESILIENCE? The committee was specifically tasked to explore resilience activities in DHS. There are many understandings of the term resilience. Chapter 2 discusses definitions of resilience and the working definition that the committee adopted to guide its work, which is “the ability to withstand, recover, and grow in the face of stressors and changing demands” (Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, 2011). Chapter 2 also discusses the need for DHS workforce readiness, the capability of an individual, unit, or system to perform the missions or functions for which it was in- tended or designed (DoD, 2013). Throughout the report, the committee refers to the need for a ready and resilient workforce. Meeting that objec- tive would include a workforce that is healthy1 (physically, mentally, and emotionally), has high morale, is adaptable, finds purpose and meaning in their jobs, and is productive and engaged. When the committee refers to workforce readiness and resilience (WRR), it implies a holistic ap- proach that includes attention to physical, mental, and emotional health; organizational culture; and the home (including families) and work envi- ronment. The committee does not view such an effort as an “initiative” or “program,” which would connote a short-term endeavor or something that is removed after it reaches its intended goal. The committee envi- sions a larger, overarching effort that becomes embedded in the DHS culture (see Chapter 2). BACKGROUND Brief History of the Department of Homeland Security Created in 2002 in the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, DHS is the newest cabinet-level department and was fashioned to serve as a unified organization to defend the United States from terrorist attacks. DHS in- corporated parts of 8 cabinet departments and a total of 22 government agencies in law enforcement, border management, and disaster prepared- ness and relief (see Box 1-2 for a list of DHS components). It consists of 1 The committee adopted the World Health Organization’s definition of health: “a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity” (WHO, 1948).

OCR for page 19
22 A READY AND RESILIENT WORKFORCE FOR DHS 7 core operating components2 and 18 supporting offices and directorates. It constitutes the largest government reorganization since the creation of the Department of Defense (DoD). The establishment of DHS was unu- sual in its size and scope, and it is now the third-largest federal depart- ment, behind DoD and the Department of Veterans Affairs. BOX 1-2 Component Agencies and Directorates of the Department of Homeland Security Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Directorate for Managementa Directorate for National Protection and Programs (NPPD) Domestic Nuclear Detection Office Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC) Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Office of Health Affairs (OHA) Office of Intelligence and Analysis (I&A) Office of Operations Coordination and Planning Office of Policy Science and Technology Directorate (S&T) Transportation Security Administration (TSA), which houses the Federal Air Marshal Service (FAMS) US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) US Coast Guard (USCG), except under Title 10, in which it becomes part of the military US Secret Service (USSS) __________ a The Directorate for Management includes the chief administrative ser- vices officer, the chief financial officer, the chief human capital officer, the chief information officer, the chief procurement officer, and the chief secu- rity officer. SOURCE: DHS, 2013c. 2 Customs and Border Protection, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Transportation Security Administration, US Citizenship and Immigration Services, US Coast Guard, and US Secret Service.

OCR for page 19
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND 23 DHS was ordered by Congress to start up quickly after its enactment. That left little time to plan strategically how to bring together 22 entities, each with its own culture. The integration of those entities continues to be challenging. Independent assessments by DHS (2010) and the Partnership for Public Service and Booz Allen Hamilton (2011) conclud- ed that critical opportunities to enhance integration throughout DHS re- main. Reorganizations tend to come into place to deal with specific crises, not problems that could occur in the future, so they do not always incorporate the types of flexibility necessary to adapt to a changing envi- ronment. Many of the 22 legacy organizations were in existence long before DHS was created and have longstanding histories and rich cultures. For example, the US Secret Service was created in 1865 and was a compo- nent of the Treasury until the creation of DHS, and the US Coast Guard (USCG) is one of the oldest organizations of the federal government, having been created in 1790. Some of the component agencies were cre- ated at the time of DHS or shortly before, such as the Transportation Se- curity Administration (TSA), which was created in 2001 in response to 9/11 and was just beginning to develop a structure and organizational culture at the time of the merger. Recognizing the diversity of DHS’s component agencies is vital for understanding the challenges associated with integration; however, their common mission to secure the nation unites them in purpose and can provide a means of fostering greater inte- gration and synergy throughout the department. For the purpose of this report, the committee uses the following ter- minology when referring to DHS (see organizational chart in Appendix A): DHS consists of operational components (CBP, FEMA, ICE, TSA, USCG, USCIS, and USSS), directorates (Directorate for Management, NPPD, S&T), centers (FLETC), and offices (Human Capital, Infor- mation Technology). “Component agencies” refers to all the various of- fices, directorates, centers, and operating components. Department of Homeland Security Workforce Challenges The DHS workforce comprises law enforcement personnel (who make up about 50 percent of the department), policy personnel who have high-level security clearances, and mission-support staff (IOM, 2012). All DHS staff share a common mission, but they have different roles with different stressors attached. Many employees in the operational

OCR for page 19
24 A READY AND RESILIENT WORKFORCE FOR DHS components work in austere environments or come into contact with po- tentially dangerous and traumatic events in the course of their daily jobs. The heterogeneity makes implementing DHS-wide workforce programs difficult. The workforce is spread out across the United States (and some are stationed abroad); only 20 percent are in the Washington, DC, area.3 About 20 percent of the DHS law enforcement personnel work in the most remote regions of the country (IOM, 2012). Not being co-located adds to the complexity of DHS and makes an integrated identity hard to achieve. The DHS operational mission elicits both chronic and acute stressors, including physical health risks, a zero-defect mentality where- by a mistake can jeopardize security clearance, narrow decision latitude, monotony, low discretion, and high expectations. There is a lack of a cohesive or unifying organizational structure: component agencies work in “silos,” and individuals in components often do not identify with DHS. These intrinsic structural challenges impede organizational changes. DHS is a high-visibility organization, and mistakes and decisions about basic activities often make headlines in the mass media and are scrutinized by the 108 congressional committees and subcommittees that have DHS oversight. That makes for a challenging situation for any or- ganization. DHS staff see the news articles or blogs that criticize TSA transportation security officers (TSOs), misspending of disaster funding by FEMA, and the failed effort to build the SBInet electric fence along the Southwest border; such pieces probably affect workforce morale. Public perceptions of DHS are disparate: the USCG workforce is viewed as heroic and effective, whereas TSA personnel are perceived poorly even though they perform their jobs effectively. The complicated structure of DHS and its highly varied workforce require resilience programs that are tailored, but it is not always clear where the differences and commonalities are. In some cases, the differ- ences or commonalities might be by component agency (CBP compared with headquarters), by subcomponent (Federal Air Marshal Service [FAMS] compared with TSOs), by the type of work (law enforcement compared with policy analysis), by location (New York City compared with the southwest Texas border), or by specific duties (the needs of Air and Marine personnel in CBP might be similar to active duty USCG em- ployees). Each component agency and each location within a given com- ponent can vary in size, resources, demographics, and other important characteristics. 3 Including various locations in Washington, DC, and Virginia.

OCR for page 19
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND 25 Like many other organizations, DHS is challenged by increasing productivity demands coupled with the need to reduce staffing levels. The demands of the American workforce are also changing. De- mographics are shifting, and reliance on technology is ever-increasing. There is also an increasing expectation—in the case of DHS, the reality—of everyday round-the-clock operations. In general, there is greater uncertainty about consistent employment, and there is an expecta- tion that today’s worker will have many skills and be a continuous learn- er. The physical, mental, and emotional demands of those changes mean that people must be adaptable and resilient (IOM, 2005). The demographics at DHS are important to consider (see Table 1-1).4 The average age of a DHS employee is 45 years; like the federal work- force as a whole, the DHS workforce is aging. Baby boomers, with their valuable skills and experience, are close to retirement. That can contrib- ute to knowledge loss, although the effects of imminent retirements may be mitigated by the state of the economy and the plans of many to work longer than originally intended. Demographic research suggests that the future workforce pool will be more diverse (in sex, age, race, and eth- nicity) (Lee and Mather, 2008; Toossi, 2002). DHS also has a mixture of personnel with respect to background: civilian, law enforcement, and the military. And DHS has a large cadre of temporary employees, such as reservists in FEMA, and many part-time workers, including many TSA TSOs. TABLE 1-1 Department of Homeland Security Demographics Overview Chart Average Average Length of No. No. (Range) Age DHS No. Female Male of Employees, Employment, Component Employees Employees Employees Years Years CBP 60,025 12,551 47,474 41 (18–89) 7 FEMA 16,022 7,418 8,604 52 (17–90) 6 FLETC 1,104 353 751 51 (22–79) 7 HQ DNDO 114 33 81 46 (18–70) 4 HQ NPPD 2,885 848 2,037 45 (20–78) 5 HQ OS 3,406 1,564 1,842 43 (17–80) 4 4 DHS has about 185,000 permanent and 9,000 intermittent or temporary employees, not including USCG active-duty personnel (43,000) and reservists (7,800) (Green and Perkins, 2012).

OCR for page 19
26 A READY AND RESILIENT WORKFORCE FOR DHS Average Average Length of No. No. (Range) Age DHS No. Female Male of Employees, Employment, Component Employees Employees Employees Years Years HQ ST 485 184 301 47 (19–75) 5 ICE 20,139 5,931 14,208 43 (17–81) 7 OIG 759 318 441 43 (20–73) 6 TSA 65,444 25,053 40,391 42 (19–83) 6 USCG 8,635 2,706 5,929 50 (17–83) 6 USCIS 11,847 6,807 5,040 47 (19–87) 7 USSS 6,653 1,581 5,072 41 (18–90) 8 Total/ Average 197,518 65,347 132,171 45 6 SOURCE: Data extracted from FedScope in March 2013 (OPM, 2013b). Physical Work Environment The DHS workforce performs its duties in a large variety of envi- ronments. When border-patrol agents are in the field tracking illegal im- migrants, drug smugglers, and potential terrorists, they contend with an extreme range of temperatures, wildlife (for example, agents in the Rio Grande Valley encounter rattlesnakes and black widow spiders), uneven terrain with little shade, and only the supplies that they are carrying with them. While on patrol, they are often tracking a large group of illegal immigrants by themselves and then need to apprehend them alone and hold them until backup arrives. Border patrol agents also work in the de- tainee centers at their stations—they regularly have to process drug and immigrant smugglers and, perhaps more difficult, process people who are crossing the border in the hope of making better lives for themselves or their families (including babies and young children who are often sent to cross the border with a smuggler). TSA employees, who make up one-fourth of the DHS workforce (the bulk of them TSOs), in contrast, are generally indoors but have constant interaction with a public that is often disrespectful and has a poor percep- tion of the agency. Part of the disrespect is the regular name-calling by airline passengers. When staffing at airport checkpoints does not adjust fast enough to accommodate increased passengers, passengers become agitated with TSOs, are rude, and sometimes are not compliant. TSOs

OCR for page 19
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND 27 have an important—and often tedious and repetitive—job. Although their job is monotonous, they must be able to identify unallowable, po- tentially dangerous items and keep them from being taken onto airplanes. Potential terrorists could at any time try to bring firearms, explosives, or other potentially disastrous materials onto a plane. TSA staff must stay on top of the latest technology and innovations to ensure interception of those trying to do harm. On the other side of the continuum are those who work in operation centers. The National Operation Center (NOC) in Washington, DC, in- cludes staff representation of every DHS component. The center runs 24 hours per day every day. To work in the NOC, almost everyone is re- quired to have at least a minimum level of security clearance, and those responsible for “watch and warning” require a top-secret or higher clear- ance. Working in the NOC can go from tedious and slow to extremely high-pressure in a matter of moments. Each of the operational compo- nents has an operation center as well. Shift schedules, which can change within a given month, can contribute to burnout, poor sleep, and ulti- mately poor performance. Making a mistake in that environment can compromise an employee’s security clearance and potentially his or her job. Training in operation centers is intense, and every level entails job- specific training. That leaves little time for training outside an employ- ee’s specialty, so it is difficult for someone suffering from burnout to move to a position elsewhere in the department. Concerns About Attrition Retention of the workforce is a key element of workforce readiness and resilience. This section provides some data on attrition in the federal government and specifically in DHS that show that retention is a subject of concern for DHS. Attrition rates in the federal government are con- sistently lower than those in the private sector. In 2008, the federal gov- ernment attrition rate was 7.6 percent vs 9.2 percent in the private sector. In 2009, the federal government attrition rate declined to 5.85 percent (Partnership for Public Service and Booz Allen Hamilton, 2010). Con- sidering only the federal employees who resigned from DHS (as opposed to being transferred to other components or being fired), the average at- trition was 1.6 percent in 2009 (excluding retirements). In 2009, DHS averages for resignation ranged from 1.13 percent (ICE) to 6.84 percent (FLETC) with an average of 3.37 percent—1.77 percent higher than the

OCR for page 19
28 A READY AND RESILIENT WORKFORCE FOR DHS federal average that year.5 In 2012, the DHS resignation average was 3 percent. Table 1-2 includes DHS component agency attrition rates for 2012. In 2006, 35.6 percent of the 15,570 new hires separated from DHS in less than 2 years; 72 percent of DHS executives left during 2003–2007 (Davidson, 2010; Partnership for Public Service and Booz Allen Hamilton, 2010). Throughout the federal government, 22 percent (6,080) of federal employees who resigned had less than 1 year of federal ser- vice, and 69 percent (18,839) who resigned had less than 5 years of fed- eral service. TABLE 1-2 Department of Homeland Security FY 2012 Attrition Data by Component Component FY 2012 Attrition Ratea CBP 3.45% DNDO 8.18% FEMA 16.59% FLETC 15.97% ICE 4.34% NPPD 7.14% OIG 8.31% OS 9.42% S&T 8.63% TSA 10.04% USCG 10.67% USCIS 5.36% USSS 4.31% AVERAGE 7.59% a As of January 31, 2013. NOTE: FY = fiscal year. SOURCE: Provided to the IOM by DHS, March 2013. 5 Calculated based on attrition data provided to the IOM by DHS.

OCR for page 19
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND 29 Those data, combined with the DHS Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey (FEVS)6 scores that show that 34.9 percent of employees plan to leave DHS in the next year (4 percent plan to retire), convey the im- portance of improving efforts to retain staff to protect institutional memory and save costs (OPM, 2012). It is a more efficient use of funds to retain an employee in whom an organization has invested time and money during the onboarding process (recruitment, training). The cost of employee turnover can be substantial in both real monetary costs (time taken for recruitment, training, and replacement) and indirect costs (loss of productivity, unnecessary overtime by other employees, and low mo- rale). Some turnover in any agency is expected, and even beneficial (for example, if employees leave because the job is not a good match for them), but reducing undesirable turnover is important. IMPORTANCE OF A READY AND RESILIENT DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY WORKFORCE The most important asset of an organization is its workforce. To achieve its mission, DHS needs an informed, well-trained, well-led, and properly supported workforce. The DHS mission, “to ensure a homeland that is safe, secure, and resilient against terrorism and other hazards” (DHS, 2013c), cannot be taken lightly, nor can the role of the DHS work- force in keeping the nation safe. The DHS work environment is inherent- ly stressful, and the responsibilities can weigh heavily on DHS employees at every level and in every facet of the organization. If the workforce is not ready and resilient—if it does not have the ability to respond to and bounce back from crises and everyday stressors—it can compromise the effectiveness of DHS. Resilience affects individual employee performance and overall op- erational readiness over time. Therefore, it is crucial that the strategic plan for workforce resilience developed by DHS ensure that its most crit- ical resource, its employees, is linked with the department’s vision, mis- 6 “The Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey (FedView survey) is a tool that measures employees’ perceptions of whether, and to what extent, conditions characterizing successful organizations are present in their agencies. Survey results provide valuable insight into the challenges agency leaders face in ensuring the federal government has an effective civilian workforce and how well they are responding” (OPM, 2013a). More information on the survey, including survey design and methodology, can be found on OPM’s website: http://www.fedview.opm.gov/2012/What (accessed June 5, 2013) and the survey FAQ page: http://www.fedview.opm.gov/2012/FAQS (accessed June 5, 2013).

OCR for page 19
48 A READY AND RESILIENT WORKFORCE FOR DHS OTHER DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY PROGRAMS RELATED TO RESILIENCE Headquarters Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer The DHS OCHCO is in the Management Directorate. No DHS-wide programs are run through OCHCO, but it does have a webpage in the DHS intranet with links to internal and external resources, including the President’s Fitness Challenge, a rotating “pulse” survey, and component points of contact. OCHCO is drafting a DHS health and wellness policy that is in the concurrence process. The policy will provide a general baseline and affirm the department’s commitment to employee health and wellness, but it will not dictate the specifics of components’ pro- grams (Green, 2013). OCHCO regularly consults with the component agencies to advise them on relevant issues and to share best practices; however, individual employee-support programs vary from component to component and even within components. In pockets around the depart- ment, there are wellness and work-life projects, such as 3 hours of work time for fitness-related activities (FLETC, FEMA,21 and USCG22), health coaching, onsite fitness facilities or fitness subsidies,23 awareness cam- paigns (such as videos, brochures, and posters), fitness walks, brown bag lunches and webinars, onsite training, blood-pressure checks, and bicycle subsidies. If a program is componentwide, it means that a policy allows the program, but it is always subject to management discretion (except where union agreements have stronger language) and mission-dependent. There are also pockets of implementation in the absence of component policy. The responsibility for wellness activities is diffuse across the de- partment, and it is unclear to the committee where responsibilities and authorities reside. DHSTogether staff see the program as addressing wellness, but they themselves are not clear about where the lines are drawn between what the program is responsible for and what OCHCO or components are responsible for. That lack of clear lines of authority ties 21 The committee learned in its site visit to FEMA that this does not necessarily apply to FEMA reservists. 22 The committee learned from public comments that this might not apply to civilian USCG employees. 23 Activities vary widely by location. CBP is piloting the 3 hours of work time for fitness-related activities at several sites and intends eventually to roll it out enterprisewide, but this has been slowed by the sequester.

OCR for page 19
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND 49 back to the committee’s concern that a lack of mission, strategy, and ob- jectives for the program has resulted in an uncoordinated, disjointed ap- proach to workforce resilience—if the department does not know what problems it is trying to improve, it cannot have a successful program. As noted earlier, OCHCO coordinated the development of the De- partment of Homeland Security Workforce Strategy (DHS, 2011a), which the committee received at the end of its study. The strategy has four goals: 1. Building an effective, mission-focused, diverse, and inspiring cadre of leaders. 2. Recruiting a highly qualified and diverse workforce. 3. Retaining an engaged workforce. 4. Solidifying a unified DHS culture of mission performance, adaptability, accountability, equity, and results. Although OCHCO is noted in the implementation paragraph, the strategy does not refer to accountable agents (other than OCHCO in a monitoring role) and does not discuss resourcing. The committee also noted that although most of the component agencies were involved in the develop- ment of the strategy, OHA was not. The committee endorses the goals laid out in the workforce strategy, but offers throughout its report rec- ommendations to help DHS develop detailed execution and accountabil- ity for such efforts to ensure that they can be effective. Employee Engagement Executive Steering Committee On the basis of FEVS data, in 2006, the chief human capital officer decided that DHS needed a concerted effort to change morale, starting at the component level (Manlove, 2013). OCHCO brought in experts from OPM and with their help created the first DHS action plan. OCHCO then directed each component to create a plan in conjunction with its human capital officers. Each component was instructed to include elements to improve communication and leadership in the action plans.24 At the same time, the Secretary and Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security sent messages to the workforce about the importance of the FEVS and shared actions that were under way to improve FEVS results (Manlove, 2013). OCHCO completed the department-level action plan by 2009, at which 24 The action plans were deemed “for official use only” and so could not be shared with the committee.

OCR for page 19
50 A READY AND RESILIENT WORKFORCE FOR DHS point its focus shifted to ensuring that the DHS components had the re- sources that they needed to improve morale, and it required that the components complete quarterly action-plan updates for OCHCO review. In 2010, the FEVS results started to level off after decreasing for several years. However, there was a large decrease in the 2011 results, particularly on questions related to leadership. The secretary expressed concern and sent a memo to all the component heads asking that they develop employee-engagement improvement plans and report progress monthly. In January 2012, the secretary formed the EEESC, made up of a senior official representative of every component (see Box 1-7 for its charter). Most of the people serving on the committee are at the under- secretary level and control management in their components. Every ex- ecutive in DHS must have an objective in his or her performance plan that is aimed specifically at improving employee engagement in their component. The component heads were also asked to conduct town-hall meetings, which they did across the country, and to be “champions of change” in their components. The component heads were asked to attend at least one labor-management forum (Manlove, 2013).25 The goals of the EEESC are to provide departmentwide direction for engagement, to share component or industry best practices, and to have component heads oversee the inclusion of the engagement-performance objective into all action plans. It is meant to provide a mechanism for leaders to discuss the outcome of the town-hall meetings and discuss whether any issues would be more effectively handled in the component labor-management forums. One goal of the EEESC was to increase the response rate of the 2012 FEVS.26 On the basis of the 2012 GAO report on DHS employee morale, the EEESC was asked to take a look at the metrics being used in the depart- ment. It formed a subcommittee that is evaluating each component action plan to ensure that the actions are solid, are based on root-cause analyses, and contain good metrics. GAO recommended that component agencies conduct demographic analysis and benchmark as appropriate; however, it is difficult for components like TSA and CBP to find similar organiza- tions to benchmark against (Manlove, 2013). The EEESC is also under- taking the development of a departmentwide communication strategy 25 All DHS components except the US Secret Service have labor unions. 26 2012 had a 47 percent response rate—about 80,000 employees (OPM, 2012).

OCR for page 19
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND 51 BOX 1-7 Employee Engagement Executive Steering Committee (EEESC) Charter  Provide direction for departmentwide employee engagement efforts and evaluate best practices for adoption departmentwide  Oversee the identification and assignment of specific responsibilities for improved employee engagement in component senior executive performance objectives  Provide a forum for DHS components to discuss plans for and results of component-specific town hall meetings with employees  Provide a forum to discuss involvement in the department’s labor- management forum SOURCE: Manlove, 2013. because DHS communication efforts are disjointed. One of the recom- mendations of the EEESC was to pursue a 360-feedback27 pilot for exec- utives in headquarters. Employee Assistance Programs DHS component agencies all have at least a basic level of staff- support resources through their EAPs and have some oversight by OCHCO in managing their EAPs. It is up to the components individually to give their employees access to such services. As was reported at the 2011 IOM workforce-resilience workshops, “the marketing, accessibil- ity, and quality of those programs varied widely” (IOM, 2012). DHS headquarters and most of the components receive their EAP services through a contract with Federal Occupational Health, EAP Consultants, or Guidance Resources. Recently, USCG ended its contract for EAP ser- vices and replaced it with an inhouse program, CG SUPRT. Lisa Teems, EAP manager for USCG, explained at the committee’s second meeting that its program differs from traditional EAPs (Teems, 2013). Teems stated that CG SUPRT “expanded the program past traditional counsel- ing of people who have mental-health issues” to include assistance with personal and work-life issues, financial-management services, tax ser- vices, and health coaching. 27 Where employees receive confidential, anonymous feedback from the people they work with.

OCR for page 19
52 A READY AND RESILIENT WORKFORCE FOR DHS EAPs may provide robust resources and support services if designed and implemented well, but it was apparent that in DHS the existence and effectiveness of the EAPs were understood and accessed differently among and within components. Each component agency manages its own contracts and may have different availability and accessibility crite- ria. For example, one component reported that after a critical incident, its EAP counselors reported that they could not be available for at least 72 hours. For a staff that works shifts 24 hours per day every day, that lack of support was problematic. It took several high-pressure leadership calls to remedy the situation to provide more immediate support to the staff after the incident. Employees in different components and in headquar- ters may have different levels of understanding of and willingness to use the services or face different barriers to accessing them (because of loca- tion, hours, or perceived stigma). (See Chapter 5 for more information on EAPs.) Peer Support Programs Organizations often use peer support programs as a means of provid- ing employees support in stressful situations. Border Patrol, FAMS, FLETC, and recently ICE have peer support programs that use different models and are implemented separately. The Border Patrol Peer Support Program is the oldest peer support program in DHS (announced in Feb- ruary 1999 in the San Diego Sector before DHS came into existence) and has become a national program across Border Patrol in all sectors with support and oversight from Border Patrol headquarters (Garrett, 2013). The program augments its EAP. Its mission “is to offer confidential as- sistance and support to all Border Patrol employees and their family members in times of personal need or due to traumatic incidents” (US Border Patrol, 2013). The program provides emotional support, assists employees with job-related or personal issues, gives referrals to EAP, and responds to critical incidents; its goal is to be a program that pro- motes overall well-being of employees (US Border Patrol, 2013). Peer support is a critical component of the FAMS Critical Incident Response Program, which began in 2009. Although the initial focus was on suicide prevention, it has evolved to focus on resilience (Holley, 2013). The program has three pieces, “the helping triad: peer support, mental health, and chaplaincy.” There are almost 300 peer supporters. Mental-health services are contracted out, and the chaplaincy program is

OCR for page 19
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND 53 being piloted. The peer support portal that was recently developed to supplement the program, PeerPort, allows FAMS to provide peer sup- porters with relevant information, such as recent articles and policies, as well as collect information about the peer support contact. FLETC has used a critical-incident stress management (CISM) peer support program for the past 14 years. CISM is a multicomponent source of help and extends from prevention through intervention to postaction support. In FLETC, CISM includes peer support programs, EAPs, chap- laincy or spiritual care, training efforts, and wellness and is overseen by the Office of Organizational Health. The mission of CISM is for FLETC staff, the staff of component partners, and students of FLETC to be more personally and professionally resilient (London, 2013). FLETC’s CISM team has 3 counselors, 2 support staff, and 50 peer support team mem- bers. Counselors are called CISM specialists, not EAP specialists, in part to avoid the stigma associated with EAPs. According to Program Man- ager Gail London, high-level administrative support is key to CISM’s success. Under the director’s purview, CISM was moved to a newly cre- ated Office of Organizational Health, which includes FLETC’s equal employment opportunity office, ombudsman, and wellness coordinator in addition to CISM. On the basis of its model of peer-support, FLETC has received funding from OHA to create a peer-coordinator training pro- gram, which will be piloted in November 2013 (Green and Perkins, 2012). Transportation Security Administration IdeaFactory As part of an effort to engage employees in the creation of innova- tive solutions, the TSA IdeaFactory was launched in 2007. It is a Web- based tool that enables TSA’s employees to submit ideas, provide com- ments on how to improve new concepts, and rate ideas that should be recommended for implementation. It expands on the traditional sugges- tion box to harness the “wisdom of the crowd.” Its purpose is to foster engagement and improve TSA, and it has implemented 85 ideas that were submitted and voted on by employees (DHS, 2013d).

OCR for page 19
54 A READY AND RESILIENT WORKFORCE FOR DHS Other Component Programs The component agencies have developed some wellness or work-life programs independently. They often do not consult with others internally or externally on best practices. The committee observed that the compo- nent agencies often do not consult with OCHCO or OHA, nor, in most cases, would it occur to them to do so. For example, the committee learned during its information gathering about a new wellness program that FAMS is developing with support from FAMS leadership. OHA and OCHCO were unaware that the program was being developed and was awaiting approval from FAMS leadership. The New York City FEMA Joint Field Office created a wellness committee to reduce the stress and improve the health of the reservists working at the site. There were no FEMA or DHS policies that the Joint Field Office was aware of to look to for best practices, and wellness committees are not developed in all FEMA field offices. In the following chapter, the committee discusses the definitions of readiness and resilience in more depth, provides a vision for DHS WRR, outlines the preconditions and goals for success, and offers recommenda- tions for implementation and authority. Chapter 3 discusses and offers recommendations related to leadership development and organizational communication and discusses how culture is intertwined with both. Chapter 4 offers a framework and recommendations for assessing, evalu- ating, and reporting on DHS readiness and resilience. Chapter 5 presents elements recommended for the 5-year workforce readiness and resilience strategic plan. REFERENCES CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention). 2013. Total worker health. http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/twh (accessed July 9, 2013). Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. 2011. Instruction: Chairman’s total force fitness framework. CJCSI 3405.01. Davidson, J. 2010. Attrition is high among new workers at many government agencies. Washington Post, November 5. http://www.washingtonpost.com/ wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/05/AR2010110500199.html (accessed March 1, 2013). DHS (Department of Homeland Security). 2010. Bottom-up review report, July 2010. Washington, DC: DHS.

OCR for page 19
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND 55 DHS. 2011a. Department of Homeland Security workforce strategy: Fiscal years 2011-2016. Washington, DC: DHS. DHS. 2011b. DHSTogether employee and organizational resilience. http://www.dhs.gov/dhstogether-employee-and-organizational-resilience (accessed June 18, 2013). DHS. 2013a. A day in the life of Homeland Security. http://www.dhs.gov/day- life-homeland-security (accessed July 26, 2013). DHS. 2013b. DHSTogether employee and organizational resilience safety stand down. http://www.dhs.gov/safety-stand-down (accessed March 27, 2013). DHS. 2013c. Our mission. http://www.dhs.gov/our-mission (accessed July 9, 2013). DHS. 2013d. TSA Ideafactory: Engaging employees to improve security. http://www.tsa.gov/about-tsa/tsa-ideafactory-engaging-employees-improve-security (July 9, 2013). DoD (Department of Defense). 2013. Joint publication 1, doctrine for the Armed Forces of the United States. Washington, DC. GAO (Government Accountability Office). 2012. Department of Homeland Security: Taking further action to better determine causes of morale problems would assist in targeting action plans. GAO-12-940. Washington, DC: GAO. Garrett, S. 2013. Peer support program: An overview of the United States border patrol peer support program. Presentation to the IOM Committee on Department of Homeland Security Workforce Resilience, February 4–5, Washington, DC. Garza, A. 2012. The charge to committee. Presentation to the IOM Committee on Department of Homeland Security Workforce Resilience, December 13, Washington, DC. Green, A. 2013. Wellness programs. E-mail response to IOM inquiry to DHS, June 11. Green, A., and K. Brinsfield. 2011. DHS resiliency programs: Overview. Presentation to the IOM Committee on Workforce Resiliency Programs: A Workshop Series, September 15, Washington, DC. Green, A., and L. Perkins. 2012. DHS workforce resilience: Past, current and future. Presentation to the IOM Committee on Department of Homeland Security Workforce Resilience, December 13–14, Washington, DC. Holley, D. 2013. Critical incident response program PeerPort. Presentation to the IOM Committee on Department of Homeland Security Workforce Resilience, February 4–5, Washington, DC. IOM (Institute of Medicine). 2005. Integrating employee health: A model program for NASA. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. IOM. 2012. Building a resilient workforce: Opportunities for the Department of Homeland Security: Workshop summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

OCR for page 19
56 A READY AND RESILIENT WORKFORCE FOR DHS IOM. 2013. Committee on Department of Homeland Security Workforce Resilience. http://www.iom.edu/Activities/HealthServices/DHSWorkforce Resilience.aspx (accessed June 9, 2013). Lee, M. A., and M. Mather. 2008. U.S. labor force trends. Population Bulletin 63(2):20. London, G. 2013. Peer support programs. Presentation to the IOM Committee on Department of Homeland Security Workforce Resilience, February 4–5, Washington, DC. Lute, J. 2013. Keynote address. Presentation to the IOM Committee on Department of Homeland Security Workforce Resilience, February 4, Washington, DC. Manlove, M. 2013. DHS employee engagement executive steering committee. Presentation to the IOM Committee on Department of Homeland Security Workforce Resilience, February 4–5, Washington, DC. Meredith, L. S., C. D. Sherbourne, S. Gaillot, L. Hansell, H. V. Ritschard, A. M. Parker, and G. Wrenn. 2011. Promoting psychological resilience in the U.S. military. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation. NIOSH (National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health). 2008. Essential elements of effective workplace programs and policies for improving worker health and wellbeing. Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. OPM (Office of Personnel Management). 2012. Employment and Trends June 2012: Table 2—comparison of total civilian employment of the federal government by branch, agency, and area as of March 2012 and June 2012. https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/data-analysis-documentation/ federal-employment-reports/employment-trends-data/2012/june/table- 2 (accessed June 5, 2013). OPM. 2013a. Federal viewpoint survey. http://www.fedview.opm.gov (accessed July 9, 2013). OPM. 2013b. Fedscope. http://www.fedscope.opm.gov (accessed July 9, 2013). Partnership for Public Service and Booz Allen Hamilton. 2010. Beneath the surface: Understanding attrition at your agency and why it matters. Washington, DC: Partnership for Public Service. Partnership for Public Service and Booz Allen Hamilton. 2011. Securing the future: Management lesson of 9/11. Washington, DC: Partnership for Public Service. Raine, L. 2013. DHSTogether budget. E-mail response to IOM inquiry to DHS, March 11. Teems, L. 2013. Panel: DHS best practices. Presentation to the IOM Committee on Department of Homeland Security Workforce Resilience, February 5, Washington, DC. Toossi, M. 2002. A century of change: The U.S. labor force, 1950–2050. Monthly Labor Review 14.

OCR for page 19
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND 57 US Border Patrol. 2013. Support programs. http://www.patrolfamily.org/ programs.html (accessed July 9, 2013). WHO (World Health Organization). 1948. WHO definition of health. http:// www.who.int/about/definition/en/print/html (accessed July 5, 2013).

OCR for page 19