Archives page

Posts Tagged ‘CBP’

H.R. 5230: SECURE THE SOUTHWEST BORDER SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2014

On Friday, August 1, the House voted 223-189 in favor of H.R. 5230, known as the “Secure the Southwest Border Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2014.” The $694M bill, now headed to the Senate, includes:

Funding Proposals

  • $405M for Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to boost border security and law enforcement measures.
  • $22M to accelerate judicial proceedings for immigrants.
  • $70M for National Guard border efforts: $35M for the federal deployment of the Guard, and $35M for reimbursing states for their use of the Guard on the southern border.
  • $197M for the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to provide temporary housing and humanitarian assistance to unaccompanied minors.
  • $40M in repatriation assistance to Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador (redirected from within existing foreign aid for Central American countries so that these repatriation activities are immediately prioritized).

Policy Proposals

  • Amends the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008 so all unaccompanied alien children (UACs) are treated the same as Mexicans and Canadians for the purpose of removals. UACs who have a credible fear of persecution or who have been trafficked must appear before an immigration judge within 14 days of their initial screening and shall be detained until their appearance.
  • Provides authority for the Secretary of State to negotiate agreements with foreign countries regarding UAC, which include protections for children who are returned to their country of nationality.
  • Includes a “last-in, first-out” policy that prioritizes the removal of minors that most recently arrived.
  • Authorizes additional temporary judges to help address the increase in traffic on the southern border.
  • Changes the Immigration and Nationality Act to strengthen the law prohibiting criminals with serious drug related convictions from applying for asylum.
  • Prohibits the Secretary of the Interior or the Secretary of Agriculture (USDA) from denying or restricting U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) activities on federal land under their respective jurisdictions.
  • Authorizes the deployment of the National Guard to the southern border.
  • Expresses the “Sense of Congress” that the Secretary of Defense should not house unauthorized aliens at military installations unless certain specific conditions are met.
  • Prohibits the housing of unauthorized immigrants on military bases if the use of the military instillation will displace members of the Armed Forces on active duty or interfere with military activities at the installation.

 

Read the full report here.

 

Contributing Author

Spencer KingSpencer King is the GTSC U.S. Intelligence Community Fellow.  Spencer studied at Audencia Nantes Ecole de Management and at Shenandoah University, where he graduated Cum Laude.  Spencer was the president of the Student Government Association at Shenandoah University.  At Shenandoah University, he worked for the university president’s office on lobbying, governance, and special projects.  Spencer also interned at Wolf Trap, where he facilitated strategic planning, government relations, special initiatives, and board relations/operations.

Mitigating the Insider Threat Through Personnel Surety Counterintelligence

The Department of Homeland Security in coordination with US Customs and Border Protection are at the forefront of preventing insider threats within its law enforcement operations. These threats take the form of overt actions because of gaps in coordination and process mistakes that lead to self-created but preventable vulnerabilities.

To assure this continued success, a Personnel Surety Counterintelligence mission must be put in place through a management and implementation functionality that will meet the following objectives:

• Assess and audit the effect of the insider threat through risk analysis threat algorithms

• Establish a collaborative information-sharing personnel surety data base system that tracks action requirements and assigns accountability on a continuous basis

• Build a personnel surety counterintelligence business process into each law enforcement mission area, both operational and technologically supported through stakeholder collaboration

• Create a culture built around a robust personnel surety plan to ensure that a need to share for operational success supersedes the need to protect information

• Identify the insider threat and vulnerabilities through a continual monitoring system of checks and balances

• Counter the inadvertent mistakes that lead to the insider threat through the deployment of technologies that drive mission success and efficiencies

 

Coordinating the Government’s Personnel Surety Mission

The multi-faceted challenges of working in today’s mission-critical environmental and multiple enterprise coordination formats require innovative approaches that stress stakeholder creation and participation with built-in accountability, under an umbrella set of governance parameters. This is especially true in the world of counter-intelligence / insider threat in light of the number of initiatives currently underway to protect the United States government information infrastructure. It is imperative that the following initiatives be established:

• Establishing a government-wide personnel surety process and management discipline supported by standardized and relevant technologies

• Coordinating the activities of multiple operational centers, including sharing information about malicious activity and establishing common operating standards and procedures to: track information sharing, require acknowledgement of information received, and provide reports of counter-actions taken

• Deploying technology advancements in order to counter the threats both from an IT and behavioral perspective

• Engaging the private sector, as a partner, to extend the envelope of protection beyond the government’s firewall in a manner that is clear and manageable to that sector

These initiatives are designed to break the pattern of information silos and to overlay new paradigms that will mandate sharing and accountability to protect lives and critical mission information while providing stakeholders tangible metrics for their participation.

They also address the technology aspects required to support this new paradigm by ensuring that the most appropriate tools are in place, under the most cost-effective basis.

Establishing Enterprise-Level Governance

As recent events have proven, internal barriers may well be the biggest stumbling blocks to “connecting the dots” on a threat and preventing violence.

Deployment of a CBP Enterprise Program Management Office (EPMO) is a successful methodology that will enable CBP to break through such barriers and establish an enterprise-level governance functionality that will assure the success of the insider threat mission. An insider threat EPMO will allow CBP to:

• Coordinate the Counterintelligence Mission Focus across all of the Federal Mexican Police Department

• Deploy technologies that drive mission success and efficiencies

• Establish performance metrics and measurable outcomes linked to meeting the counterintelligence insider threat mission

 

Successfully Deploying the EPMO

A successful Counterintelligence EPMO will require the following focus to its activities:

• Developing and documenting a clear understanding of the mission

• Establishing an executive Governance Board

• Organizing with a focus on meeting the counterintelligence mission

• Deploying operations that protect the mission from internal/external threats

• Leveraging technology to enable the counterintelligence mission

• Establishing a disciplined standards-based foundation

It is critical that CBP establish an EPMO to serve as a central program management body, one which both manages and coordinates core insider threats and counterintelligence activities. The EPMO performs much of the program management related work for individual programs as well as the organization at an enterprise level, while still valuing the individual program contributions and objectives.

Establishing and sustaining this focus for the EPMO will require that four themes be addressed: statutory and other mandatory drivers, organization and supporting processes, technology requirements, and cultural change.

1. Statutory and Other Mandatory Drivers

Any EPMO is responsive to the statutory and / or regulatory drivers that established the mission for a sponsoring agency, augmented by internal agency directives or other mandated requirements. It is critical that information on these be gathered, analyzed, and clearly understood. After this it must be coalesced into a charter statement that all stakeholders will commit to support and follow under a program organization that has been developed and accepted in a collaborative process. Specific mission performance objectives may then be developed. Successful implementation of these is a function of establishing a common operating environment that has two components: process and supporting technology.

2. Organization/Process

The processes defining the EPMO’s operating framework must promote the effectiveness, efficiencies, and collaboration necessary to successfully meet the established counterintelligence insider threat mission. Once established, these characteristics must be sustained by adopting a regular process or review through which the operational and control processes of the EPMO are assessed, revised and opportunities for improvement are incorporated. The effective EPMO deploys Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) measuring key processes, especially those that touch the counterintelligence insider threat customer.

The EPMO monitors the KPIs to identify reductions in performance, and as a result, to proactively deploy revised and improved processes. Incorporation of standards and ratings to insure ongoing performance maturity is essential in order to ensure that the stakeholders of the EPMO are receiving the best information and are participating in decision-making as appropriate.

3. Technology

Even while most EPMOs operate in a highly automated environment, the successful counterintelligence insider threat EPMO team understands the use of technology is not the answer to all problems. That team also understands that well-deployed technology remains a critical, but supporting, component to highly qualified personnel and a well-run EPMO organization.

These technologies should be “smart”, scalable, flexible, extensible, and self-monitoring. The requirements for deployment must be based on the automation of a collection of previously manual processes and should provide short-term tactical efficiencies in response time, effectiveness, and productivity. It cannot disrupt processes, unless it is part of a well-understood process improvement strategy. It must be well understood and require users and customers to be well-trained and able to quickly incorporate the technology capabilities into the responsibilities assigned to them.

4. Culture

The EPMO must be staffed by program, change, technology, and counterintelligence professionals who are directly accountable to the counterintelligence mission and to the Department’s strategic objectives. The individuals in the EPMO must have the necessary credentials, as well as managerial, consultative and functional counterintelligence experience, necessary to operate a Department level counterintelligence program office. While necessity often requires that personnel and resources are gathered from other parts of the Department, once those resources are assigned or brought into the EPMO, the mission of the EPMO takes precedence; any adherence to previous cultural and organizational barriers become of secondary priority.

The above four goals must be addressed via a specific implementation process consisting of three primary phases: Initiation, Planning, and Execution, coupled with ongoing Assessment and Update once all facets of the EPMO have been deployed. Each phase has its own input requirements and results in deliverables which are critical to day-to-day execution of the mission objectives.

The advantages of this phased approach are multiple:

• An over-arching mission definition is established, to ensure that all participating agencies are operating to the same goals and objectives

• Agency and other users are provided hands-on guidance to support them through collaborative / facilitated involvement and integration into the counter- intelligence program

• EPMO establish standards, processes and performance measures as well as measuring tools

• Agencies left with flexibility in the management of individual counter- intelligence activities while adhering to enterprise business rules

• Some impact on organization and may require changes in organization structure and / or roles and responsibilities

• Relieves agencies and program teams of much of the responsibility and details of program management-related activities

• Allows users to focus on the counterintelligence activities, resolution of technical issues, and threat adjudication under a common set of ground rules and information-sharing environments

Conclusion

The need for a successful counterintelligence program demands a direct approach to establishing coordination. Therefore, the Counterintelligence / Insider threat EPMO would provide the most robust construct for securing enterprise wide coordination and help break down the organizational silos preventing success. The EPMO will provide a personnel security program as well as counterintelligence / insider threat coordination to the entire enterprise:  from the Executive level to managers, to Federal Officers, to professional staff, to security personnel, to IT personnel, and finally, to IT Security personnel down to administrative and clerical staff.

Contributing Author:

BillCarrollBill Carroll is a co-founder and the President of the EnProVera Corporation, a Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business and Native American Owned Small Disadvantaged Business.  Prior to EnProVera, he was the Managing Partner of Strikeforce Consulting.  Bill has over 40 years of experience in law enforcement, in the U.S. Government, and in the Government Contracting Industry.  He retired from the U.S. Government in 1998 after a distinguished career in the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS).  Bill was the Director of the INS Washington District Office and Deputy Director of the Los Angeles District Office. 

 

 

GTSC Honors 2013 MVP Charles Armstrong, CIO, CBP

Washington, D.C. – July 12, 2013 – The Government Technology & Services Coalition (GTSC) celebrated its second anniversary yesterday, honoring Mr. Charles R. Armstrong, the Assistant Commissioner and Chief Information Officer at U.S. Customs and Border Protection with the 2013 Most Valuable Player (MVP) Award.

Mr. Guy Torres, Director of Information Technology Contracting at U.S. Customs and Border Protection, with GTSC's 2013 MVP Awardee, Mr. Charles R. Armstrong, Assistant Commissioner and Chief Information Officer at U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

Mr. Guy Torres, Director of Information Technology Contracting at U.S. Customs and Border Protection, with GTSC’s 2013 MVP Awardee, Mr. Charles R. Armstrong, Assistant Commissioner and Chief Information Officer at U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

“Our MVP award recognizes those officials who make a tangible difference to modernize and improve government operations so the mission of homeland and national security does not suffer under our budget constraints,” said Kristina Tanasichuk, CEO of GTSC. “Mr. Armstrong has focused on expanding targeting, analysis and enforcement capabilities; data and information sharing; and enhancing operational capacity and processing, in addition to the revenue producing capabilities of CBP. We are extremely proud to present this award to such a worthy recipient.”

The GTSC awards program seeks to recognize public and private sector individuals who work to achieve the homeland and national security missions of the nation. The MVP Award is presented to an exceptional official who modernizes and improves the operations and performance of an agency, component, program or division to increase capacity, speed delivery, use innovation and improve performance. For more information about GTSC’s awards, click here.

Annual Report Cover Screen Shot

Click to read the Annual Report.

GTSC also released its 2012-2013 Annual Report outlining the organization’s significant accomplishments in its short two years. “I believe much of the success of GTSC comes from its members’ entrepreneurial desire to challenge the status quo – it is an extremely grassroots effort initiated by small companies in the market concerned with assisting their clients to achieve their mission objectives – on time, on budget and on target,” said Chris Gorman, Chair of the GTSC Steering Committee. “We have brought the community of homeland and national security together to tackle these challenges and leverage all of our collective resources. As the annual report says, it’s all about the mission.”

The coalition also recognized numerous outstanding members and advisors who have contributed to the vision and mission of the organization, including:

Julie Barth, L-3 STRATIS; Dr. Steven Bucci, The Heritage Foundation; Mary-Claire Burick, MC Strategy; Robert Burton, Venable LLP; Bill Carroll, Strike Force Consulting Services; Brad Cole, Agilex; Dr. Sherilyne Dougherty, DAI; Rob Edmonds, Uniplus Consulting; Brian Finch, Dickstein Shapiro LLP; Nicole Geller, GCS, Inc.; K. Eileen Giglio, WAGsolutions, Inc.; Chris Gorman, The Efiia Group; Mila Halpine, Cognivault, LLC; Scott Halpine, Cognivault, LLC; Earl Holland, Growth Strategy Consultants; Stephen Howard, TecPort Solutions, Inc.; Tom Hughes, Datamaxx Group; Laura Jones, SAIC; Robert V. Jones, PReSafe Technologies, Inc.; Mike Kelly, TASC; Sara Kindsfrater-Yerkes, TeamCatapult; Victoria Laing, Linda LeFevbre, NCI, Inc.; RADM Don Loren, Old Dominion Strategies; Lisa Martin, LeapFrog Solutions, Inc.; Michelle Mrdeza, MXM Consultng LLC; Brian Nault, BlueWater Federal Solutions, Inc.; Anne Petera, Harris; Kathy Pherson, Pherson Associates, LLC; Wayne Pizer, L-3 Communications; Larry Pokroy, VisionOnline; John Rothenberger, SE Solutions, Inc.; Ravi Singh, Deosi, LLC; Carmine Taglialatela, TecPort Solutions, Inc.; Chani Wiggins, Winn Strategies; and Chuck Winwood.

 

July 11: Join us for GTSC’s 2nd Anniversary

You are cordially invited to join the

 Government Technology & Services Coalition

and celebrate our 2nd Anniversary

and honor our 2013 MVP

Charlie Armstrong

Charles R. Armstrong

Assistant Commissioner & Chief Information Officer,

U.S. Customs and Border Protection

Come Stroll Through the Greek Isles!

Music | Mezze | Magic

Thursday, July 11

5:30 p.m. – 8:30 p.m.

The U.S. Navy League | Arlington, VA | Courthouse Metro

R.S.V.P. Required

Parking is available at street level meters and in the basement of the U.S. Navy League building.

Thank you to our sponsors!

 

Platinum Sponsor:

 

Harris LogoGold Sponsors:

Bluewater federal

L3STRATIS_RedBlk_transp_LOGO copy

PreSafe Tech Logo

Bronze Sponsors:

OldDominionStrategies_Logo small

SE Solutions Logo