DHS OIG, OIG-16-34, CBP's Special Operations Group Program Cost and Effectiveness are Unknown (2016)

CBP's Special Operations Group Program Cost and Effectiveness are Unknown January 29, 2016 OIG-16-34 DHS OIG HIGHLIGHTS CBP’s Special Operations Group Program Cost and Effectiveness Are Unknown January 29, 2016 What We Found Why We Did This Audit The mission of U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s (CBP) Special Operations Group (SOG) is to train, organize, equip, resource, and deploy tactical and emergency response personnel worldwide to protect America. Based in El Paso, Texas, SOG plans, coordinates, and executes national, regional, and international level operations. We reviewed the SOG program to determine its cost and effectiveness. We determined that CBP does not have formal performance measures for its SOG program and does not track SOG’s total program cost.

Federal guidance requires agencies to develop goals and objectives that are outcome oriented and integrated with a strategic plan. Federal managers are also required to establish and maintain internal controls to achieve the objectives of effective and efficient operations. The incomplete records of SOG and other components of CBP that support SOG limited the determination of the SOG program’s total cost. SOG program efficiency and effectiveness cannot be accurately determined without total program costs or formal performance measures.

As a result, CBP may be missing opportunities to improve effectiveness and identify potential cost savings in the SOG program. What We Recommend We made no recommendation regarding the lack of formal performance measures in the SOG program because U.S. Border Patrol is in the process of developing and implementing performance measures. We made one recommendation to CBP to develop and implement a process to determine program costs for the SOG. For Further Information: Contact our Office of Public Affairs at (202) 254-4100, or email us at [email protected] CBP Response CBP concurred with our recommendation.

The recommendation is resolved and open. www.oig.dhs.gov OIG-16-34 v ~ oy~~gNU SF~Jp OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL Department of Homeland Security Washington, DC 20528 / www.oig.dhs.gov MEMORANDUM FOR: The Honorable R. Gil Kerlikowske January 29, 2016 Commissioner U.S. Customs and Border Protection Ronald Vitiello Acting Chief, Border Patrol U.S. Customs and Border Protection John Roth ~~~~ Inspector General CBP's Special Operations Group Program Cost and Effectiveness Are Unknown FROM: SUBJECT: For your action is our final report, CBP's Special Operations Group Program Cost and Effectiveness Are Unknown. We incorporated the formal comments provided by your office. The report contains one recommendation aimed at improving identification of CBP's Special Operations Group (SOG) program cost. Your office concurred with this recommendation.

We made no recommendation regarding the lack of formal performance measures in the SOG program because U.S. Border Patrol is in the process of developing and implementing performance measures. Based on information provided in your response to the draft report, we consider the recommendation open and resolved. Once your office has fully implemented the recommendation, please submit a formal closeout letter to us within 30 days so that we may close the recommendation. The memorandum should be accompanied by evidence of completion of agreed-upon corrective actions.

Please send your response or closure request to OIGAuditsFollowut~a,oi~. dhs. Gov. Consistent with our responsibility under the Inspector General Act, we will provide copies of our report to congressional committees with oversight and appropriation responsibility over the Department of Homeland Security. We will post the report on our website for public dissemination.

Please call me with any questions, or your staff may contact Mark Bell, Assistant Inspector General for Audits, at (202) 254-4100. www. oig. dhs.gov OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL Department of Homeland Security Background In 2007, the U.S. Border Patrol (BP)1 created its Special Operations Group (SOG) to provide a centralized chain of command for its specialty teams and improve BP’s ability to react to actionable intelligence, terrorist-related incidents, natural disasters, high-risk operations, and search and rescue missions. SOG’s mission is to train, organize, equip, resource, and deploy tactical and emergency response personnel worldwide to protect the United States. Based in El Paso, TX, SOG plans, coordinates, and executes national-, regional-, and international-level operations. The operational components of SOG include:     the Border Patrol Tactical Unit (BORTAC); the Border Patrol Search, Trauma, and Rescue Unit (BORSTAR); the SOG Intelligence Unit; and the Mobile Response Team (MRT).

SOG also administratively supports eight Sector-based Special Operations Detachments with equipment, training, and standardization. Sector-based Special Operations Detachments are BORSTAR and BORTAC teams that are located in designated sectors such as El Paso and Yuma. Sector Chiefs maintain tactical control of the detachments and MRTs for day-to-day operations. Appendix B displays an organizational chart of SOG and its components.

Appendix C provides descriptions for these components. As of September 2015, BORTAC and BORSTAR had 473 active personnel.2 Specially trained and equipped teams, capable of rapid response to emergent and uncommon law enforcement situations, respond to situations that require special tactics and techniques, search and rescue, or medical response. Upon request, SOG personnel also conduct international training and capacity building operations for the Department of State and the Department of Defense. The goal of these missions is to enhance the capabilities of foreign border security law enforcement partners.

1 Border Patrol is a component of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), as depicted in appendix B. 2 Appendix D provides personnel information as of September 2015. www.oig.dhs.gov 2 OIG-16-34 OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL Department of Homeland Security SOG’s annual operational budget in fiscal year (FY) 2014 was $8.4 million (0.07 percent of CBP’s annual budget) as shown in table 1. Table1. SOG Budget Comparison 2011 Fiscal Year SOG Operational Budget CBP Budget* SOG Operational Budget Percentage of CBP Budget Source: Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Office of Inspector General (OIG) table created from SOG and Congressional budget information. *FYs 2010, 2012, 2013, 2014 – Revised Enacted; FY 2011–Enacted. 2010 2014 2012 $6.1M $6.3M $7.1M $3.8M $8.4M $11.5B $11.2B $11.8B $11.7B $12.5B 0.05% 0.06% 0.06% 0.03% 0.07% 2013 We conducted a limited review of the effectiveness of CBP’s SOG in meeting BP, CBP, and DHS goals and objectives as defined in annual performance and strategic plans.

We also assessed SOG’s total program cost including the cost of support from other CBP entities, along with its work with the Department of State and the Department of Defense. Because BP is in the process of developing and implementing performance measures, we made no recommendation regarding the lack of formal performance measures in the SOG program. Results of Review The SOG program’s effectiveness and cost cannot be determined because CBP does not track total program costs and SOG has no formal performance measures. Federal guidance requires agencies to develop goals and objectives that are outcome oriented and integrated with a strategic plan.

Federal managers are also required to establish and maintain internal controls to achieve the objectives of effective and efficient operations. The incomplete records of SOG and other CBP components limit the determination of total program cost, and BP has not required SOG to develop or implement formal performance measures for effectiveness. As a result, DHS, CBP, and BP may be missing opportunities to improve effectiveness and identify potential cost savings in the SOG program. SOG’s Program Cost Undetermined Because CBP does not maintain complete records for the SOG program, its efficiency and effectiveness cannot be determined or assessed.

Examples of incomplete cost records include aviation and marine support, personnel salaries, and international mission costs. Management’s Responsibility for Internal Controls (Circular A-123) notes that Federal managers are “… responsible for establishing and maintaining internal control to achieve the objectives of effective and efficient operations….” CBP www.oig.dhs.gov 3 OIG-16-34 OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL Department of Homeland Security does not track the total cost of the SOG. According to one CBP official, SOG is not a program or a unique organization within CBP but rather a tool to address CBP’s mission. DHS OIG found similar programmatic cost issues in December 2014.3 We reported that CBP does not include all costs in the operating cost of its Unmanned Aircraft System program.

By not including all operating costs, CBP could not accurately assess the program’s cost effectiveness or make informed decisions about program expansion. DHS recently released a bulletin requiring all DHS components that fund and support aviation capabilities to identify operational costs using a standard DHS model. CBP maintained incomplete records to support the total cost to operate the SOG program. Appendix E lists OIG-identified cost categories supporting the SOG program, including those with incomplete records.

OIG was unable to calculate the total cost of the SOG program because of incomplete records. OIG used available records to calculate a partial cost of the SOG program, as displayed in table 2. Fiscal Year 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Table 2. SOG Partial Program Costs4 SOG Program Costs (using identified costs) $19,180,154 $12,790,027 $26,688,265 $26,403,978 $33,627,414 Source: DHS OIG table created with CBP-provided data.

We identified several examples of incomplete or inconsistent cost data that contributed to the SOG program’s incomplete cost records, including: International mission support costs,  Air and Marine Operations (AMO)5 support costs,   SOG personnel costs,  National Training Plan cost data, and  Asset Forfeiture Fund revenue. 3 U.S. Customs and Border Protection's Unmanned Aircraft System Program Does Not Achieve Intended Results or Recognize All Costs of Operations, OIG-15-17 4 Appendix E displays specific program cost categories used to determine estimated total SOG program costs identified in table 2. 5 On October 1, 2015, CBP’s Office of Air and Marine changed its name to Air and Marine Operations to better communicate what they do—interdict, investigate, operate. www.oig.dhs.gov 4 OIG-16-34 OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL Department of Homeland Security Air and Marine Operations Support The total cost of air support that CBP’s AMO provided to the SOG program during any fiscal year in our scope of FYs 2010–14 was unavailable because of incomplete records. AMO provides air and marine support to CBP, including SOG, and other Federal, state, and local agencies for missions.

These missions include anti-terrorism, border protection, and disaster relief. AMO provided the cost per flight hour for specific aircraft, but those costs do not include the salaries for aircrew. AMO officials said they do not specifically track SOG aviation support operations, so they could not confidently provide all of the SOG operations that AMO supported. Therefore, aviation costs were not complete for FYs 2010–14.

AMO also provides marine assets to SOG for its missions; AMO funds maintenance expenses; and SOG funds fuel expenses for those missions. AMO did not have vessel maintenance data for assets provided to the SOG prior to FY 2011, but the team was able to obtain costs for FYs 2011–14. International Mission Support SOG, BP, and CBP’s Office of International Affairs (INA) officials reported that they do not programmatically track SOG costs associated with international mission support. Costs paid by the Department of State or the Department of Defense associated with international mission support agreements, and any CBP funds used to support these missions, could not be determined due to incomplete records.

According to an INA official, INA “coordinates and supports all of CBP’s foreign initiatives, policies, programs, and activities.” SOG conducts Foreign Border Security training and advisory missions in support of INA. According to INA, the Departments of State or Defense fund these missions if an interagency agreement is in place. However, some international missions may use other support agreements, which only reimburse CBP for travel costs and not salary costs. According to INA, it assigns foreign mission requests related to BP capabilities to BP Headquarters for further assignment to the appropriate element of BP.

INA reported that it neither tracks which element within BP completes the mission nor maintains a database or list of all its interagency agreements. INA also reported “… it is virtually impossible for INA to tell … which interagency agreement that SOG has performed duties to a degree of certainty.” If BP assigns the mission to SOG, SOG uses a BP tracking system to record all SOG inter- and intra-agency work. However, according to SOG, it does not track any costs associated with these missions. SOG provided after action reports for 15 international missions in FY 2014.

Yet, INA only provided five FY 2014 labeled agreements for potential SOG missions. Due to a lack of identifying information across all data sources, a crossmatch between SOG mission reports and INA agreements was not possible. www.oig.dhs.gov 5 OIG-16-34 OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL Department of Homeland Security SOG Personnel Personnel costs for any Sector Special Operations Detachments or MRTs during FYs 2010–14 were unavailable because CBP did not track this data. CBP provided Pay, Salary, and Benefits data for the SOG program, but these costs only included national SOG personnel data. CBP reported that there is no Pay, Salary, and Benefits data prior to FY 2015 for Sector Special Operations Detachments, as CBP had not officially created these detachments until FY 2014.

According to BP, the payroll system in effect prior to FY 2015 did not allow allocation of personnel time across projects; therefore, work done by Sector MRTs in support of SOG missions was not available prior to FY 2015. Inconsistent Data We also found inconsistencies in the data provided by SOG and other CBP components. For example, CBP’s Office of Training and Development (OTD) oversees the National Training Plan and maintains records for training costs incurred by SOG, but SOG’s recordkeeping of these costs did not match. OTD officials are responsible for those costs, so we used their cost amounts.

SOG also had inconsistencies in its recordkeeping of Asset Forfeiture costs, so we used the numbers that the BP Headquarters provided. Despite follow-up phone calls and correspondence, it is unclear why SOG’s numbers do not match either category. Lack of Formal Performance Measures CBP has not established formal performance measures to determine the effectiveness of its SOG program. However, it maintains informal measures that, if formalized, could improve SOG’s assessment of its mission performance.

The GPRA6 Modernization Act of 2010 and Management’s Responsibility for Internal Control (OMB Circular A-123 (revised provide the framework of requirements for performance management. The 2010 Act requires agencies to develop objectives and goals that are outcome oriented and describe achievements for major functions as well as how they tie into overarching Federal Government priorities. The circular requires managers to establish and maintain internal controls to achieve the objectives of effective and efficient operations. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security Annual Performance Reports present performance measures, applicable results aligned to missions, and planned performance targets for future years.

The FYs 2014–16 report provides high level goals for each of the Department’s five missions that are identified in the 6 Government Performance and Results Act www.oig.dhs.gov 6 OIG-16-34 OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL Department of Homeland Security Department’s FYs 2014–2018 strategic plan. These goals comprise performance goals and measures with targets and results that funnel down to specific mission programs, such as CBP. CBP creates its own strategic plan that aligns the component with the Department, while providing specific information for its mission requirements. Although BP’s 2012–2016 strategic plan indicates that it has measureable objectives, it does not meet the Department’s 2015 Performance Measurement Verification and Validation Handbook criteria,7 defining adequate performance measurements.

The Government Accountability Office (GAO) reported8 that BP is developing key elements of its current strategic plan to define and develop performance goals to assess progress toward securing the border. According to BP, these metrics should be implemented in 2017 and included in the 2017– 2020 strategic plan. BP currently uses two performance measures that are not included in its strategic plan. According to BP, it did not establish or provide formal direction to establish any requirements for SOG to institute formal performance measures because BP’s focus was on the operational implementation of its new risk-based strategy.

Although SOG does not have a formal process to track its performance and effectiveness, it reported that it is developing a process to determine and define metrics. Those metrics should allow SOG to evaluate its performance and better determine its effectiveness. For example, SOG after action reports may contain recommendations based on mission results. According to an SOG official, SOG does not have a process for tracking these recommendations but plans to capture this information in the future.

One potential limiting factor to determining SOG effectiveness is that BP sectors attribute all operational statistics resulting from SOG mission support to the sector. According to SOG, sector personnel enter apprehensions or seizures into a system that tracks sector statistics. In order for SOG to get credit, its personnel would have to arrest and process the individual at the El Paso SOG Headquarters rather than the sector. An accurate accounting of SOG contributions to BP missions is necessary to determine the SOG program’s overall effectiveness related to BP’s strategic plans.

SOG’s strategic plan contains specific objectives and goals that align with BP and CBP strategies, but it does not contain specific measures to determine achievement or effectiveness. SOG’s FY 2014 end-of-year report does highlight accomplishments and links its actions to objective and goal achievement, but these are not formally measured. SOG reported that it obtains this information 7 The handbook identifies five criteria to determine if performance measures are adequate, timely, valid, complete, consistent, and accurate. 8 Key Elements of New Strategic Plan Not Yet in Place to Inform Border Security Status and Resource Needs (GAO 13-25) www.oig.dhs.gov 7 OIG-16-34 OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL Department of Homeland Security by using performance measurements embedded in operational orders directing SOG activities, weekly SOG intelligence reports, and after action report recommendations for operational effectiveness improvements.

However, SOG also reported that it does not track or formally use this data, which minimizes SOG’s ability to determine its performance and effectiveness. Although SOG has a basic performance measurement system in place, a few modifications could allow the formal use of its current system to measure its performance and effectiveness. We have no recommendation at this time because BP is in the process of developing and implementing performance measures. Recommendation We recommend that the Commissioner, U.S. Customs and Border Protection and the Chief, Border Patrol develop and implement policies and procedures for accurately capturing SOG’s total program costs including:  SOG aviation support costs from Air and Marine Operations, including aircraft and aircrew costs;  SOG international mission costs, including those costs funded by outside entities such as the Department of State; and  Sector Special Operation Detachment and Mobile Response Team personnel and travel costs.

Management Comments and OIG Analysis CBP Comments to the Draft Report CBP concurred with our recommendation. CBP provided comments to the draft report and a copy of those comments are included in their entirety in appendix A. A summary of CBP’s response and our analysis follows. CBP also provided technical comments, which we reviewed and incorporated. CBP Response to Recommendation CBP reported that, in September 2015, DHS’s Aviation Governance Board established a provisional DHS Standard Comparable-Cost-Per-Flight-Hour Reporting Methodology and that CBP AMO is using this effort to more accurately track the costs associated with Air and Marine asset utilization.

However, CBP also reported that these missions are only entered into its management information system at the agency or component level and not to the SOG level. According to CBP, BP and AMO will collaborate to determine the most effective way to track SOG missions flown by AMO. www.oig.dhs.gov 8 OIG-16-34 OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL Department of Homeland Security CBP reported that INA will document international engagements for Special Operations BP deployments. INA will be able to filter these engagements through a new automated temporary duty memorandum form. This form will include an SOG indication field and capture all necessary information related to the temporary duty except for final costs; quarterly reports will capture final costs.

Lastly, according to the CBP response, BP will track MRT personnel time– related expenses as an activity code within the Border Patrol Enforcement Tracking System (BPETS). In addition, Sector Special Operations Detachments will manually track their costs, including MRT-related travel and equipment. Expected Completion Date: July 29, 2016. OIG Analysis CBP’s proposed actions meet the intent of the recommendation.

The recommendation is resolved and open. The recommendation remains open until CBP provides policies and procedures to: 1. track SOG aviation support from CBP AMO including aircraft and aircrew costs; 2. ensure SOG international deployments and non-final costs are appropriately captured in its new automated temporary duty memorandum form; 3. capture final international deployment costs in quarterly reports; 4. track MRT personnel time-related expenses within BPETs; and 5. track Sector Special Operations Detachment costs including MRT travel and equipment costs. Objective, Scope, and Methodology The Department of Homeland Security Office of Inspector General was established by the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (Public Law 107-296) by amendment to the Inspector General Act of 1978. This report provides the results of our limited review to determine the effectiveness and cost of CBP’s SOG for FYs 2010–14.

OIG did not complete the planned audit because we determined that BP is still in the process of developing and implementing formal performance measures, and the recordkeeping practices of CBP limited our ability to determine total SOG program costs. Findings and one recommendation from our limited review are included for CBP’s action. www.oig.dhs.gov 9 OIG-16-34 OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL Department of Homeland Security We reviewed criteria including the GPRA Modernization Act of 2010 and Management's Responsibility for Internal Control (OMB Circular A-123 (revised for Federal Government requirements to develop outcome-oriented goals and objectives and internal controls that must be established and maintained to achieve the objectives of effective and efficient operations. We reviewed laws and regulations pertaining to Border Patrol agent authorities. Additionally, we analyzed SOG policies and procedures, as well as annual performance (DHS, CBP) and strategic plans (CBP, BP, and SOG).

We also reviewed and analyzed prior reports from GAO and DHS OIG. We obtained and analyzed budget and expenditure data from SOG, OTD, Use of Force Center of Excellence, and AMO. We did not verify the provided cost data due to the timeframe and scope of the limited review; rather, we accepted cost data as provided by the various offices of CBP and BP. We interviewed CBP and BP personnel at CBP Headquarters in Washington, DC, and SOG National Headquarters and Sector El Paso in El Paso, TX.

We conducted this performance audit between April and September 2015 pursuant to the Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended, and according to generally accepted government auditing standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based upon our audit objectives. We believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based upon our audit objectives. The Office of Audits major contributors to this report are Patrick O’Malley, Director; Lorinda Couch, Audit Manager; Falon Newman-Duckworth, Auditor in Charge; Kathleen Hyland, Auditor; Tessa May-Fraser, Program Analyst; Michael Staver, Program Analyst; Sandra Ward-Greer, Auditor; Kevin Dolloson, Communications Analyst; and Ashley Petaccio, Independent Referencer. www.oig.dhs.gov 10 OIG-16-34 OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL Department of Homeland Security Appendix A CBP Comments to the Draft Report www.oig.dhs.gov 11 OIG-16-34 OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL Department of Homeland Security www.oig.dhs.gov 12 OIG-16-34 OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL Department of Homeland Security Appendix B Special Operations Group Organization Figure 1.

DHS OIG created Organization Chart from CBP Sources www.oig.dhs.gov 13 OIG-16-34 OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL Department of Homeland Security Appendix C Special Operations Group Branch Descriptions Border Patrol Tactical Unit (BORTAC)  Created in 1984  Provides immediate response capability to emergent and high-risk incidents requiring specialized skills and tactics Border Patrol Search, Trauma, and Rescue Unit (BORSTAR)  Created in 1998  Provides law enforcement, search, rescue, and medical response capabilities and mutual assistance local, county, state, tribal, and Federal entities Mobile Response Team (MRT)  Provides a national group of organized, trained, and equipped Border Patrol Agents capable of rapid response to regional and national incidents in support of priority CBP operations Special Operations Group-Intelligence Unit (SOG-IU)  Provides direct intelligence support to field operators  Identifies threats operating across corridors and threats approaching the U.S. border, prioritizes these risks, and supports the missions to mitigate the operational gaps specific to each corridor Operations Center (OPSCEN)  Provides SOG deployable and deployed assets with essential information, training, and equipment necessary for mission success Logistics Support  Provides operational support for SOG missions by providing logistical, fleet, facilities, wireless service, and procurement support to SOG components and limited support to the Office of Field Operations, Special Response Team Resource Management  Provides in-house training, support, continual and specific guidance in proper administrative procedures and processes  Provides continual and specific guidance, support and assistance in areas such as Retirement and Benefits, Health and Life Insurance, and procurement www.oig.dhs.gov 14 OIG-16-34 OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL Department of Homeland Security Appendix D Special Operations Group Personnel Table 3. Special Operations Group Personnel Totals (September 2015) Category of SOG Personnel BORSTAR BORTAC SOG Component Active Ready Reserve Inactive Totals Source: DHS OIG-created table based on SOG-provided data. 253 29 105 387 220 51 75 346 MRT (October 2015) 480 0 N/A 480 Active SOG Personnel Requirements:  BORSTAR o Eligible to participate in BORSTAR Operations o Completed BORSTAR basic training o Current BORSTAR annual fitness standards certification  BORTAC o Assigned to the National SOG Team or Sector BORTAC teams o Fully eligible to participate in all BORTAC operations o Certified BORTAC member o Current BORTAC annual fitness certification, qualifying firearms scores, and BORTAC Mission Essential Task List items  MRT o Successfully completed MRT training Ready Reserve SOG Personnel Requirements:  BORSTAR o Eligible to participate in BORSTAR operations in an administrative, instructional, or technical support role o Must currently be members of a BORSTAR unit but need not have a current BORSTAR annual fitness standard certification  BORTAC o Not assigned to the National SOG or a Sector team o Eligible to participate in BORTAC operations o Certified BORTAC member o Current BORTAC annual fitness certification, qualifying firearms scores, and BORTAC Mission Essential Task List items Inactive SOG Personnel Requirements:  BORSTAR o Eligible to participate in advisory roles o Past member of a BORSTAR team in good standing  BORTAC o Eligible to participate in advisory or administrative roles o Past member of BORTAC in good standing www.oig.dhs.gov 15 OIG-16-34 OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL Department of Homeland Security Appendix E Estimated SOG Program Costs Based on Audit Work Table 4. OIG-identified SOG Program Cost Categories Incomplete Cost Records in Blue Font Cost Category Ammunition* FY 2010 No data available FY 2011 No data available Fiscal Year FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 $119,082 $939,961 $1,275,572 Asset Forfeiture $20,222 $377,385 $583,761 $19,439 $373,565 National Training Program Travel $1,971,079 $4,037 $1,243,231 $868,873 $879,287 Service $417,475 $404,521 $518,300 $438,559 $764,367 Supplies $1,680,813 $1,327,132 $960,341 $298,638 $185,681 Equipment $755,976 $217,986 $394,844 $154,286 $73,312 No data available No data available No data available $171,354 $368,706 AMO Aviation** AMO Vessel Maintenance International Missions*** Personnel Pay, Salary, Benefits**** SOG Operational Costs No data available Unable to determine costs $8,456,772 $6,904 $19,648 $22,130 $20,415 Unable to determine costs Unable to determine costs Unable to determine costs Unable to determine costs $4,243,468 $15,726,360 $19,691,639 $21,723,108 Overtime Operational Travel $335,943 $1,585,559 $184,947 $1,108,584 $340,926 $1,355,523 Transportation Communications $0 $139,259 $0 $172,213 $0 $231,029 $248,772 $911,094 $0 $258,272 $126,343 $1,327,285 $4,602 $199,715 Services $1,497,935 $1,834,416 $1,883,583 $812,708 $1,144,394 Supplies $1,271,146 $1,551,094 $1,624,786 $1,378,734 $1,763,746 Equipment $1,047,975 $1,357,340 $1,686,851 $189,519 $3,397,316 Totals $19,180,154 $12,790,027 $26,688,265 $26,403,978 $33,627,414 *Ammunition purchased for SOG by the Use of Force Center of Excellence ** Incomplete AMO data provided for FYs 2013–14 ***International mission support through INA **** Data for National SOG team members only Source: DHS OIG-created table from multiple sources of CBP data. www.oig.dhs.gov 16 OIG-16-34 OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL Department of Homeland Security Appendix F Report Distribution Department of Homeland Security Secretary Deputy Secretary Chief of Staff General Counsel Executive Secretary Director, GAO/OIG Liaison Office Assistant Secretary for Office of Policy Assistant Secretary for Office of Public Affairs Assistant Secretary for Office of Legislative Affairs CBP Liaison Office of Management and Budget Chief, Homeland Security Branch DHS OIG Budget Examiner Congress Congressional Oversight and Appropriations Committees www.oig.dhs.gov 17 OIG-16-34 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND COPIES To view this and any of our other reports, please visit our website at: www.oig.dhs.gov.

For further information or questions, please contact Office of Inspector General Public Affairs at: [email protected]. Follow us on Twitter at: @dhsoig.

OIG HOTLINE

To report fraud, waste, or abuse, visit our website at www.oig.dhs.gov and click on the red "Hotline" tab. If you cannot access our website, call our hotline at (800) 323-8603, fax our hotline at (202) 254-4297, or write to us at: Department of Homeland Security Office of Inspector General, Mail Stop 0305 Attention: Hotline 245 Murray Drive, SW Washington, DC 20528-0305