Bill Overview
Title: DHS Acquisition Reform Act
Description: This bill revises acquisition and procurement programs and activities of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The bill (1) designates the DHS Under Secretary for Management as the DHS Chief Acquisition Officer and sets forth the Under Secretary's acquisition-related duties, (2) sets forth new acquisition responsibilities of the DHS Chief Financial Officer and the DHS Chief Information Officer, and (3) establishes within the Management Directorate of DHS a Program Accountability and Risk Management Office and sets forth the responsibilities of its Executive Director.
Sponsors: Rep. LaTurner, Jake [R-KS-2]
Target Audience
Population: People in the United States
Estimated Size: 332000000
- The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is a critical federal body that incorporates many agencies responsible for public security in the U.S., including but not limited to Customs and Border Protection (CBP), Transportation Security Administration (TSA), Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
- This bill affects the acquisition and procurement policies of DHS, which can influence how effectively these agencies can obtain resources needed for their operations.
- Efficient acquisition processes can improve the ability of DHS to execute its mission of safeguarding the U.S. from domestic and international threats, affecting national security.
- Given the wide reach of DHS, changes in its efficiency and effectiveness can indirectly impact all U.S. residents, as these agencies deal with issues like immigration enforcement, disaster response, and transportation security.
- The fiscal and operational effects of this acquisition reform will primarily impact DHS personnel and contractors who procure equipment and services essential for security and emergency operations, ensuring that they have clearer guidelines and potentially more efficient management structures.
Reasoning
- The potential impact of this policy on individual wellbeing is mostly indirect, as it involves internal structural changes within DHS aimed at improving efficiency and accountability in acquisitions.
- Citizens may not directly experience the changes, but the improvements in DHS operations can have secondary benefits for security and emergency response times, which could alter public perception and anxiety about national security.
- Contracts and acquisitions that are handled more efficiently can prevent resource shortages during emergencies, leading to improved public confidence in responses to national emergencies.
- Some DHS personnel and contractors may experience improved job satisfaction and stress levels due to streamlined processes and clearer guidelines.
- The impact level on individual wellbeing is likely to vary based on proximity and relation to DHS operations (e.g., employees, contractors, and general citizens), education about the reforms, and perceived effectiveness of now-enhanced services.
Simulated Interviews
Policy Analyst (Washington, D.C.)
Age: 35 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I am optimistic about the potential for improved efficiency, although it won't directly affect the general public.
- It could enhance the effectiveness of DHS, impacting national security positively.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Homeland Security Consultant (California)
Age: 42 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Streamlining the acquisition process is crucial, and it will ease my work stress, leading to better personal wellbeing.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Border Patrol Agent (Texas)
Age: 30 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope it enables us to get more timely and adequate resources.
- Direct effects on my job duty might be minimal, but efficient procurement can improve operations.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Emergency Management Specialist (Florida)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Improvements in acquisition could lead to more efficient disaster response, crucial for my role.
- If the policy works, it should improve readiness and job satisfaction.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Retired (New York)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I believe increased efficiency might improve national security, potentially easing travel-related anxieties.
- Hard to see direct benefits as a retiree, but better TSA operations can mean smoother experiences.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Small Business Owner (Ohio)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Policy clarification might simplify contracting processes, affecting my business positively.
- Could reduce bureaucratic delays which often impact business cash flow.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 3 |
DHS Procurement Officer (Illinois)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Clarified roles should reduce job stress, as processes may get smoother.
- Should improve morale within DHS procurement teams if effectively implemented.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Immigration Attorney (Arizona)
Age: 39 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Procurement improvements might streamline processes that indirectly affect my clients.
- Skeptical but hopeful for a smoother system if resources are managed better.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Graduate Student (New Mexico)
Age: 25 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's a good case study for understanding federal operations.
- Increased effectiveness in DHS can act as a model for other agencies.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
IT Consultant (Vermont)
Age: 38 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 6.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- If implemented well, this could drastically reduce inefficiencies in IT procurement, directly affecting work quality.
- I hope for clearer guidelines and reduced miscommunications.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $80000000 (Low: $60000000, High: $100000000)
Year 2: $65000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $80000000)
Year 3: $60000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $70000000)
Year 5: $55000000 (Low: $45000000, High: $65000000)
Year 10: $40000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $50000000)
Year 100: $10000000 (Low: $5000000, High: $15000000)
Key Considerations
- The ability of DHS to effectively implement these changes will be key to the realization of potential cost savings and efficiency improvements.
- Coordination among different departments within DHS and with other federal agencies will be crucial for seamless adaptation to new acquisition processes.
- Maintaining the integrity and security of DHS operations while undergoing restructuring challenges will be a priority.