The Blog @ Homeland Security: Video: Defining One DHS

Thursday, December 17, 2009

Video: Defining One DHS

When Secretary Napolitano took the reins at DHS, she outlined five major priorities for the Department: guard against terrorism; secure our borders; enforce immigration laws, prepare for, respond to and recover from natural disasters; and unify and mature DHS.

This final objective was the focus of the Secretary’s town hall meeting with employees this week. A standing-room-only crowd of employees packed the USCIS Tomich Center in Washington, DC, and more employees from across the country tuned in via video teleconference, to hear the Secretary highlight the Department's 2009 accomplishments and share her vision for creating One DHS.

After her remarks, the Secretary fielded questions from both the audience and from employees across the country who submitted questions via e-mail.

Video of Secretary Napolitano’s One DHS Town Hall with Employees – both the speech and the question-and-answer session with DHS workers – is now available below.

Secretary Napolitano made clear at the town hall that DHS’ biggest asset is its people, and she is proud to serve alongside the dedicated men and women who contribute to one of the most important missions around – protecting the American homeland and the American people. As she said, "DHS and our 230,000 employees are connected by a common mission and responsibility to protect the United States from all threats and disasters."

Please take a moment to watch the town hall below.

Viewing this video requires the Flash 9 plugin.

Labels: One DHS, Secretary Napolitano

Share |

28 Comments:

At December 17, 2009 5:00 PM , Anonymous said...

Still no real answer to pay upgrades, get an excuse of budget.
At December 17, 2009 5:00 PM , Anonymous said...

Unless I missed it, the one major initiative that could have been addressed at moving towards 1 DHS - combining ICE OI and CBP - was not addressed at all during this town hall.

I will limit my comments to saying that we at ICE OI are watching with great concern as CBP continues to gather assets and political clout, while ICE seems to be relegated to "second class" status in border investigations - CBP has uniformed officers, Air and Marine and are expanding their IA investigative function. Before long, CBP will be clamoring for authority to conduct UC ops and other authorities long rooted in the Investigations platform rooted in ICE.

That said, before long, why would CBP look to ICE to fulfill its investigative needs? Indeed, as of 10/1/09, CBP Investigative Program Specialists (Special Agents, on their credentials) hired in FY 2010 must have gone to CITP training, even though they are 1801 series - can 1811s be too far behind, even beyond IA? If not, then why would we have CBP 1811s and ICE 1811s with identical authorities performing an identical, duplicative mission?

I strongly urge the good Secretary and the Executive Branch, generally, to address this issue sooner rather than later - I and many other managers, albeit quietly out of respect for not airing "dirty laundry" publicly, are very concerned about a potential "bleed-out" of highly qualified talent to retirement, transfer to OGAs or outright resignation if the current state of affairs - from IT systems controlled by CBP, to lack of AMB support, to lack of budget availability - continues as it has for the last few years and threatens to continue with shrinking budgets in FY 2011 and beyond. There is no reason to have ICE OI separate from CBP any lonnger - budgets, hiring practices, chains of command and a whole host of other processes are either duplicative, disparate or discongruent - certainly not what I or others envision for a unified DHS.

Thank you for considering my remarks.
At December 17, 2009 5:04 PM , Z. Lyons, USCG said...

Madam Secretary,

I'd love to see a one-day "DHS-family conference" happen in each of the various big cities. Each of the agencies could have some time to present their missions, authorities, command structure, and introduce some of their personnel. It would be important that a lot of the lower-level employees come, not just bigwigs. This would be the beginnings of more of a "one-DHS" becaise relationships would be born and innovation would occur. I'd like to help you make it happen here in Honolulu and you should come be a part of it.

Sincerely,
Z. Lyons,
LT, US Coast Guard
At December 17, 2009 5:05 PM , Anonymous said...

SHE skirted the issue on pay raise and talked about budget concerns. she gave 50,000 CBP employees GS-12. and she couldnt give 4,000 ICE DRO LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS GS-11. ONE WORD "WOW". THANKS MADAM SECRETARY WE KNOW WERE YOU STAND WITH ICE DRO.
At December 18, 2009 7:13 AM , Anonymous said...

Unable to clearly hear the Secretary's speech. I had my volume set to the highest setting on my desktop and the volume control on this webpage; I was still unable to clearly hear the speech. Additionally, the 3" x 3" video screen made it difficult to watch the video. There did not appear to be an option to enlarge the video screen size.
At December 18, 2009 11:33 AM , Anonymous said...

Ma'am,

I would just like to state that by not addressing the ICE/DRO pay upgrades you are increasing the gap to your and goal of “One DHS” and continuing the perception that ICE/DRO is not important enough to DHS. By arbitrarily granting BPA’s and CBPO’s upgrades to GS-12 and not even considering the hard work that IEA’s and DO’s have done in ICE you are showing us that you are not really worried about the budget but the number of employees that you can please. If it were a budget issue then it would be less of a burden on the budget to grant upgrades to 7,000 DRO employees (that have lobbied for years to get them) as it would to grant upgrades to the 50,000 CBP employees (that were not even asking for them) in my opinion.
At December 18, 2009 9:10 PM , Anonymous said...

Kevin Galbreath (TSA STSO-DFW Airport)

It seemed to me that she was well prepared and covered a lot of basic topics without going too deep. My problem is not with her. I have seen her interviewed many times and she really seems to care about this workforce and the agency's future.

The problem I have is that it seemed the questions were either softballs like "How will you make One DHS happen?" from a TSA person or questions that were mostly HQ type questions. I find it hard to believe that a TSO would ask that question when the bill to give us collective bargaining is still not passed or for that matter the PASS system that upsets most of the workforce because one part of it can preclude bonus money (PSEs). What is the reason for people to give their best when their bonus and raises are determined by that one thing usually early in the fiscal year?

The bulk of this workforce doesn't sit behind a desk....most of us work the floor. To me the questions seemed to all be either preselected or coached so certain points could be covered.

The sound was almost non existent and the video could not be taken to full screen so technically our One DHS does not even match the AV club from most high schools.
At December 18, 2009 11:20 PM , Anonymous said...

What a waste of Time""

Tsa should have already made the transition to the gs level instead of sv series pay band which is very confusing to other govt agencies. Were here working with the general public, trying to keep are heads cool day in and day out just to hear rhetoric and biases when will we ever get bargaining rights like other agencies, we should be treated equal, thanks secretary, I guess now we should feel like a big happy family..
At December 19, 2009 7:19 AM , Anonymous said...

To the ICE agent who is complaining about not getting a GS-11 rating WAAAAAA, YOU WANT A REAL COMPLAINT PUT YOUR GUN DOWN AND JOIN THE TSA !!!!! We can not transfer to another agency because we are not a GS rating, hiring practices within the TSA is the good old boy system and promotions, none. No educational benifits and at many airports we have to pay for parking where others don't. Our manning staff has been cut because the Federal Screening Directors fluff the results so they will get a better bounus while requirements for our bounus are unrealistic. Here, $500 for doing a great job.
At December 19, 2009 9:26 AM , Anonymous said...

One DHS sound inspiring and ideal but when you dont mention all of them you will think its not one but a selected group that belong. Great example is CBP Agriculture Specialist and aparently ICE and others we should all be part of the One DHS therefore mention at least in events like this.

Thanks lets have faith in One DHS.
At December 19, 2009 9:52 AM , Dave Engle said...

While I'm glad Secretary Napolitano didn't simply ignore the numerous emails about DRO pay parity, I'm disappointed that she refused to address it in this "Town Hall" meeting, and I'm curious to know when she plans on sharing any information about this issue.
At December 19, 2009 1:40 PM , Anonymous said...

as to Aunt Janet's "tough pathways" approach to getting it right
A. Surely finger printing is needed
B. DNA swabs also if possible
a. PRIORITY ANTI TERROR
C. Is it Switzerland that has the lowest crime rates?
a. all sound ex military (most)retain their duty weapon
after faithful service
1. that's rapid response as many are high tech weapons
2. many have the guns from previous ancestors still at home

but back to the criminal illegals in the country....my point is many fall into the "terror" category...we may have to start thinking more tactical as a nation...personally I'm retired in Canada, but just a thought for you Mam....you are doing an excellent job SF jhc
At December 19, 2009 5:03 PM , Anonymous said...

Consolidating expert departments from multiple components can save money, and provide better results for DHS as a whole.
At December 19, 2009 9:59 PM , Anonymous said...

what do you do if you know someone whose going through immigration process forged the petitioner signiture on one of the documents ad has forged the sigiture on a income tax first time home buyer credit
At December 20, 2009 1:11 PM , Anonymous said...

It's disgusting to see the lack of respect that is given to the ICE Agents (yes I said it - it's on my credentials whether OI wants to hear it or not) who work for Detention & Removal Operations. It's obviously a matter of dollars and cents. When the Immigration Enforcement Agent position was created, the bulk of the work that we inherited came from OI and the Border Patrol. Fugitive Operations, and (now) the Criminal Alian Program (formerly known as IRP or BORCAP) were performed by higher grade GS-11's and GS-13's. Now, the work is being performed by GS-09's. Was the work so simple that it didn't warrant being performed by higher graded employees? If so, the taxpayers deserve a refund. IEA's regularly perform docket management duties, and contrary to poular belief enforce the Immigration Laws of our nation. Our training and the jobs that we perform more than qualify us for a pay upgrade. If this is truly going to be "One DHS" then we should receive equal consideration- especially where pay is concerned.
At December 21, 2009 1:27 PM , Anonymous said...

At least you can watch the video. Our port wont install the Flash 9 plug-in on our computers so we can view official videos.
At December 21, 2009 2:18 PM , Anonymous said...

The big plan of ONE DHS doesn't mean ONE pay rate of course(ICE) I guess we don't do Law enforcement work such as fugitive operations, Crininal Prosecutins, Prisoner transfers, Warrent executions, time for us to go stamp passports so we can get a raise.
At December 21, 2009 2:55 PM , Anonymous said...

The "one DHS" she envisions has a long way to go. As long as DHS component agencies are allowed to exclude other DHS component agencies from applying for positions, it will never be unified. CIS is one of the biggest offenders of this "policy". They will publish vacancies on USAJOBS, but then limit them to their own employees almost exclusively. How can it be that CIS is currently hiring nationwide for ISO positions under merit promotion, with many being hired in various locations; but then exclude all except their own currently serving employees? From what I have been told, they are going to fill some of these position with NTE/Temps/Term employees who have been let go. According to OPM, only people with permanent career/conditional status, or former employees with status, can apply under merit promotion announcements. The vacancy announcement even states that it is limited to people with "status". NTE/Term/Temp employees do dot have status...yet, apparently it is these people who will be filling many of the positions.
At December 21, 2009 3:41 PM , Anonymous said...

Where's the Federal Protective Service fall, under DHS now under NPPD, it has to be better than when it was under ICE.
But who will take the helm and correct the "sinking ship" - Will the new Secretary redefine and straighten the mission?
One of the countries former leading law enforcement agencies has been abused and neglected under ICE, may now have a chance, but it needs a new leader, the present has destroyed morale, destroyed the agencies specialty units, specifically Explosive Detection K9.
Secretary please help, and lets provide the security our country needs.
At December 21, 2009 4:42 PM , Anonymous said...

Nothing really was said here....why bother?
At December 23, 2009 10:19 AM , Anonymous said...

While moving toward “One DHS” can further our support of, and even help us succeed at, our shared homeland security mission, achieving the vision shouldn’t be mutually exclusive of our pride in and dedication to our component agencies.

A parallel can be seen in our workforce diversity. DHS is committed to diversity and inclusion in its workforce, recognizing that our different backgrounds bring different perspectives and strengths to our shared mission. Similar to the value we place in our diverse workforce, the diversity of DHS components is a strength.

Our components take pride in their individual histories, in unique resources and capabilities that have developed over decades and even centuries, and in the dedicated performance of specialized operations that contribute to meeting the larger DHS mission. Recognizing the breadth and depth of our components doesn’t weaken the DHS brand; on the contrary, it is the strength of our Department.

The sum of DHS is greater than its parts, but not despite the number of those parts. Acknowledging – and taking pride in the fact – that DHS is made up of many components helps personnel in the Department and the American people better understand the extent of our commitment to keep America safe.
At December 23, 2009 2:45 PM , Denise said...

Where can I find more information on the plan for the One DHS intranet? This impacts my line of work, yet the announcement was a surprise.
At December 27, 2009 8:07 PM , Anonymous said...

DHS to fragmented and to diverse for its own good.
At December 28, 2009 5:55 PM , B. Bean (ICE) said...

I think one of DHS' biggest impediments towards a "One DHS" culture is the way in which we screen candidates for positions. To truly create this culture DHS needs to be able to better share ideas, lessons learned, and best practices across each department. A great way to accomplish this is thru the development and mobility of employees, and this needs to be accomplished at all levels of DHS, not just at the top grade levels. I believe a diversity of ideas and backgrounds coupled with fresh approaches to problems are critical in today's security environment.

My suggestion is for DHS to end the "compartmentalization" of its human resources. Too many job postings have very specific requirements and/or training course completion requirements that have little impact on the overall success of the applicant in that position. In my opinion, DHS needs to ensure candidates have the capability and motivation to perform the job, and then give the new hire the training once they come on board. For example, in law enforcement would you rather have a leader that has a proven ability to perform under pressure, or someone that will exercise indecision under pressure, but has attended a 3 month law enforcement course? I believe in picking the stronger candidate based on core attributes because the specific training can be provided later. From what I have seen, this is a problem at all levels of hiring (entry level, management, journeyman, etc.). These hiring practices ensure CBP (or ICE or FEMA, etc.) employees stay put in only CBP, and is counter to creating a "One DHS" culture. Not only is creativity and ingenuity stifled, but this only encourages DHS employees to associate with their respective department instead of with DHS.
At December 29, 2009 10:11 AM , Anonymous said...

BONUS? What's a BONUS? Oh, yeah, that's something you get if you get if you're not a Union activist and/or you're not with FPS!
At December 30, 2009 12:26 PM , Carsie said...

Madam Secretary,

With all do respect, you have waisted my time in listening to your town hall meeting that outlined nothing. You truely are an attorney when you have accomplished this. We in Arizona already know this about you and now so does DHS. Also to address your comments about the recent terror activities, you have embarrassed me and the department in which we all work.

Madam Secretary, I think it's time you actually listen to your Department and try not to fill in the blanks with your own interpretations because the are not even close to the truth.
You can do this by addressing ICE, CBP, BP, TSA, SS, USCG and all other agencies seperately and actually listen to then instead of standing on your self-made pedistal bragging about what you have set for a goal. Set your goals off of what you hear. Don't talk for an hour about nothing, we're tired of that and frankly don't care about it.

It seems to me that this is what made you unpopular as Govenor of Arizona. Please don't bring your bad habbits here.
At January 10, 2010 9:02 PM , Anonymous said...

In response to “One DHS”, I would merge U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS), U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) into one agency U.S. Border Enforcement Administration (BEA). In addition, I would merge Transportation Security Administration (TSA) with Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and put TSA under the Department of Transportation. Second, I would create the same format of badges, credentials, and uniform patches for all agencies under the DHS. For example, U.S. Secret Service and Federal Emergency Management Agency would have identical format of badges and credentials except the name and authority would be different. This would create similarities and unity instead of competitiveness and division among the DHS agencies.
At January 29, 2010 7:29 PM , Anonymous said...

I am a DHS employee. I watched the video and read the comments here in late December. I thought the openness and willingness to open the door for employee feedback was great.

I checked back in a month to see if there was any follow-up response from anyone at DHS to the comments. There doesn't seem to be. Some are simple questions that someone surely can answer. Shame on us for inviting comments but not following up. I had the same question Denise (December 23, 2009 2:45 PM ) had about the One DHS Intranet, and was hoping to find an answer. This blog can be so much more powerful if it's used for two-way communication. Are the questions raised here answered someplace else? Thank you!