Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 30, 2024 Tue
Time: 3:36 am
Time: 3:36 am
Results for police dogs (u.s.)
2 results foundAuthor: Department of Homeland Security. Office of Inspector General Title: A Review of U.S. Customs and Border Protection's Procurement of Untrained Canines Summary: Chairman Bennie G. Thompson and Representative Kendrick B. Meek, U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Homeland Security, requested that we review a contract awarded by U.S. Customs and Border Protection to procure and deliver untrained canines to its canine training facilities. They expressed concerns that the contract costs may be outside of a reasonable price range for untrained dogs. We were also requested to review vendor licensing requirements, the percentage of canines unsuitable for service, and the role of dog deployment in the overall border protection strategy. From April 2006 through June 2007, U.S. Customs and Border Protection procured 322 untrained canines at a cost of $1.46 million, or an average price of $4,535 per canine. The costs incurred for the untrained canines were reasonable and were comparable to the costs incurred for untrained canines procured by organizations such as the United States Secret Service and the Department of Defense. Regarding the cost effectiveness of the program, while only 3.85% of the Office of Border Patrol’s 13,905 agents were canine handlers, they were credited with 60% of narcotic apprehensions and 40% of all other apprehensions in FY 2007. The solicitation and award of this contract were conducted according to applicable federal regulations. Also, U.S. Department of Agriculture officials said that the vendors were not required to possess a federally issued license to engage in the sale of animals. Through August 14, 2007, 26 or 8% of the procured canines did not complete the training. CBP donated six of these canines to private homes, which was inconsistent with federal regulations. We recommend that U.S. Customs and Border Protection adjust the delivery timeframes for vendors, properly transfer or sell unfit canines, and implement a unified system that accurately accounts for the performance of canine teams. U.S. Customs and Border Protection generally concurred with all recommendations. Details: Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Office of Inspector General, 2008. 35p. Source: OIG-08-46: Internet Resource: Accessed on January 28, 2012 at http://www.oig.dhs.gov/assets/Mgmt/OIG_08-46_Apr08.pdf Year: 2008 Country: United States URL: http://www.oig.dhs.gov/assets/Mgmt/OIG_08-46_Apr08.pdf Shelf Number: 123855 Keywords: Customs AgenciesPolice Dogs (U.S.) |
Author: U.S. Government Accountability Office Title: TSA Explosives Detection Canine Program: Actions Needed to Analyze Data and Ensure Canine Teams Are Effectively Utilized Summary: The Transportation Security Administration (TSA), the federal agency that administers the National Canine Program (NCP), is collecting and using key data on its canine program, but could better analyze these data to identify program trends. TSA collects canine team data using the Canine Website System (CWS), a central management database. TSA uses CWS to capture the amount of time canine teams conduct training as well as searching for explosives odor, among other functions. However, TSA has not fully analyzed the data it collects in CWS to identify program trends and areas that are working well or in need of corrective action. Such analyses could help TSA to determine canine teams’ proficiency, inform future deployment efforts, and help ensure that taxpayer funds are used effectively. For example: • GAO analysis of canine team training data from May 2011 through April 2012 showed that some canine teams were repeatedly not in compliance with TSA’s monthly training requirement, which is in place to ensure canine teams remain proficient in explosives detection. • GAO analysis of TSA’s cargo-screening data from September 2011 through July 2012 showed that canine teams primarily responsible for screening air cargo placed on passenger aircraft exceeded their monthly screening requirement. This suggests that TSA could increase the percentage of air cargo it requires air cargo canine teams to screen or redeploy teams. TSA has not deployed passenger screening canines (PSC)—trained to identify and track explosives odor on a person—consistent with its risk-based approach, and did not determine PSC teams’ effectiveness prior to deployment. TSA’s 2012 Strategic Framework calls for the deployment of PSC teams based on risk; however, GAO found that PSC teams have not been deployed to the highest-risk airport locations. TSA officials stated that the agency generally defers to airport officials on whether PSC teams will be deployed, and some airport operators have decided against the use of PSC teams at their airports because of concerns related to the composition and capabilities of PSC teams. As a result of these concerns, the PSC teams deployed to higher-risk airport locations are not being used for passenger screening as intended, but for other purposes, such as screening air cargo or training. TSA is coordinating with aviation stakeholders to resolve concerns related to PSC team deployment, but has been unable to resolve these concerns, as of September 2012. Furthermore, TSA began deploying PSC teams in April 2011 prior to determining the teams’ operational effectiveness and before identifying where within the airport these teams would be most effectively utilized. TSA is in the process of assessing the effectiveness of PSC teams in the operational environment, but testing is not comprehensive since it does not include all areas at the airport or compare PSCs with already deployed conventional canines (trained to detect explosives in stationary objects). As a result, more comprehensive testing could provide TSA with greater assurance that PSC teams are effective in identifying explosives odor on passengers and provide an enhanced security benefit. Details: Washington, DC: GAO, 2013. 44p. Source: Internet Resource: GAO-13-239: Accessed March 25, 2013 at: http://www.gao.gov/assets/660/651725.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://www.gao.gov/assets/660/651725.pdf Shelf Number: 128126 Keywords: Canine UnitsPassenger ScreeningPolice Dogs (U.S.)Transportation Security |