|
|||||
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
 |
 |
    |
|
|
|||
 |
|
||
|
|||
|
|
|
|
||||||||
|
U.S. Auditor Finds Slow Spending of Terrorism Grants, but Calls Spending a Poor Measure of Progress By Joe Fiorill WASHINGTON — The U.S. Homeland Security Department’s inspector general yesterday endorsed the growing consensus that states and local jurisdictions have been slow to spend post-Sept. 11, 2001, federal terrorism-response funds, but said spending rates are not the best way to track progress in improving preparedness (see GSN, March 19). As of February, most of the $2.4 billion in first-responder grants awarded in fiscal 2002 and 2003 by the department’s Office for Domestic Preparedness remained in the U.S. Treasury, Inspector General Clark Kent Ervin said in a report. The portion of funds that was spent ranged from 10 to 36 percent for the office’s various grant programs. The inspector general added, though, that “the spending picture is not as bad as it appears.” Some state and local governments, he said, delayed spending while assessing the terrorist threat and setting priorities, “believing that spending the funds wisely was more important than spending them immediately.” Accused by cities of creating what Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge has called a spending “logjam,” state officials have stressed that they have designated much grant money to local jurisdictions that have not yet spent the funds. Ervin appeared to endorse the states’ position. “Although only a small percentage of the funds had been drawn down, much of the remainder had been committed or obligated. … The amounts of funds drawn down by states provide an incomplete picture of the progress states and local jurisdictions are making. A more accurate way to monitor progress would be to identify the amount of funds obligated and spent (outlays) by the states and local jurisdictions,” Ervin said. “For example, as of Sept. 30, 2003, Ohio and Pennsylvania obligated and spent over 98 percent of their fiscal 2002 grant awards, while ODP’s grant payment history reports showed that only 36 percent and 8 percent, respectively, were drawn down,” he said. Ervin recommended that the Office for Domestic Preparedness increase reporting requirements and performance standards for grant recipients; speed development of federal guidelines on first-responder capabilities, equipment and training; and offer grant recipients guidance on how best to accelerate spending. A Homeland Security Department official said today that many such changes are coming this year. The official cited a new system for tracking funds, as well as improvements in the department’s ability to provide technical assistance to state and local officials. “A lot of this will be done or is in planning to be done very quickly,” the official said. Several members of Congress who have sponsored measures to reform first-responder grant programs said the inspector general’s report demonstrates the need for such laws. “This report indicates that there is a clear need for legislation to ensure that homeland security funding reaches our first responders, who are on the front lines in the war against terrorism,” said Senate Governmental Affairs Committee Chairwoman Susan Collins (R-Maine), the sponsor of one of several pending Office for Domestic Preparedness reform bills. Chairman Christopher Cox (R-Calif.) and senior Democrat Jim Turner (Texas) of the House Select Committee on Homeland Security, which has produced a bill to speed Homeland Security Department funding to emergency responders, also praised the report. “This report echoes our own findings and supports quick passage of our bill,” they said in a statement.
| ||||||||||
Back to top
