Science

1. 1
Challenges in the Department of Homeland Security
Student
Department, College
Code: Course Name
Professor
Date

2. 2
Abstract
The main objective of this paper is to examine national intelligence challenges that the United
States Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is anticipated to encounter in the future. A
literature review methodology will be applied. Proposed recommendations are based on the
analysis of previous research outcomes. Despite the department having remarkable
management of security within the US borders, it still has more milestones to be addressed
based on the current issues such as national peace. It is recommended the national
intelligence challenges to adapt to the growing national population that is characterized by
varying social fabric as well as global metrics.
Keywords: critical infrastructure, department of homeland security, infrastructure
protection, terrorism

3. 3
Challenges in the Department of Homeland Security
Introduction
In 2018, the U.S. Government Accountability Office (US GAO) had produced over
633 reports and published over 1,650 recommendations on the performance as well as
challenges that the homeland security encounter (US GAO, 2018). Besides, the GAO's
recommendations to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) like expansion programs
and offices, the establishment of new sub-departments, deployment of the critical staff, and
formulation of better operational plans are among the functions of that are yet to be fully
implemented.
Currently, DHS is working hard towards the policy-making level despite its efforts
not being well-guided (Painter, 2019). This implies that the present homeland security
framework is fairly weak and does not have focus. According to the paper, for example, the
guiding principles in terms of disaster response are below the standards when compared to
the ever-changing nature of security issues facing the US. It is against this backdrop that this
paper seeks to review the existing research on the national intelligence challenges to propose
solutions that can ensure DHS copes with challenges shortly or coming decades.
Research Question
This literature review analyses the existing literature as well as the future intelligence
issues that DHS can eventually struggle with if not well-addressed at the moment. Thus, the
security contribution made by the federal, state, and local government should not be
overlooked (US GAO, 2018). All these organs aim to enhance security. Therefore, this
literature review will avail of a succinct literature analysis from the existing reports and
research on the aspects that are most likely to impede the performance of intelligence organs
across the country. This review will also avail of some background information concerning

4. 4
progressive and retrogressive factors that affect intelligence acquisition and general security
management.
Thus from the objective statement, this literature review will be in a position to
develop a vital connection between the current and past intelligence acquisition mechanisms
and subsequently extrapolate the efficacy of the future intelligence mechanisms in the United
States. Therefore, this literature review looks analyses the statement problem by attempting to
answer the following research question:
1. Which national intelligence issues will the DHS continue to face in the future?
Hypothesis
The hypothesis is that poor acquisition and application of intelligence information
will continue to hamper the performance of the Department of Homeland Security in the
future.
Literature Review
Reviewing the above research question and developing concrete proposals is certainly
the main value of this literature review. National security touches every domain, that is, from
the national to local levels (US GAO, 2018). Therefore, if security as well as intelligence-
related parameters are not well-handled, a country can be brought down even if it is a
superpower country.
On the other hand, the hypothesis will be tested by reviewing the existing scholarly
sources as well as authoritative publications on security and intelligence in the United States.
This review will then be utilized in deducing the possible reality in the future. However, the
key limitation of this study will be the absence of primary data from the field since it will
utilize past and present data from secondary sources. The generality of issues from secondary
sources will also be a likely drawback that will ultimately result in bias. This because the

5. 5
review will not be entirely empirical in nature, sampling plans, and the procedure is not
necessary due to sourcing from peer-reviewed journals (Xaquin & Pérez-Sindín, 2017).
Progressive Factors
The federal infrastructure protection policies issued over the last 35 years are
responsible for determining the origin as well as the future of DHS's missions. The term
"critical infrastructure" refers to the assets or systems that are significant to the US and their
destruction would lead to the debilitating outcome to the safety as well as the security of the
country. According to the US GAO (2018), over 10 overarching critical infrastructure
policies have been released in 19 years. The US GAO refers to the critical infrastructure as
the national pillar in availing crucial service, as it is an interconnected system that can
amount to debilitating outcomes when destroyed, and avail necessary services like safety and
health to the public.
The DHS offers highly specialized services to both the public and private sectors. For
instance, owners of commercial office buildings can call the US DHS and request for the
federal representative to visit the building in question to ascertain the building's susceptibility
to terrorism. Thus, the information on the physical attributes of the building is acquired and
entered into the software to generate a model of risks alongside high-quality photographs of
the building's exterior (Riedman, 2016).
To avert the risks related to terrorism, the US DHS proposes security strategies. For
instance, strategies like erecting fences, installation of electronic access control devices, the
introduction of extra closed-circuit television cameras, or performing randomized security
screenings on visitors are advised by the DH. Besides, the US DHS conducts free training
courses for private security officers, for instance, searching for improvised explosives,
identifying terrorists, or handling bomb threats during the surveillance exercise.
Retrogressive Factors

6. 6
Riedman (2016) utilized a meta-analysis on the government policies on infrastructure
protection towards addressing facilities that were categorized as critical. The scope of the
formulated infrastructure protection was checked if it was inhibiting the DHS's ability
towards accomplishing its mission. The research was limited to the vulnerability assessment,
risk evaluation, and the protection of physical infrastructure facilities. Therefore, the author
aimed to restate the problems associated with infrastructure protection published by the US
GAO as well as Congressional Research Service.
Riedman (2016) explored the ideas that not everything defined as critical aligns with
the characteristics of criticality. Riedman found out the criteria used in evaluating
infrastructure were not aligned to the threats, for instance from terrorism. The author found
out when the supposedly critical infrastructures, especially critical facilities, are destroyed,
they turn out as non-critical. Despite this, the overall systems of essential-to-life
infrastructure are more resilient than the current criteria presuppose.
The federal screening personnel that is currently installed by DHS is likely to be ill-
equipped in terms of the resources as well as capacity building or training. Therefore, there is
a need for developing solutions for some of the core persistent issues that face the DHS in
terms of the management of intelligence as well as security affairs (US GAO, 2018).
Solution
An answer to accomplishing the task of successfully classifying, prioritizing, as well
as protecting critical is via refining the methodology used in determining a critical facility.
Thus a small number of critical facilities will result, thus reducing the overall scope of the
DHS's protection mission. Besides, when identifying effectively facilities that critical
infrastructure, the US DHS is required to use a risk-based method within a narrow
identification or definition of terminology that can be easily modeled. A narrow definition is
the critical infrastructure is among the best security practices in the United Kingdom (UK).

7. 7
For instance, UK utilizes the term "national infrastructure" in emphasizing the scope of its
security mission, which is aims fully on the infrastructure or systems that the entire nation
relies on for their daily life (Counter-Terrorism Committee Executive Directorate & United
Nations Counter-Terrorism Centre, 2018). Thus, for an infrastructure asset to be regarded as a
national priority, both a high level of assessment and a high chance of something negative,
like terrorism, occurring must be present. Implementing a risk-based method for both the
prioritizing of facilities via the probability of destruction and assessment of the national
impacts can help the DHS in more efficiently entitling facilities as critical.
Conclusion
From the literature, the DHS is required to treat everything designated as critical to
the requirement of criticality. The literature review shows that DHS is not exhaustively
fulfilling its security missions, due to poor improper facility analysis, for instance in the
protection of infrastructure from terrorism, which is vital to the country. However, the
organization has misaligned most of its resources toward protecting insignificant facilities.
Some facilities are branded as critical may not be likely targeted by terrorists. Besides, some
facilities are likely too remote, too large, or too secure for the terrorists to destroy, or have an
interest in targeting. Therefore, the organization is supposed to change methodologies
utilized in assessing infrastructure alignment to fulfill the mission of protecting the building
and the entire country from terrorism now and in the future.

8. 8
References
Counter-Terrorism Committee Executive Directorate (CTED) & United Nations Counter-
Terrorism Centre (UNOT). (2018). The protection of critical infrastructure against
terrorist attacks: a compendium of good practices. https://www.un.org/sc/ctc/wp-
content/uploads/2019/01/Compendium_of_Good_Practices_Compressed.pdf
Painter, W. (2019). Selected homeland security issues in the 116th congress.
https://fas.org/sgp/crs/homesec/R45701.pdf
Riedman, D.(2016). Questioning the criticality of critical infrastructure: a case study analysis.
The Journal of the NPS Center for Homeland Defense and Security.12,
https://www.hsaj.org/articles/10578
US GAO. (2018). Performance and accountability report: the fiscal year 2018
https://www.gao.gov/assets/700/695501.pdf
Xaquin, S., Pérez-Sindín, L. (2017). Secondary Data: sources, advantages, and disadvantages.
New York. SAGE Publications, Inc. DOI: 10.4135/9781483381411.n557
.