Security Predictions: Two Views on the Department of Homeland Security

CSO: Dyncorp has had a presence with contract security forces on the border, as well as with contingency efforts in the Gulf after Hurricane Katrina. Drawing upon your expertise both with DynCorp, and previously with the Department of Homeland Security, do you anticipate an increasing private presence in homeland security efforts?

Williams: From its formation, DHS relied heavily on contractor support to stand up the organization and roll out new initiatives. From my experience, it was a public-private partnership that worked very well. I am certain the private sector will continue to play a prominent role with DHS, particularly in the development of new technologies to protect the homeland and by providing surge support in response to natural or man-made disasters.

Other key roles for the private sector include the protection of our critical infrastructure and government facilities, thus freeing valuable government resources to concentrate on detection and elimination of threats to our way of life.

CSO: If you could name one or two major challenges with regard to homeland security that still need to be tackled, what would those be? And what is the challenge for security contractors in working with DHS on these challenges?

Williams: We still face a number of major challenges, but high on my list is securing our very porous borders and the inspection of the vast amount of goods that enter our country each day by ground, air and sea.

I think it is important that security contractors have the opportunity to discuss solutions with the federal customer prior to the issuance of a RFP. A combination of rapidly emerging security technologies and the constantly shifting threat landscape can make the best solution a moving target. Creating a strong partnership between industry and the government will always produce a better security solution.

Of course a well documented challenge is the timeliness of obtaining security clearances and personnel suitability reviews. Our problem is trying to keep the best candidates interested in a position while waiting for the process to run its course. This is by no means limited to DHS; this involves most of the federal sector. Ive now experienced this from both sides of the fence. Vetting procedures are very important and there have been great strides to improve the timeliness of the process, but there is room for more improvement. A greater reliance on automated personnel checks and continuous monitoring can reduce the need for many of the staffing intensive investigative techniques.

CSO: While with the DHS, you oversaw efforts on the part of the ISC Interagency Security Committee to devise standards to protect federal buildings with three criteria in mind: threat, vulnerability and consequences. Do you see the results of these standards come into play now for DynCorp in its work with DHS?

Williams: To date, the nature of our work and contact with DHS has not brought the ISC standards directly into play. However, I am very proud of what the ISC was able to accomplish and continue to take the same risk based approach to physical security with many of our mission-critical projects around the world. As DynCorps potential business opportunities expand domestically, my past involvement with the ISC should benefit our organization in developing ISC compliant solutions to federal projects.

Reprinted with permission from

This story is reprinted from CSO Online.com, an online resource for information executives.
Story Copyright CXO Media Inc., 2006. All rights reserved.