Obtaining Security Program Funding

Officials provide insight on budget appropriations and grants funding for security programs
Author:
Publish date:

The challenges of security programs—including those involving surveillance cameras—are common at all levels of government, so developing models and strategies for dealing with those challenges is crucial to getting security programs funded, according to federal and county officials.

Image placeholder title

Security is built into federal agencies’ programmatic and mission functions; as agencies develop their annual budget proposals, they include appropriations for their own security and, when appropriate, to award grants, said Robert Brese, the Department of Energy’s deputy chief information officer.

However, federal budget sequestration has placed caps on the amounts agencies can spend, said Brese, who spoke about “Funding Today’s Security Programs” at the GovSec conference in Washington during May. Sequestration has imposed “flat and declining budgets” on the agencies, creating a situation where flat is the new increase in funding, he said. But, even though appropriations for security programs might be reduced, “the level of security requirements don’t go down,” he added.

The agencies are aware that “even though our bottom lines are going down, or being held flat, the level of activity by our adversaries continues to go up,” Brese said. While security programs have to be funded, the cap on federal spending has required the agencies to focus intently on “outcomes and goals,” either within the agency, or by grant recipients, he said. Such outcomes and goals are provided to the agencies by the White House and from the departments, he said. The agencies also are aware that there are local goals that jurisdictions want to achieve.

DEALING WITH RISKS

In addition, while state and local governments face the same challenges when seeking funding for security programs, each municipality has pressures unique to their jurisdictions, said Ira Levy, chief information officer for Howard County, Md., who also spoke at GovSec. “Those pressures are how the jurisdictions develop funding models to deal with what is seen as risks,” he said.

When the agencies in Howard County seek security-program funding—either in the county budget or through grants—it is to deal with vulnerabilities and risks, Levy said. In addition, no matter how secure a facility might seem to be, “unpatched vulnerabilities” can be found, he said. “Anyone who says that they are ‘100 percent patched’ or their goal is to be 100 percent patched … the first is untrue, and the second is impossible.”

Some potential funders might even ask, “If you know these vulnerabilities exist, then why haven’t you fixed them on your own?” Levy said. So those seeking a grant or a budget allocation have to be ready “to have a conversation on why you haven’t fixed those.”

PARTNERSHIPS URGED

Howard County government is not the largest or smallest county government in Maryland, but is in the middle in many regards, including geographically in the middle between Washington and Baltimore, he said. The county uses its location as an advantage when seeking discretionary funding from the state or federal government, he said. It partners with adjacent counties when applying for grants, he added.

The grants the county seeks are, on occasion, not so much about vulnerabilities, but how the joint applicants are going to approach the vulnerabilities, Levy said. If the funder believes that four jurisdictions are going to team up to deal with a risk, that can be more meaningful because we’re four jurisdictions coming together, he said. When counties do partner, they have not only communicated a risk, but that it is being solved by combined action.

Related

Key House Committee Members Act to Spur FCC on Programs promo image

PEG Gets Short Shrift in FCC Report

Out of 105 organizations that responded to the FCC’s call for comments for inclusion in the 15th report to Congress on the “Status of Competition in the Market for the Delivery of Video Programming” issued July 20, 2012, at least 83 were public, education and government channels, or PEG-related groups.

PEG Channels’ Latest Tool Is Webstreaming promo image

PEG Channels’ Latest Tool Is Webstreaming

Webstreaming has become the latest tool available to public, education and government channels to help them reach the widest audience possible, including providing content to viewers who not only leave a channel’s immediate broadcast area, but who also leave the state.