▶ 0:06:09.
▶ 0:17:07Good morning. Uh, the subcommittee on government operations will come to order, and I'd like to welcome everybody, uh, to this important hearing. Without objection. Uh, the chair may declare a recess at any time, and I recognize myself for the purpose of making an opening statement. We welcome today's hearing on the modernization of the federal government's background, investigations, and security clearance process.
▶ 0:17:33In particular, the department of defense's national background investigative services system, all known, also known as imbus. If the topic of today's discussion sounds familiar, it should. As a matter of fact, we're getting to know each other rather well in this room.
▶ 0:17:55This subcommittee first examined issues related to this back in june of 2024, when congress raised serious concerns about persistent failures in personnel vetting. Unfortunately, the need for continued oversight has only grown more urgent, and I must say that it is a welcome, uh, seemingly welcome thing for the administration gao, to want to tackle this issue. But it also leads us to today's hearing.
▶ 0:18:29Unfortunately, the need for this continued oversight has grown more urgent. And as I said, both all three sides are willing to come together for this discussion. I want to thank the gentleman, Mr. mfume, for his insistence that we continue down this pathway. Join our initial hearing. We heard from, uh, the gentlewoman. Miss says the same gao witness that we will hear from today.
▶ 0:18:57Jean has been tracking problems with our nation's federal personnel vetting process since as far back as 2005. We also heard from them dcsa director david kettler, who in this same hearing room was brand new to the job at the same time to speak about the program, significant management and oversight shortcomings, poor scheduling, poor cost planning and dozens of cyber security
▶ 0:19:30Risks which many of them have become true at the time. Our witnesses offered recommendations and commitments to correct action. Today, our focus remains squarely on nimbus and whether the program is on track to support the administration's stated goals of accelerating background investigations and security clearances.
▶ 0:19:54Specifically, we want to know whether the system is progressing as discussed, what additional steps may be necessary to deliver a modern, reliable personnel vetting platform that is long overdue, that exists in law. Nimbus was in in.
▶ 0:20:17Envisioned as a one stop shop for all phases of federal personnel vetting by providing modern tools for investigators. Once again not a mission being met, it has become especially critical after the 2015 opm data breach, in which the personnel data and sensitive information of over 21 million current, former and prospective federal employees and their
▶ 0:20:48Families were exposed. Yet today, nimbus has deployed only limited capacities and capabilities, and the program is now more than eight years behind schedule, with completion delayed from 2019 to 2028. This has cost the american taxpayer hundreds of millions of dollars and has wasted valuable government resources.
▶ 0:21:12I will note before I turn the page, it would be simple to blame the people who are here today, and I don't intend to do that. I intend to work with the people who are here and to move forward. But we're going to take seriously what is done today with the need to correct that action. In addition, it is called into question the safety and reliability of all aspects of the federal personnel vetting system is also showed.
▶ 0:21:41The broader government wide initiative to reform personnel vetting policies and processes, known as in the law trusted workforce 2.00. The federal workforce and the government's industrial partners deserve better. That was why we have held so many hearings, and that's why the law was made.
▶ 0:22:06Without these vetting reforms in place or the promised information technology like nimbus that serve as their backbone, security clearance providers and recipients lack advanced tools and the assurance that their personal information is guarded and safe. Agencies and contractors are left struggling with the same persistent challenges.
▶ 0:22:29Slow and delayed onboarding, delaying their access to facilities, and inefficiencies that undermine undermine mission readiness that people like Mr. mfume and the administration need to make sure that they have the assured people in place.
▶ 0:22:51As was clear from our last hearing, concerns about bias are shared by members of congress on both aisles. This is not a partizan issue. This is a national security issue. We must continue to work together to ensure the security, efficiency and accountability of these personnel, vetting systems and processes, which play an increasingly vital role in safeguarding our national interest, comes to fruition.
▶ 0:23:18I am hopeful that our witnesses who have taken place, uh, who have provided this, uh, subcommittee with data and information over the last few weeks, recognize that the progress that has been made over the last 18 months must continue.
▶ 0:23:39Last september, after director kettler's retirement from dxa ranking member and from I wrote the dod to express our concerns about the its leadership strike that department of war d o w we encourage swift action to put a new director in place, especially given the ongoing problems that embassy has and the need to effectively place leadership in that role.
▶ 0:24:08We will probably hear today some of the follow up to that, but it it comes with a lot of uncertainty and a lot of frailties attached to it. We're still going to have the hearing.
▶ 0:24:27And while I have no doubt that this administration will find another leader with necessary commitment, passion and quality qualifications to guide this full and successful, successful implementation, I remain deeply concerned. Now, over seven months since Mr.
▶ 0:24:45Kessler announced his retirement, dcsa remains without a permanent director and part of the discussion today will be to put on record that needed desire for this administration to accomplish this. I'm confident that that my friend and colleague, Mr. mfume, is not only shares my concern, but I want to thank him for his professionalism in addressing these issues today.
▶ 0:25:11I look forward to hearing more about the progress brand new director on, as well as status of the national background investigation service program. Because this hearing will further develop because g o is here. Lots of other ideas that they've got that are challenges that must be met.
▶ 0:25:35I look forward to hearing how we can continue to use this relationship that we share with the administration. Gao and I would now yield to the ranking member, Mr. mfume, for his opening statement. The gentleman is recognized. Thank you very much. >> chairman sessions, and good morning to all of our witnesses. I want to thank you, Mr.
▶ 0:26:00Sessions, for your partnership on this issue and a lot of other issues that have come before this committee that really require a bipartisan approach. You've been very clear in that regard, and it has been clear, I think also, uh, to the full committee and to others who've watched us over the last couple of years. Uh, again, my thanks to the witnesses when it comes to national security, I think we all can agree that partizanship stops at the water's edge.
▶ 0:26:29At least that's what I was taught long ago. And it's important to underscore that because our goal is straightforward deliver a background check system that keeps the united states of america safe, that also gets qualified people to work without delay and continuously verifies that they deserve and have earned our trust.
▶ 0:26:53America, in my opinion, cannot hope to maintain our technological advantage in the national security space if we make the best engineers, scientists, linguists, analysts, and others spend months, if not years, sometimes in limbo before they can serve. And if we can't clear people, we can't complete our missions. It's very, very simple. The national background investigation services are in.
▶ 0:27:23This program was launched, as we all know, to replace the outdated, cumbersome legacy systems and to reduce backlogs and to harden cyber security. However, successful implementation is still far from a reality, and the current plan is for technical capabilities.
▶ 0:27:43In fiscal year 2027, full implementation in 2028, and continued rigorous oversight, if necessary, to get us across the finish line. Now, since 2017, the government has spent about $2.4 billion on nbis and legacy sustainment to keep outdated systems up and running. That is an awful lot of money. $2.4 billion.
▶ 0:28:10And the department projects that about another 2.2 billion is needed to finish the job. So we're far off the mark of where we had hoped to be. It's an enormous amount of money for the government to spend on anything and have so very, very little to show for it.
▶ 0:28:30I understand that this project reached a state of disarray, and that after eight years of implementation, it had to return to a planning phase to restructure the entire acquisition strategy.
▶ 0:28:45This has left contractors in my district and districts all across the country stuck with unclear instructions and increased cost as they juggle various systems in a region where roughly 9% of jobs require a security clearance. This really is not a small problem. It is a huge, huge problem.
▶ 0:29:07It is a direct hit to workers and employers in my city of baltimore, and cities and towns and hamlets all over this country, east to west. They depend on a functioning clearance system to be able to do their jobs. And so the consequences do not stop with my district or the chairman's district.
▶ 0:29:27This is chaos, and in many respects, it's also come with system outages that have stopped work on ground operations and have caused things to come to a halt all over the globe. These are more than just teachable moments, I hope, and these issues have real mission impacts. So here are a few points I'd like to hone in on and make sure on the record today.
▶ 0:29:54First, we need an ongoing sense of vigilance on this project. Otherwise we will be right here a year from now. Treading water. The dxa team has provided quarterly plans and gives a quarterly report to the industry. We need that in an ongoing fashion, but I pledge that we here in congress are not going to get bored or look the other way, and we won't settle for surface level. Check the box compliance exercises.
▶ 0:30:23And I think many of you have followed the work of this committee. Know that that's the case. We're going to be and continue to be very dogged about trying to bring about change here. And we'll make sure that the goals of this implementation are quantifiable and that they are very, very clear. We will be monitoring progress toward each milestone, and we will do that quarter by quarter.
▶ 0:30:44Secondly, we must ensure that transparent cost on on taxpayers are just that transparent and so that taxpayers can trust in this and trust also that the cost that they are paying, since it's more than double than what was previously expected, will be looked at and looked over.
▶ 0:31:04I think all of us here agree, whether you're on this panel or in the audience, that we owe it to the american people to hold the department accountable for overruns and to prevent such gross mismanagement moving forward, both for the remaining steps of implementation and for future projects. Finally, I expect that real results from real people, uh, will be coming soon.
▶ 0:31:34We need to know that we are seeing measurable work in progress in bringing down the backlogs. We can't just trust that things are getting better, and we will not let up until we get gao, uh, gao seal of approval and can see for ourselves that the prospective employees are on the job as fast as possible.
▶ 0:31:57I'm going to repeat what the chairman just said, and that is that the last dcsa director, david cutler, announced his retirement, as you heard from his role in july of last year, I cannot help but to wonder how we are still sitting here seven months later and we still don't have even a nominee for dcsa today we have a director of, uh, defense intelligence and security
▶ 0:32:28Agency before us overseeing dcsa. Uh, that's just one of the many duties, Mr. overbaugh, that you have. We appreciate your work. Uh, and we expect that you will keep this on track as acting director, but it seems like that's a full time job to me. And so I ask for the following. Clear on the record commitments from the department one. Name a permanent dcsa director.
▶ 0:32:55And the plan for getting a qualified candidate into the position as soon as possible. Two a full course profile that ties dollars spent on this to the effectiveness of personnel security reform, and three a commitment to ongoing quarterly briefings about progress toward its stated milestones.
▶ 0:33:18And if any of those milestones slip, I would expect, and I'm sure the chairman would also, that the department will notify this subcommittee in writing within five business days. Uh, regarding the cause, the impact, and what the recovery plan is, people in this country expect stewardship of their money, and they expect trust and trustworthy persons in and around government to carry that out.
▶ 0:33:47And they expect the department and a trusted workforce onboarded without delay will become a reality very, very soon. They expect transparency when things go right and when they go wrong. That is the spirit of this hearing. There will also be transparency in measuring the progress or the lack thereof.
▶ 0:34:08So if we do our jobs here, all of us, those of us who have sworn an oath and have the privilege of representing congressional districts, and those of you who are working for the agency or other agencies, uh, will turn plans into demonstrable results and turn intent into real and lasting impact. That's the spirit of this hearing today.
▶ 0:34:32Um, I want to thank again, chairman sessions, for being as dogged as he is in making sure that as a team, we work together to bring about real and lasting change. Otherwise we have really just failed our jobs and failed our mission. And Mr. chairman, I would yield back. Thank you very much. >> I appreciate the gentleman's comments.
▶ 0:34:53Um, I know that the people who are witnesses today and, and, and have been a part of this for quite some time, do recognize that you and I are attempting, along with this subcommittee, on a bipartisan basis, to move a decision making and authority.
▶ 0:35:11And I concur completely with your comments that this hearing today will be the beginning of that, that will increasingly upbeat tempo will be required on both sides.
▶ 0:35:28Um, without objection, I would, uh, allow and have congressman walkinshaw, virginia, a very kind gentleman who's asked to be waived on to the subcommittee for the purpose of questioning the witnesses at today's subcommittee hearing. We welcome him to this subcommittee hearing. I also just to be nice and fair, because she's my dear, dear friend from the last couple hundred years.
▶ 0:35:55We welcome the distinguished chairman of the rules committee, also a member of the subcommittee, my dear friend, virginia fox. Virginia, welcome today. I'm delighted that you're here. >> to be inconspicuous. >> oh, well, you didn't make that. Virginia. Uh, for those of you who know, I have told virginia for the last 20 years or so, every day. I love you, virginia and virginia, I love you, and thank you.
▶ 0:36:20Yes, I'm pleased to welcome our witnesses for today. Mr. justin overbaugh is currently serving as both the acting director of the defense counterintelligence and security agency, as well the deputy undersecretary for defense for intelligence and security in this important role as acting dci director, he's responsible for leading efforts to protect america's trusted workforce, trusted workspaces,
▶ 0:36:51And classified information. And, uh, he has a daytime job and a nighttime job, obviously, because this is, Mr. mfume noted, is a heavy lift. And we appreciate him, his professionalism and taking time to be with us today. Then we also welcome lisa sis, who serves as the director, and the defense capacity, capacity, capabilities and management team at gao.
▶ 0:37:21In her role at the government accounting office, she oversees reviews on the personnel security clearance process, artificial intelligence, intelligence infrastructure, and dod approach to business transmissions, among other topics.
▶ 0:37:39And we have found her testimony, professionalism and reliability to not only want to work with this subcommittee, but in a professional attribute that is related to her agency, and we welcome her. So thank you very much. I look forward to.
▶ 0:37:57If I could have both of you stand and raise your right hand for the purpose of administering the oath to the witnesses pursuant to committee rule nine, g the witnesses that stand before us, uh, raise their right hand. Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony that you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you god? Thank you. Let the record reflect that. Both the witnesses answered the affirmative. Thank you very much.
▶ 0:38:26And you may take your seat. Uh, we are now going to move to recognizing the witnesses, and we appreciate you being here. Uh, you're not new to this. You know that. We've got a yellow light, green light, yellow light, red light. Uh, I would ask, as I always do, uh, for the gentleman to understand that we would like for our witnesses to give us the information that is necessary.
▶ 0:38:56And I am not going to stick to necessarily a five minute rule if either side goes over. But we are here today to get to the bottom of this, because I think that this will be a hearing that whoever you hire will want to know how serious this is and will want to know that it's been vetted not only by gao, but the importance to each of these members that are here. And so we're not going to cut you off.
▶ 0:39:27We want you to give full testimony, full hearing, full articulation on the matter. And I'm delighted that you're here. The gentleman, Mr. overbaugh, is now recognized. >> good morning, chairman sessions, ranking member mfume and distinguished members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today.
▶ 0:39:47It is an honor and a privilege to represent the over 13,000 civilians, service members, contractors of the defense, counterintelligence and security agency.
▶ 0:39:59I was appointed acting director of dcsa on november 19th, 2025, with a clear mandate from the undersecretary of war for intelligence and security, the honorable bradley hansell, to ensure dcsa finally delivers the critical security capabilities our nation requires. I understand this committee has received testimony from previous leaders suggesting the agency was largely on track.
▶ 0:40:27Respectfully, that assessment was too optimistic. The truth is, dcsa has been an agency in the midst of an identity crisis after it was cobbled together from disparate programs. Dcsa never truly self-actualized or forged a unified culture.
▶ 0:40:46I contend that this foundational issue has directly contributed to the significant challenges in delivering both trusted workforce 2.0 and the national background investigation services program, on time and on budget. It is my assessment that previous agency leadership, in an effort to establish a brand focused more on marketing than on delivering value and allowing that value to speak for itself.
▶ 0:41:14The agency's original purpose became blurred, drifting towards an intelligence focused entity rather than embracing its vital security mission. Instead of focusing on executing its most important functions with excellence, the agency attempted to accumulate more missions to the point that it failed to achieve its core purpose altogether.
▶ 0:41:35The lack of a viable vision, clear expectations, and leadership accountability from past department oversight allowed dcsa to fail. Under secretary hansell dismissed dcsa leadership because the transformation required here cannot be incremental, it must be complete and total.
▶ 0:41:58He had little confidence that the leadership he inherited would have been successful in leading the change from a sclerotic, compliance based bureaucracy to a customer centric, business oriented entity. The department of war and the nation need dcsa to be.
▶ 0:42:15While the undersecretary continues his search to select a new director with the optimal mix of private sector technology and government experience, he directed me in the interim dcsa leadership team to steer toward a business model that mirrors secretary haig's approach of eliminating bureaucratic processes in favor of speed and innovation.
▶ 0:42:37In my short time as acting director, I have found what I expected a dedicated, talented and innovative workforce, unfortunately shackled by burdensome processes designed not to empower them but to maintain the status quo and sustain layers of management. Our focus now is on unleashing their potential.
▶ 0:42:59To that end, we are designing the agency for purpose, moving it from a cumbersome bureaucracy to an agile organization that can serve as a model for the rest of government. At dcsa, we will build a workforce of the future.
▶ 0:43:15Founded on a culture of meritocracy, efficiency, creativity, empowerment and accountability that enables timely, risk informed decisions, dcsa struggles to deliver and implement. Trusted workforce 2.0 are but symptoms of the deeper cultural problems I have outlined. These two efforts are not merely programs, they are the backbone of our national security personnel vetting enterprise.
▶ 0:43:43Their delivery is non-negotiable. While the government accountability office rightly noted recent progress on the program's cost and schedule estimates, we must be honest that this progress is fragile. Without the cultural and structural reforms we are now implementing, technical gains alone will not secure success.
▶ 0:44:05Absent this transformation and a refocus on its core mission, dcsa would surely continue to fail to meet its targets for development and deployment. We look forward to partnering with gao to give us an objective look at the agency as we continue to make reforms under secretary hansell and I share as a top priority the delivery and development of nbis by fiscal year 2028.
▶ 0:44:29He and I are aided in this task by the undersecretary of war for acquisition and sustainment, the honorable mike duffy, who has designated nbis as an acquisition category one special interest program, subjecting it to the highest level of scrutiny at dcsa. We are overhauling our governance, acquisition strategy and partnership with industry to ensure every decision serves the core mission.
▶ 0:44:56Through the trusted workforce implementation group, we work to validate the policy requirements and make sure that they are mature through the executive agents and are translated into real world capabilities delivered by nbis. These goals are to get people to work faster, eliminate waste, optimize risk management, and improve the experience for our government customers.
▶ 0:45:22While the full transition to trusted workforce 2.0 and nimbus will be complete by fy 2028, we are accelerating the development of key capabilities now, including adjudicative improvements for public trust cases, expanded use of interim secret clearances, and broader application of vetting services features. Even with a renewed vision, this will not be easy.
▶ 0:45:49Nbis is a massive undertaking intended to replace deeply entrenched legacy systems across the federal government. Getting this right is as important as getting it done quickly. Dcsa now has the appropriate oversight, a clear mandate for change, and a leadership team committed to transparency within the department, with partners in the interagency industry and other stakeholders.
▶ 0:46:12And with you here in congress, the exceptional team at dcsa is the driving force that will make this transformation possible. My commitment to you is that I will continue to foster a culture of innovation and accountability that empowers them, and that I will maintain oversight in my role as deputy undersecretary for
▶ 0:47:12Intelligence and. Security. We appreciate congress's engagement on this critical issue and look forward to demonstrating through our actions and results that dcsa is on a new and better path. Thank you, and I look forward to addressing your questions. >> thank you very much. The gentlewoman is now recognized. >> chairman sessions, ranking member mfume, and members of the subcommittee. Thank you for inviting me to testify again on gao's work on personnel vetting and specifically the national background investigation services system, or nbis, for short. As you know, the us government relies on over 4 million personnel with security clearances to protect our nation.
▶ 0:47:37Personnel vetting helps ensure a trusted workforce, but the government has struggled with managing this process for years. This issue has been on gao's high risk list since 2018, due in part to challenges with it. Systems reform is urgently needed. The federal government is taking too long to grant security clearances to essential personnel. For example, it takes over 200 days to grant a top secret clearance. This is 80% longer than the government's goal. As you know, after a massive cybersecurity breach of opm systems in 2015, the president tasked dod with building a new it system to manage personnel vetting.
▶ 0:48:06The department began developing invis in 2016. My statement today focuses on the department's progress with nbis, and what actions are still needed to ensure its success and achieve personal vetting reform. First, the good news dcsa has made progress addressing our recommendations. It now has a reliable cost estimate for nbis.
▶ 0:48:30For the first time ever, a reliable estimate should help the program better manage expenses, avoid unexpected increases and promote transparency. However, the government is years late in delivering invis. This failure happened in part because dcsa had not developed a reliable schedule for the system, as we first recommended several years ago.
▶ 0:48:56Dod had originally planned for nbis to be fully functional in 2019, and has changed its deadline several times since then. In 2024, dcsa paused in this development while it drafted a recovery plan. Just last summer, the department began development again. Dcsa now projects it will finish in this development in 2027 or fy 2028, according to a statement. This is nearly a decade after its original goal.
▶ 0:49:26The latest nbis schedule shows some improvements in key areas, but overall we find that it is still not reliable, putting nbis at risk of further delays. Notably, dcsa has not done a risk analysis and thus cannot determine where slippage is most likely to occur. Without implementing this best practice, it cannot effectively target actions to milestones that are at the most risk.
▶ 0:49:55We are making new recommendations in our written statement today for dcsa to address these and other deficiencies. Having a reliable schedule is a basic program management principle. We agree with Mr. overbore dcsa needs to get this right. Given the program's history of missed milestones. Further, while dcsa has a reliable cost estimate for nbis now, delays have caused the price tag to balloon.
▶ 0:50:27The department has already spent at least $2.4 billion developing new systems and maintaining opm's legacy systems. It now projects spending an additional 2.2 billion to finish invis, bringing the total cost to the taxpayer to about $4.6 billion. This is a 100% increase over dxc's previous projections.
▶ 0:50:55Finally, strong and sustained leadership is critically important, especially with high risk government programs like this one. When I last testified in this had been failing. Since then, dcsa has taken some important actions to try to get things on track. But shortcomings still persist. This at a time when dcsa does not have a permanent director, and the time it takes to get a security clearance continues to far exceed goals.
▶ 0:51:22Strong leadership and oversight. Like the important work this subcommittee is doing, are essential for the program to continue to make improvements and ultimately deliver what it has promised. Simply put, personnel vetting reform has the potential to better protect our country, but the it must be in place for this to happen, Mr. chairman. Mr. ranking members and members of the subcommittee, thank you for your time. I look forward to your questions.
▶ 0:51:53>> thank you very much. Uh, detailed information about what needs to be accomplished, I think is very clear from your constant reports, and I appreciate that. We now move to our members, and I will move to the distinguished gentlewoman from north carolina, the gentlewoman, the chairman of the rules committee, Mrs. fox. >> uh, thank you, Mr. chairman.
▶ 0:52:18Um, no one put in my notes that I should be very concerned about this, but I am, along with all of you, this what our witnesses have said today is very, very troubling. But let me say, last fall, the subcommittee was supposed to hear from dcsa director kettler. Shortly before he left federal service. While I appreciate Mr.
▶ 0:52:44Overby's attendance here today as acting director, I'm disappointed there's still no permanent replacement for director kettler. As miss shizz just said, steady leadership is important for continuity and accountability. The national background investigation service needs to become operational. Having a permanent director at ncsa would send a strong message that the dod is serious about the issue. Can you elaborate, Mr.
▶ 0:53:13Overbaugh, on how delays in the implementation of nbis impacts other federal agencies that rely on timely clearances? >> representative fox, I can it's very clear to me that the entire federal government and all the agencies and partners that rely on dcsa to deliver trusted workforce 2.0, um, are impacted when employees cannot get to work in a timely and
▶ 0:53:45Efficient manner. >> well, as a follow up, based on dcs, nsa's recent review of nimbus implementation, what actions are you and others taking to get it back on track? We've just heard it's going to cost an additional $2.2 billion and be delayed to 20 27, 20 2028. What in the world are you all doing?
▶ 0:54:16>> that's the exact question that I asked representative fox when I took over the agency in november. I can tell you that the that our teammates at dcsa have done a fantastic job on establishing the technology required with mdis to ensure that we can get to trusted workforce 2.0 what the agency had failed to do, however, in the past was match emerging requirements, the business or the mission side if you will, if you will.
▶ 0:54:44With that technology. As a result of that identified failure, the trusted workforce integration group was stood up. That brought together our technology specialists along with our operations and mission side. Together, they produced over the last couple months a key set of milestones that we can use to judge dxc's performance on delivering trusted workforce 2.0 moving forward.
▶ 0:55:12And those milestones are laid out in the pac principle. The performance accountability council's fy 26 implementation strategy. Now, this is a great step forward, and it gives us something that we can sink our teeth into to hold ourselves accountable for progress. It's not complete. We need to do more here. We need to to use these milestones to break down almost a complete work breakdown structure.
▶ 0:55:40So we're then able to identify the things that our gao partners have have told us are critically important, namely, critical paths and the identification of risks. Um, that is forthcoming. We're looking forward to producing that document in march, uh, april time frame and would certainly look forward in future interactions with this body to share the the work that we've done there.
▶ 0:56:08>> and the chairman mentioned the issue of transparency and the need for that. Are you committing that, um, the reports and the progress are all going to be transparent. >> without question. >> thank you. Uh, Mrs. in the committee's 2024 hearing, you raised concerns about cybersecurity privacy protections.
▶ 0:56:35Has dxa taken concrete steps to mitigate those risks? And have have you seen evidence these steps are effective? >> yes. Dxa has taken swift action to address our recommendations. At the time of our last hearing, we put out a report with 13 recommendations, mostly focused on the management of cybersecurity, making sure that there's current guidance and effective oversight.
▶ 0:57:03Um, the previous dxa director, director kettler, uh, made it a priority to implement all of those recommendations within one year, which is very fast for a gao report to have all recommendations closed in one year. So we think that that's a very positive effort. Uh dxa does need to remain very, very vigilant on this. This is the whole reason that the department has responsibility for personnel vetting.
▶ 0:57:27Because of that cybersecurity breach in 2015 that compromised, as the chairman mentioned, uh, data on over 22 million federal employees and contractors. We do have work that's not available in the public setting to discuss looking more specifically at nbis and testing of cybersecurity controls, and issued a recent report in december on that, which we have discussed with dxa. But we are confident that they are taking it seriously. Yes. >> thank you very much.
▶ 0:57:56And thank you, Mr. chairman, for recognizing me, I yield back. >> gentleman yields back your time. Thank you very much. The gentleman is recognized. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. I want to yield to the gentleman from virginia, Mr. walkinshaw, who has waived on to the committee, and I'll pick up with my questions at some other point in the hearing. Mr. walkinshaw. >> thank you. I thank the ranking member and Mr. chairman, thank you for having me today.
▶ 0:58:25And to our witnesses for being here, Mr. overboard, as you laid out in your testimony, you have many responsibilities in your role as deputy undersecretary for intelligence and security. I know that in your role, you serve as acting director of dcsa. As we're discussing today, you oversee dia nga, the nro, the nsa. You serve as an advisor to the undersecretary of defense on intelligence related matters.
▶ 0:58:51And given all of that, I guess my question for you is why should the committee and the american people have confidence that you can manage this multi-billion dollar critical modernization while performing your many other duties, including safeguarding our nation's secrets from adversaries, ensuring proper vetting of individuals with access to classified information. And, as I noted, acting as an advisor to the undersecretary.
▶ 0:59:23>> uh, representative walkinshaw, I appreciate that question very much. And the short answer is I'm surrounded by a fantastic group of teammates who are assisting me in this endeavor. I have, uh, down at dcsa as acting deputy director. Miss tara jones, who also comes from our office at the undersecretary of war for intelligence and security. In addition, we have acting chief of staff, colonel brooke carr. Um, our team down there.
▶ 0:59:48Um, and they're down there on a permanent basis to assist and lead that assist me in leading that organization. And I have fantastic teammates as well, uh, up in my office in the pentagon. And so while I understand from an external perspective, it looks like we are stretched thin. And in all honesty, there are times when it feels like it. But I'll tell you that the passion that we have as a group of teammates to get this task right energizes all of us and the entire team.
▶ 1:00:16Um, and quite honestly, um, it's an honor and a blessing to be able to do this. >> thank you. And a recent a january 22nd, 2026, uh, briefing with committee staff here. I think it's accurate that you said you intended to eliminate what you've called inefficiencies within dcsa and suggested.
▶ 1:00:39And you can correct me if this is wrong, that you felt there was a need to eliminate positions at the agency. So are you planning to reduce the workforce at dcs, and if so, how will you ensure that those cuts to the workforce don't further derail this critical modernization? >> I think dcsa faces a challenge, representative, uh, that the entire government faces.
▶ 1:01:06And quite frankly, our society writ large faces, and that is the impact that technology is having and is going to have on the way that we work moving forward. Um, dcsa faces this dynamic, uh, quite acutely with our responsibility to implement nbis and trusted workforce 2.0. I can't say at this time exactly what the workforce of the future at dcsa looks like. Exactly.
▶ 1:01:31But I know that we have an obligation to empower our teammates to ensure that they can be as effective as humanly possible, uh, in the future of work. >> so you don't have any immediate plans to reduce the workforce, short or medium term? Quite the. >> contrary, representative walkinshaw. We are constantly looking at the dcsa organization and determining where we can find efficiencies. I have no implementable plans at this time, but it is something that we will be looking at moving forward.
▶ 1:02:02>> okay. One of the things I understand this committee has asked for previously is an organizational chart for your staffing and any proposed changes. Is that something you can commit to providing to us? >> I would absolutely, uh, be happy to provide that to you. Once we have a clear understanding of the direction that we think we need to go in. >> okay. Thank you. Um, Mr. bob, dc job, as you know, is to vet cleared personnel and ultimately ensure the protection of classified U.S. government information.
▶ 1:02:32It is a cornerstone of our national security. I, I appreciate the passion that you have for the work and that your teammates have. I think I share the concerns on the dais here that the mandate is far too large and critical to function indefinitely under an acting director, no matter how passionate. We need a director focused on its counterintelligence mission who has the skills and the bandwidth. I don't question that you have the skills.
▶ 1:02:59I question whether you have the bandwidth to keep this project moving forward. I hope you can commit to providing this committee with a hiring plan and criteria for a new director promptly. Thank you. And I yield back. >> gentleman yields back his time. Thank you very much. I've been approached by several members who plan to be in attendance today. I would move next to the gentleman, Mr. mfume, for any time. He would choose. >> uh, thank you very much, Mr. chairman.
▶ 1:03:29I, um, let me just be deliberately redundant for a quick second. Um, enbis and the enbis project is, as you've heard repeatedly today, ten years behind schedule and already billions and billions over budget. So I'd like to know. And by the way, this keeps me up at night because america's secrets are at risk. The longer we don't do what we ought to do here.
▶ 1:03:55And the russians and the chinese, who can tune into c-span whenever they want to, to be assured that we're behind. We'll look at what we're doing. And year after year after year, get emboldened because we are so transparent about why and when we expect to have this, this completed. So, Mr.
▶ 1:04:15Overbaugh, when you look as you have been doing since november, when you came on board at cost overruns, which ones are the most apparent to you? >> uh, representative or excuse me, um, ranking member mfume.
▶ 1:04:38To me, the the most alerting is the the overall amount of money that we've spent so far writ large, the 2.4 billion and not delivering the capabilities that we promised over time to the american people. Um, it's there there there are many details within that. The failure to, as I mentioned earlier, to match up the operations and business side with the technical side, there are redundancies and inefficiencies in there.
▶ 1:05:05But I think that that number overall, the 2.4 million, uh, correction billion is inexcusable. And one of the things that drives me and the team on a daily basis, um, to fix the things in the past that we have not done well so that we can deliver for the american people. >> do you think your predecessor felt the same way, was driven the same way? Uh, I. >> won't speak to the the intent or what was going on inside the minds or hearts of any of my predecessors.
▶ 1:05:34I know that the organization today sits ready, um, and they are excited about delivering for the american people. >> well, and I understand it and I appreciate it, but you have to realize what it's like to sit here year after year after year after year and be told the same thing, that it's getting better. The organization understands we've got the right path. We're going to be transparent.
▶ 1:05:59And in that process, contractor after contractor is billing the united states government for services that I assume are never fully completed. Within that caveat, saying, we couldn't do this, we won't do this or we need more money for that. That is very, very disturbing. And it's not your fault. I'm just giving you the history of how we got to this point and why it is so very disturbing to us. Uh, you've heard the term fat rats.
▶ 1:06:27Well, a lot of making out with a lot of money and not providing the kind of service that they are being contracted for and paid for. And. Mrs. if I could just ask you the same question, are there some identifiable cost overruns that repeatedly, year after year, gao looks at, identifies and points out, yes.
▶ 1:06:51>> in fact, our previous analysis showed that dca or dxa did not have a reliable cost estimate for nbis. It was not accurate, it was not comprehensive, it was not credible, and it was not well documented. So we can't tell you where where the problems were. It was across the entire estimate. It could not be relied upon for planning. Um, now they have taken important steps, including conducting an independent cost estimate, uh, to get a better handle on costs. So we're at a better place now.
▶ 1:07:23Uh, that estimate needs to be updated annually. And so I advise the subcommittee to stay on top of dxa, as we will, to make sure that that is updated annually with actual costs. But they are better positioned now, unfortunately. And if I can kind of veer off a little bit, um, earlier on in the program, I think one of the key shortcomings was a lack of oversight. Right? So dxa was really policing itself in its actions.
▶ 1:07:50No one broader in the department was taking a look at what dxa was doing as imbus was going off the rails. There were some steps put in place, uh, for ins, uh, where Mr. overbaugh is from, to be now the program sponsor, and then even higher within the department to have milestone decision authority. There were some other mechanisms put in place. The requirements board, for example, that's supposed to meet quarterly and some other reporting requirements.
▶ 1:08:18Where we do still have concerns is some of these oversight mechanisms are great that they're in place, but we're not actually seeing them working as they're supposed to be working. So that requirements board that I just mentioned is supposed to meet quarterly. We think it met last friday, but before then had only met in june. Right. So maybe once a year. So it's good to put those mechanisms in place. But you have to exercise the oversight as well too.
▶ 1:08:43So that's something that we'll be taking a look at as the program moves on, making sure that oversight is actually working. >> and what would gao immediately recommend be done? Uh, as you look at where we are in this process, notwithstanding the things you just mentioned, right. >> I think we've been on record for years that you really can't plan effectively without having a reliable schedule for the program.
▶ 1:09:11It milestones have shifted for years where, you know, we're a decade, a decade long program now. Costs have increased 100%. We still don't have a reliable schedule. So it's great that we're marrying up policy with milestones.
▶ 1:09:25But our recent analysis showed that almost half, 40%, 46% of milestones in the trusted workforce 2.0 strategy that are in this related have slipped over the past nine months, 46% because of invis delays. Right. So that that's something that's that's got to be addressed right away. We have new recommendations kind of to target in on what needs to be done for a schedule.
▶ 1:09:54Um, and it's great that Mr. overbaugh is very focused on this, but this is something that we've been talking about for years. Uh, we talked about at the last hearing as well, without getting this in place, the program is still is at risk of slippage going forward and then increased cost to the taxpayer. >> and Mr. I know you've been there since november, but do you have some semblance of a schedule, a sketch, an outline? Are you talking directly to gao to figure out how and when that ought to be completed?
▶ 1:10:26>> ranking member mfume uh, the schedule has yet to be developed. And that's one of the great things that we've discovered through our partnership with gao. And as a reminder, as we dig down into the milestones that the twig recently established, we will be producing that schedule. That's the document that I hope to bring back to this body, uh, in the march and april time frame. Um, I do want to push back on one thing that you said earlier. You mentioned that it's not my fault.
▶ 1:10:55I just want to give you the confidence, sir, um, as I'm acting director, uh, everything that this organization does or fails to do is now my responsibility. We do take on the fact that the previous failures are now our responsibility. Uh, and we own them. And that's part of the cultural change that we're trying to instantiate at dxa. >> well, that's good to know. And it's good to hear. But it really wasn't your fault because you were not there.
▶ 1:11:21Um, but I commend you for owning them. Um, so are you saying to the chairman and members of the committee that by late march or early april, this schedule will be in place and we can call another hearing and talk about it? >> what what our team is attempting to produce by by march. April time frame is a business operationalization synchronization schedule.
▶ 1:11:46That is our attempt to get at the critical paths and the risks that gao has rightly pointed out that we continue to lack. Once we have that established, I'm happy to bring that product back. We have as a goal to establish that by the march and april time frame. >> and just one other question. Are you interacting with gao to make sure what you produce is exactly what they have identified? >> we will be moving forward.
▶ 1:12:13I had the opportunity to meet Mrs. the other day in preparation for this hearing, and we agreed that we would interact quarterly on a quarterly basis moving forward, and we look forward to them helping us provide an objective look at our organization as we try and implement the change. >> thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. chairman. >> we'll move to the distinguished gentleman from tennessee. Your recognized. >> thank you, Mr. chairman.
▶ 1:12:37One of the things I like about your chairmanship and your relationship with our ranking member, I always dig his line of questioning and sometimes, like myself, it takes me a little longer than five minutes. And I appreciate you allowing us to do that. Gentleman was. >> recognized. And the gentleman does understand from his experience in dealing with Mr. mfume and myself, I would like for you to take the time that is necessary to express yourself as well, our witnesses, to get everything out, and the gentleman is now recognized. Thank you. >> Mr. chairman.
▶ 1:13:07Um, madam, your last name is rs. Is that how you pronounce it? That's correct. Well, burchett, nobody gets that right either. I was on some show this weekend. I said it's burch. Like the tree and like, I just ate breakfast and they all laughed. And my wife got on me and said, no, it's not burchett, it's burch. It's it's. It's burchett, you know what I mean? They can never get it right. So anyway, thank you. Um, since 2024, how is the defense counterintelligence and security agency?
▶ 1:13:36Um, the the dcsa progressed in addressing the nbis high risk areas like cybersecurity. And what issues remain. >> so since 2024, dcsa has made significant progress addressing cybersecurity issues within bis. We had issued a report in 2024 really focused on the management and lack of management attention on cybersecurity. Uh, we made 13 recommendations at that time.
▶ 1:14:06The dcsa leadership took swift action and implemented all of those recommendations. Uh, we. >> did you say they implemented all of those. >> implement all 13 recommendations from our 2024 report on cybersecurity? Yes. >> which of those are you most concerned about that moving forward? >> right. So we were very concerned that there was just a lack of management oversight of cybersecurity in general. They were using outdated guidance. Um, they were not there were issues with privacy controls.
▶ 1:14:36There were folks that didn't have the necessary training to use the system. So those were some issues that we pointed out. Um, and they did take immediate action, addressed all of those recommendations in a very, very fast time frame, uh, for addressing gao recommendations. Um, as I mentioned earlier, we do have a nonpublic report, uh, that we did produce in december on cybersecurity to looking at testing of cybersecurity controls. Um, so it is a topic that we stay on.
▶ 1:15:05We know dcsa is taking seriously, but the entire reason that the department has responsibility for the it system was because of the cybersecurity breach in 2015 of opm systems. So it's critically. >> opm remains opm. >> the office of personnel management who had previous responsible office. >> we don't use initials because I'm 61 and it kind of fills up my brain, right?
▶ 1:15:30>> the office of personnel management has previously had responsibility for personnel vetting, but that moved after that cybersecurity breach. >> well, thank you, madam chair. Um, when I get back to the office, I'm going to ask some of my young people exactly what you just told me. So thank you. Sir. Let me ask you a question. And your name is overbore. I believe I can get that one right. Thank you. Brother. Um, since you were appointed, what steps have you taken to address the cultural issues? Identified that you. I think you made them in your opening statement.
▶ 1:16:02>> representative burchett, thank you for the opportunity, um, to to chat with you today. There's been a couple things that we've done from a cultural perspective. The first thing was we looked at leadership across the organization, and we identified where we had, um, individuals who were stymieing progress because they were too comfortable with the status quo. And we made some changes in that regard.
▶ 1:16:23Second thing that we've done is myself and miss jones have traveled to a number of the different locations where our dcsa colleagues and teammates reside. We have over 163 different locations across the united states, and we've begun to hear from folks who work on the front line across our agency about the types of things that we can do at a leadership level to change the culture.
▶ 1:16:48Ultimately, the steps that we're taking are designed towards transforming it from a reactive to a proactive organization, from a risk based or correction, from a fear based culture, to one that looks for opportunities to continue to shore up security for the american people. >> this is not in my notes, but it jogged a memory of encrypted messages. You know, I always I know they can't get into this. It's encrypted.
▶ 1:17:16And then there's some kid in a garage in california, southern california, who's figured out how to do it in about 15 minutes. Is there anything truly encrypted, in your opinion? >> uh, representative burchett, we could go into greater detail on that particular topic, but not necessarily in this forum. And I would want to bring back to you from my my role in ins, ins, correction, uh, a more fulsome picture on that, perhaps in a, in a, in a closed setting in. >> the future. Can I ask one more question, Mr. chairman?
▶ 1:17:46I run over. Just a minute. Thank you. Brother. Um, what do you think? What is your plan on getting everything on track for the next three years? Do you have a plan? I mean, I don't want you to disclose any secrets, but. And do you feel like you can obtain those objectives? >> yes. I do believe that we can attain the objectives. And the plan relies on a couple parts.
▶ 1:18:10First, going back to what our our gao colleagues have talked with us about, we we will and we must get our hands around a detailed schedule that enables the agency itself to hold itself accountable and for our oversight partners to hold us accountable. Um, that is a non-negotiable. We will achieve that in the coming months.
▶ 1:18:31And I very much look forward to coming back, um, either as acting director or in my role, uh, in my oversight role in ins to report to you and your colleagues about the progress that we've made there. In addition, though, we do have to change the culture of the organization. Like I talked about earlier, we have to be adaptable.
▶ 1:18:53We have to be flexible, and we have to, um, take on an attitude, um, that our primary responsibility is to provide decision makers with risk informed information so that they can make assessments about the trustworthiness of their their workforce. >> thank you. Thank you, Mr. chairman. And thank you again for letting me go over.
▶ 1:19:18I wish more committees would allow us to do this because and I appreciate the relationship that you have with the ranking member because, um, I think more committees could probably fashion a little bit more of their attitude towards us lower level members, if they'd probably year or two leads. So thank you all. >> I thank the gentleman from, uh, tennessee and will tell him that Mr.
▶ 1:19:43And um, and I intend to maintain this relationship for the benefit of not only members but also the american people. >> Mr. chairman, I would also like to say I tend to like Mr. mfume more than I like you. And I just want to say that, for the record, keep that off the record, though. >> the gentleman is not recognized for more time. Uh, in fact, uh, tim, it is, uh, with great respect that you offer that feedback because Mr.
▶ 1:20:13Fema, in my opinion, is an outstanding example of collegiality and something which, uh, I think, as is Mr. burchett noticed, is desperately in need here on a regular basis. And so thank you very much.
▶ 1:20:29I'll now yield myself such time as I may consume the opportunity to have both of you here with what I consider to be outstanding or sterling, uh, insight and ability to accept. As I say, you're accepting the role, Mr. overbore, and the responsibility and the good things and the bad things. Uh.
▶ 1:21:00Mrs. part of what we're talking about today, we don't always get down to brass tacks, but what Mr. overall has spoken about is his analysis, which I do accept and appreciate and respect about how professional they are, about their ability to do their work.
▶ 1:21:24He did, comma, suggest that there are some things that still need more tinkering with more reliability. Do you get into those management personnel type things of frailties, of outcomes that he spoke about? >> I would say that the progress within this is very recent.
▶ 1:21:50And so it is fragile, um, sustained leadership attention is critical for the program to continue to make the improvements that it has done recently and then continue to implement the recommendations that gao has made for several years, to have a schedule to make sure the oversight mechanisms are in place to marry up those milestones with trusted workforce 2.0. So we're not seeing continued slippage down the road.
▶ 1:22:17So it's important to not take you know, this is great that there is some progress. Um, but I would agree with Mr. overbaugh. It's recent and it is fragile. If we don't have the leadership and oversight mechanisms in place. >> Mr.
▶ 1:22:34Overall, the discussions without naming names, but do you find that there are people within the organization who are not interested in its success in mastering the time frames, in allowing slippage, that they were seemingly happy with their performance that you've described?
▶ 1:22:57Why did this even slip months, and where those people spoken to realistically or simply exited from the organization? >> chairman sessions, I would tell you that 99.9% of the workforce today is absolutely passionate and capable for the task that we have in front of us.
▶ 1:23:27I did find, uh, some individuals who embodied a culture of wanting to maintain the status quo, um, where we find those individuals, we will, um, take the opportunity to give them a chance to serve in another capacity.
▶ 1:23:45But for dxa moving forward, we need a team that is 100% dedicated to the mission, that understands that we are, uh, have a critical mission and that we use and we achieve that mission, um, through the hard earned dollars of the american taxpayer. >> okay, let's stay on this pathway, please. You mentioned that you have offices, different people in 160, some different locations.
▶ 1:24:15Do you have metrics on them, and are they part of the slippage, or is are we talking about systems that they enter data into that then talk to people looking for more, uh, back and forth to then agree to that and then move. Is it system oriented or have you do you have a metric that determined it was people also?
▶ 1:24:46>> one of the things I recognize that we need at dxa is a is a way to visualize the performance of our entire organization succinctly and clearly. We don't have that today. That's one of the things that I'm working on internally to the organization to be able to see, for example, from cradle to grave, how our investigative processes are going. Um, we have some of that picture right now in the team does a very good job of providing that data, but we can do much better.
▶ 1:25:16It will enable us to find those areas in the funnel where we have clogs or where we have, uh, obstacles that as leaders, we can first identify how we can remove those obstacles for our teammates. And if it ends up being a personnel challenge, we can address that as well. >> so what have you found? >> as it relates to what in particular, Mr. chairman.
▶ 1:25:41>> the delay of your 160, uh, different offices, you're seemingly would have an idea that you have a problem or don't have a problem, or can set a standard that seemingly could be established rather quickly if that is the issue. Once again, it's hard for me to know if that is the issue.
▶ 1:26:03People oriented responses, uh, decision making, moving things along, or whether it's correspondingly in the processes of systems that then do not effectively provide the information to decision making. Miss sis, will you answer that? >> our work has found that it has mostly been in the lack of basic program management principles.
▶ 1:26:30Again, not having a reliable schedule for the program. We do know that dxa has taken some efforts even before Mr. overbaugh. >> so you're worried. >> about headquarters decision making for fixing the systems that people operate within? I was asking him, and we'll get here.
▶ 1:26:54The people who do these, the work, and then that process is it then the systems that are causing the delays. And so I want to then focus on the 160 offices that you're evaluating. And yet the systems are tools by which they have to operate.
▶ 1:27:23Whether where are the issues that you found. And that could be some of both. But this is where then I want to come to Mrs. and say, say you have and gao has a broader viewpoint than just this organization on how to effectively deal with management systems and structures and try and work with them to find a how to update which comes first?
▶ 1:27:52Which vendor comes first, which which system needs updating? Which system needs new standards or procedures. So let let me go back and have you both feel free. Once again we're trying to get to the bottom of this. You went out and visited some offices and you had an opportunity which is very professionally oriented and good. What did you find out there?
▶ 1:28:24>> I found both, Mr. chairman. Quite frankly, I found, uh, a dedicated workforce, but one that suffered from lack of our technology integration and one that also, unfortunately, at some later areas, and management was too oriented towards the status quo.
▶ 1:28:42That's why the recommendations that the gao has made to us about, uh, tools like the critical path and the risk schedule are so important because metrics will drive behavior within the organization. Once we have that clear picture, once we have those metrics, we're going to be able to drive that cultural behavioral change in a much more effective manner. The short answer to your question, Mr. chairman, was I found both. >> okay.
▶ 1:29:10So in other words, when you take on a particular issue subject, a person, and you've got a request that may have been sitting there for a long time, you have then identified that we need certain data, certain information, processing of their form, verifying the data and information, uh, touching base where an investigator will move forward, getting that investigator's recommendation,
▶ 1:29:42Looking at feedback that others provided, and then sifting through that and then placing that into some sort of system where that is then vetted properly, that is people oriented. No, no, it's really system two, because if you got a system problem, they're not able to effectively do that. Is that what you also have a system problem.
▶ 1:30:13>> in the sense if I understand your, your your concern. >> that your data. >> in something. >> that would be. >> reviewed by you decide how many but several people, it's not just a one person process. You've got an investigator that goes out and they put their data and information. Is that a problem of getting that data and information? Uh, we're dissecting this now in this subcommittee. Is is that a problem? Because it seems like that may be part of your daytime job.
▶ 1:30:45>> yes, chairman sessions, and what I would say is that's the the problem that you're highlighting is the exact reason why we are we are why it's so important that we we give this online so that we're able to achieve the goals laid out in trusted workforce 2.0. As it stands right now, from a system standpoint, we're using old and antiquated technology, I think developed in the 80s in order to do the task of personnel vetting.
▶ 1:31:15>> and we hear that and that's that $2.5 billion. And then the need to update it or make it work. 2.5 billion. My my point is, are you looking for the director to cut through that and say, we are going to do this until we get that done? Ten years? I'm worried about the ten years. I mean, you may not have what you're asking for for ten more years.
▶ 1:31:40And I'm asking you, how are we going to do that? And then look at it. Mrs. say, doesn't the gao. I think the answer is yes. Doesn't the gao have some recommendation of which one of these systems may need to spend? I don't know whether 600 million.
▶ 1:32:02I don't know what it is to update it, to make something happen, if not a relationship that you've identified to getting data quicker and faster, even though it's not the delivery, it's an interim step. Somebody has got to do that. We cannot wait ten years, Mr. may and I will not wait ten years. Will you? That answer's no.
▶ 1:32:29I know you're you're very glib at understanding and nimble at understanding this, but I still have not heard back. Okay, we got a problem here. We know we've got to fix that. We got good people. But this system, this one right here, has to be updated for these other factors to work. And then Mrs. to be able to say yes.
▶ 1:32:53Yes I think that's right that we've got to do this, this this one first, this one second, this one third over the next year to better the lot where we are. That's what I'm looking for. I think that's what Mr. may and I are looking for. Not well we're going to wait ten years. Well we've got good people but we got a systems problem.
▶ 1:33:15What the heck are we doing to work together to say we're going to update this one thing, which is, uh, in material to the work that's got to be done. I don't want something out there done. I want something in here. I've unfortunately been around enough in life where I have had to wait on computer systems, but we did. We we understood when that was going to happen.
▶ 1:33:45So get ready for this next round. When you're back. I want to know what systems I don't need to know the vendor I don't you don't need to do a flow chart, but that you have taken the 5 or 4 most critical systems and they are online. You are with standards and procedures and uh, an understanding about what they're supposed to do and go get that darn thing done. I mean, uh, we're not looking at paint drying and we're not going to do that.
▶ 1:34:15So, uh, and likewise, I don't think Mr. mfume and I want to manage your job, either one of you. We want to provide oversight. We want to make sure, as you talked about in one of the best things you said today was we got to get a person with the bandwidth, the bandwidth, not to sit back and say, I can't get my job done because my boss has always gone clear lines of authority,
▶ 1:34:45Delegation, authority, clear lines of responsibility, uh, time frames that are professionally established to be met, not to slip. And I just think that this has got to be done. Mrs. can you make sense of what I've said? Yes.
▶ 1:35:02Do you have the desire and ability to understand the systems that if he talked to you or you know where they are, what the problem is, and provided feedback back to them to say, we think this system is the first that needs to be updated, not waiting for embossed. This is a backlog or a clog or a bottleneck in the system. Do you think you have that level of detail?
▶ 1:35:32>> so those are what the recommendations we've made in our written statement go toward the I'm sorry, the sequencing of the sequencing. Right. And that's that was our whole point here, that the program has been focused on an agile program very focused on near-term gains that they're not looking at. If a milestone slips here, what is the effect of it down the road? Right. So and that's what Mr. overbaugh, I believe wants that visibility.
▶ 1:35:58And talked about having that visibility for him at the leadership level too, so he can take action. But he doesn't have that information right now because the program does not have a schedule set up to be able to sequence those events, to be able to identify risks and then to be able to take action. >> and how could we say it's going to be done in ten years? How can you say you've got a schedule of ten years yet if you don't have that schedule?
▶ 1:36:27>> well, uh, chairman sessions, we don't have ten years. We have a couple years. And and we are charged with delivering trusted workforce 2.0 by fiscal year 2028. Right. And I'm quite confident that we can to to address what I think. One of the things that you're talking about is this aside from in this in our current procedures, do we have the ability to generate trust decisions for our workforce? And the answer to that question is yes, we can.
▶ 1:36:56We are operating with legacy systems, but we do have dedicated professional teammates who have experience with those systems and all the associated bolt ons that go with it to provide those those trust decisions. We're not where we want to be. And as we implement, uh, an integrate in this, the team is looking at continual improvements that we can make to the process. >> so would that be against the 80% model that Mrs. spoke about?
▶ 1:37:26The 80% model you are 80% inefficient is the way I took her comments. >> uh, I would I would need to hear again, ma'am. >> right. It's the time for taking for granting top secret clearances is 80% longer than the government school. >> I mean. >> that is just one. It's just one number that she threw out, right? >> it's one data point. >> yes, yes, Mr. chairman, and that is a concern that we've had.
▶ 1:37:51And I am encouraged by the work that dcsa has done to get down the investigative backlog to a number that is more acceptable. Um, I think we spoke the other day on the fact it's about 100,000 now. >> yes you did. >> team thinks that it can get to about 70,000 as part of a a normal workflow process. Um, but we're also looking at things like the better that we get on the investigative side, we have to to make sure that we're not overburdening the folks that do the adjudication.
▶ 1:38:19There are in our interoperability and, and, uh, and relationships between those two tasks that will impact one another. So I am absolutely focused on the concerns that you're raising. Um, and again, why I would go back to the fact that I recognize that the progress that we've made is exceptionally fragile, and we're going to have to stay laser focused on this. I agree, we can't wait another ten years. We've already spent way too much, the american taxpayers dollars on this problem. And we are committed to delivering this capability by fy 2028.
▶ 1:38:51>> it would be, um, appropriate for me to recognize that both of you are, as I've said in the past, very professional, very inward looking and attempting to focus on these things. I, I want to put you in a position, however, that adds a little bit of fuel to the fire about decision making that you and the the department have to make.
▶ 1:39:24And you and I spent a little bit of time on that about some of the intricacies, some of the other problems of mirroring up who will take the job, who's got the background? Um, I will just say to you that something's got to happen there. We we want the next person, as you have openly said, I'll accept the responsibility. And I think that's magnanimous.
▶ 1:39:51I'm delighted as opposed to not my problem. But time clicks on. This committee will not become frustrated. Mr. may and I are not frustrated. We want to hear progress that's on both sides, and that is that the gao has a responsibility as our arm to look at this.
▶ 1:40:18I just simply think that there are things that he and I need to get into to see the incremental progress that we're going to need to see that the decision making that was done did better itself over some small period of time, and it could be the things that you've delineated, you have delineated. Look, we've been out and talked to people.
▶ 1:40:40We had a problem with some personnel that were satisfied with, uh, not moving the ball forward. Uh, we have made decisions. We are, lord of all, I think, concerned about us being nice to people, but getting results. And I think Mr.
▶ 1:41:02Mfume and I do recognize there's always a room for someone else to move, or if you've got a problem, to move them somewhere else, and for them to take that as a lesson, a learning opportunity, perhaps they're better positioned to do something different, but not to get in the way, and not when you've accepted responsibility. I expect you to be able to have the bandwidth to pull that off. Notwithstanding, uh, a myriad of federal laws. Okay.
▶ 1:41:31Employment laws, one last point that I would like to ask, do you have a handle on your people, meaning the people in this organization, some 13,000 of them reporting to work by the president's directive in january of 25. >> uh, I'm aware of no violations of the president's directive.
▶ 1:41:56>> so you believe that you report which you're required to do, report to, uh, office of management and budget that your employees are back at work? >> yes, as far as I know. Now, Mr. chairman, that's true. And if if, uh, if I'm misspeaking, I'll, I'll definitely. >> you're entitled to to revise that. But if you would please go back and double check that.
▶ 1:42:18Uh, in some areas of the government, we still have, uh, a larger number of people, and it's dragging down the organization's ability to effectively meet its goals, too. >> gladly. I'll take that back. >> Mr. chairman. Mr. do you wish to have further time, chairman? >> yes, I I've got a question. I guess that just always pops up when we are talking about this agency.
▶ 1:42:45And, um, there's an old saying that goes the harrier, I go the behinder I get, which was the way people used to characterize frustration. Just spinning wheels, spinning wheels, spinning wheels. And thinking about that. Mr.
▶ 1:43:03Obama, I wanted to ask you, are you aware if the secretary has sent from on high a directive all the way down to the thousands of people that work for you and all that are on your level that he wants in place a permanent director of defense, counterintelligence and security agencies? >> uh. >> by secretary.
▶ 1:43:30>> ranking member mfume, I can I can assure you that that through the leadership of secretary hegseth and my boss, uh, Mr. hansell, that the selection for a permanent dcsa director is a top priority. >> right. But has he sent that word down to the many, many minions and ranks below him as a directive from his office as secretary that you may be aware of? >> I'm not aware of that communication. Um, but I do know that Mr.
▶ 1:43:59Hansell views this as one of his top priorities, and he has been looking for the right person to ensure that the progress that we've made continues forward. >> so let me ask you another question, because about my frustration with the department at times, you know, the department has failed 7 or 8 straight audits. >> I am. >> so that's very troubling to me.
▶ 1:44:26And I'm sure it's troubling to the chairman of this committee, because we just don't understand that 7 or 8 straight audits, year after year after year, with a budget that shrinks any other budget that's out there. And, um, one of the things that I try to do in dissecting that and gio was very helpful. I wanted to know what were the components that sort of led to that.
▶ 1:44:53And what we learned was that there was not a problem with the marine corps. They, for the last 3 or 4 years, have figured it out, got it done. And it wasn't a knock against the army, the air force, uh, or anyone else.
▶ 1:45:09But we asked through gao what was the single most important feature that caused the marine corps to do what others had not been able to do? And the answer was that there was an order on hai from the commandant straight to everybody below him. This is a priority. Get it done. And they got it done.
▶ 1:45:38So I asked the question about the secretary because I think if there was a directive from on high straight down that says this is a priority, get it done. It would get done. Now you can't respond to that because you're not the secretary. And casually and not so casually. We've always said to him that this committee is wide open to receive him any time, uh, that he'd like to come by and talk about, uh, that or anything else.
▶ 1:46:06And I just want to reaffirm that that's the case today. But in the absence, in my opinion, of a clear directive from the secretary, that this is not only a priority, but I want to get it done. I think we are kind of treading water. And one month turns into the next and the seasons change and the years change. And here we are now.
▶ 1:46:27Uh, aside from eight straight audits that have been failed, here we are now 100% over budget years beyond where we should be. So that's not for your ears. To god, it's for the secretary's ears to god. I hope that he will understand why this is so very important and why in this case, he's the man, as they say he can get this done. There's nothing that the united states government cannot do.
▶ 1:46:56I honestly have always believed that, and I don't know to what extent beyond you people have gone to him and said, this is an this is exposure here. This is not good. Eight straight audits 100% over cost, ten years behind schedule. Um, so I want to thank you for your, your work, uh, previous to november and your work since november.
▶ 1:47:23And thank you also for wanting to own some of the issues that predated you. But as I said before, that's somebody else's ownership. We will be looking at you from november on, obviously, and hoping and wishing that things change, which is why I was particularly encouraged to hear the gao say that there have been some improvements in there, some things on track, and for us to talk about a schedule and trying to get something before this committee again. And in march or april.
▶ 1:47:50Um, and I want to wish you well. My sense is that we'll be having this discussion again, uh, when the chair decides to call us together again, and maybe incrementally, we can designate or pinpoint some sort of progress. And miss schiff's. Thank you. Also, I really want to thank the gao. I don't want to call you the police, but you have done a great job of policing agencies throughout this government.
▶ 1:48:18And, um, I'm going to be heartened by your words, as I said a moment ago, that you have seen some, uh, improvements here. And we've got to make sure that every time we meet we can say that. And I hope, Mr. secretary, if you're listening, that you would, uh, contact the the chair of this committee and myself. We'd love to talk with you.
▶ 1:48:41Uh, not to sling arrows, but to try to figure out how do we put our finger in the dike to stop this amount of money going out and creating a security situation for the united states and its people and agents all over the globe that none of us want and none of us want to see come to pass. So, Mr. chairman, you've been very generous as the gentleman from tennessee said earlier, he's going to like you more than he likes me. It's just a matter of time. But, uh, thank you.
▶ 1:49:10>> a little bit of time on my side, and I want to thank the gentleman. Uh, if I could say that one of the things that temporarily disturbed us is we did not here have had back a letter that we sent to the secretary. I did not see a response.
▶ 1:49:26And members of congress that comes from from subcommittees like ours, where we attempt to approach things on a bipartisan basis, to keep it level, to keep it professional, would be appreciated that when we send a letter to hearing something back.
▶ 1:49:50And I find it in, uh, a way that Mr. mfume has been gracious about that I don't write letters for the department of war. I write letters to them. And I think that if there's one thing that you or the chief of staff, uh, Mr. hewitt's here would take back to some bit of people.
▶ 1:50:15And that is when we get a letter, we should respond back professionally or at least respond back. We don't intend to. To bad, we will wait to find out. It may take seven more months or ten more months, but that letter was sent with good intent. And for us to maintain a professional standard of business that Mr.
▶ 1:50:47Newman insists on. And I do too. I think that that open communication extends also beyond you. Sir, I want to thank our witnesses for being here today. I want to thank the time, your staff. I want to thank our staffs. We have been spent a good bit of time on this issue. And as Mr. fema said, we're not going away. I want to thank everyone for being here today.
▶ 1:51:15I want to move to my where I've got to, uh, state in closing, I want to thank our witnesses. There's a five day. There it is. So with that said, without objection, all members have five legislative days within to submit materials and additional written questions for the witnesses, which will be forwarded to our witnesses if there's no further business. Without objection.
▶ 1:51:43Subcommittee stands adjourned.