Review of the Critical Incident Response Plans of the United States Attorneys’ Offices

Report Number I-2004-001
December 2003

Figure 1
Components Involved in the CMC Program

Attorney General Deputy Attorney General Executive Office for United States Attorneys Office of Legal Education Evaluation and Review Staff Security Program Staff United States Attorneys Crisis Management Cordinators Criminal Division Counterterrorism Section Source: Organization Charts for the Department of Justice, EOUSA, and Criminal Division, July 2003.

Figure 2
48 actions in USAO Plans
N = 76

32 plans had 0-12 action items addressed. 32 plans had 13-24 action items addressed. 5 plans had 25-36 action items addressed. 7 plans had 37-48 action items addressed. Source: OIG review of Plans on file with CTS & EOUSA.

Figure 3
USAOs Conducting Critical Response
Exercises in Last 7 Years
N=81

Never - 49 Once - 16 Twice - 8 Three times - 3 Four or more times - 3 Unknown - 2 Source: OIG administered survey of CMCs

Figure 4
CMC Requested Support and Guidance

Area of Support Requested by CMCS National Training Conference - 92%, 24 requests Feedback on Plans - 62%, 16 requests How to conduct exercises - 54%, 14 requests Improved communication among CMCs - 50%, 13 requests Model Plan - scalable and size relevant - 31%, 8 requests Training based on size and needs - 23%, , 6 requests Source: OIG CMC Interviews.

Figure 5
Goal v. Actual Plans Submitted, FY 1998 - FY 2001

FY98 - Goal(0) Actual(10) FY99 - Goal(0) Actual(20) FY00 - Goal(60) Actual(80) FY01 - Goal(90) Actual(88) Source: OIG administered survey of CMCs