Interview transcript:
Terry Gerton We’re going to talk about Customs and Border Protection’s Reimbursable Services Program. You all have announced some new awards, but before we dig into that, I’d love to have you just give a general background about what this program does and how it works.
Ryan Flanagan I appreciate the opportunity. And so this is a program that was established back in 2013 as part of U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s resource optimization strategy efforts to try to keep pace with the increased demand of travel and trade at all of our ports of entry. So specifically, Reimbursable Services Program is a public-private partnership program. It’s a mechanism that allows U.S. Customs and Border Protection to collaborate with private sector and government entities to provide additional inspection services. So those that are above and beyond what we can provide under our appropriated budget on a reimbursable basis, not only at CBP ports of entry, but any location in which CBP is actually willing to provide services. So we look at this program as it’s an approach for us to ensure that in augmentation of essential CBP services, such as customs inspections, immigration processing and agricultural examinations, can be expanded to better fit program stakeholders’ business needs while conversely making sure that there’s no degradation in the services that are normally provided to non-stakeholders at our ports of entry.
Terry Gerton So just to make sure I’m clear, this is a way for private sector organizations to pay for additional CBP services beyond what would normally be offered to expedite their business needs through customs processes.
Ryan Flanagan That’s correct. So, through the program, not only private sector entities, but even some municipalities and other government entities can actually voluntarily enter into agreements with CBP, to select potentially where and when they would like to leverage an augmentation of any existing services, not only at any port of entry, but at any location which CBP would be willing to provide services. So essentially, it provides them with additional services on a reimbursable basis in a way that meets their business models and their business needs.
Terry Gerton So could you give us a couple of examples about where this is actually working now?
Ryan Flanagan Sure. So we provide services in all modes, land, sea, air, rail, ferry. We even provide cattle processing services down in one of our ports of entry in south Texas. And so we see the use of the program in a variety of ways. We see some airport entities that may try to leverage services after core hours of operation at a port of entry. We also see entities that may look to leverage reimbursable services during peak hours of operation at a port of entry. So essentially what they’ll do is try to reimburse CBP to staff additional booths beyond what we can do on our own given budget to try to drive down wait times, basically create additional throughput, so that they can bring in more business to that respective location. And so to your question, we see it in a variety of different ways, in all modes. In airports that are leveraging this to bring in additional flights, land ports of entry just to drive additional throughput, maybe through the lanes there on the bridges at the land ports of entry, ferry services, I already alluded to, just to provide for additional processing of ferries that may be coming through at different seaport locations and cruise lines as well. We’re seeing them jump on board just to try to obtain additional services, which as I alluded to earlier, are an augmentation of what we typically provide.
Terry Gerton That’s very helpful. Your memo from last month announces 33 new partners. Tell us about the new partners, do they have different demands? Is the scope of the responsibility or the scope the ask changing in this new memo?
Ryan Flanagan So with this recent batch, we’re seeing that it’s pretty consistent with the way this program has trended since its inception in 2013. So when we started off in 2013 — and why I say that in 2013, essentially, the authority under which we operated, which was granted to us by Congress — it granted us a pilot status in which we were only able to enter into five initial agreements. And so that lent itself to U.S. Customs and Border Protection entering into agreements with larger port authority entities, which were more operationally feasible for our agency to work with. But as a result of what we like to look at as appropriate utilization of the authority granted to us, Congress has essentially removed some of the limitations tied to limitations and the number of agreements that we could enter into. And so what that’s resulted in is it’s kind of opened things up in terms of the variety of different entities that are applying to the program. And basically providing us with additional flexibility as to the types of entities that we can enter into agreements with. So specifically, let’s say in the air environment, we traditionally had been entering into agreements with airport authorities. Now we’re seeing a huge uptick in the general aviation environment and also specifically for charter flights as well. We’re seeing a lot of interest in the program, specifically in that mode with the upcoming World Cup games coming, where a lot of these private sector entities are, at the very least, would like to have a reimbursable services agreement in place in their back pocket, understanding that there is no cost to apply to the program, there is no cost associated with maintaining an agreement with CBP and that the only time that they would actually have to reimburse CBP is after they voluntarily requested formal services to be provided. And so that’s done on a reimbursable basis. So we’re seeing an uptick, and we’re seeing a few of the applicants as part of this most recent round of selections, trying to get out in front of that potential need down the line when it comes to the World Cup games and other sporting events. But no, other than that, we are seeing, again, general aviation environment in particular, some additional sea environment needs as well, especially when it comes to cargo processing. So really it runs the gamut across all modes that CBP provides processing services.
Terry Gerton I’m speaking with Ryan Flanagan, he’s the Director of the Alternative Funding Programs Office of Field Operations at Customs and Border Protection. If I’m understanding what you’re saying correctly, this is for services above and beyond what CBP’s core funding allows you to provide. How do you staff up for this flexible demand?
Ryan Flanagan Well, the key thing is under the reimbursable authority under which we operate, is that it says that we cannot enter into an agreement that is not essentially operation feasible for CBP. And that is something that would unduly impact any existing services at that location of service. And so I think the key caveat there is that we ensure when we receive applications for services is that any non-stakeholder services that are provided at a port of entry are these standard services that, provided given our appropriated budget, are not impacted. And to your point, these are for services that are augmentation strictly above and beyond what we can perform at that location of service, under our given budget.
Terry Gerton And so do you need to hire additional inspectors to do this? Do you pay overtime for folks to do these? How do you meet those needs?
Ryan Flanagan Exactly. So this is primarily for overtime services. And so yeah, it’s overtime services given existing staffing that CBP has at that specific port of entry location. And so that’s something that is taken into account when we receive applications and look at maybe the operational feasibility of any application, we’re going to look at that scope of services that are being requested, seeing if it’s feasible, take into account if there’s any health or safety concerns to our existing workforce. We don’t want to overwork them just to provide services through RSP to a given stakeholder. And assuming that it’s something that’s mutually beneficial, we’ll proceed with entering into an agreement with that entity and then work with them. My team, I’ve got a great staff where we’ll work with the applicant and once they’re as part of the onboarding mechanisms and make sure that they are up to speed in terms of up and running, and they know exactly what they need to do to get services started at that port of entry.
Terry Gerton And so what lessons has CBP learned through this program? Are there practices here that you think other government agencies might benefit from?
Ryan Flanagan Well, I think if anything, what we’ve, what I’d like to think — and I’m biased when it comes to this having been with the program for a number of years — I think that we’ve been able to effectively communicate at least with these interested parties that may be concerned to say, okay, well, if we enter into an agreement at a specific location, does that mean that this location may be overlooked when it comes to allocating appropriated staffing down the line. And we’re able to push back on any such narrative to say, look, that’s not the case. In fact, CBP will take a look at that when it comes to any usage under our Reimbursable Services Program and how staffing should be allocated. Another thing that I’d like to think that we’ve been effective at is just pushing back on any potential narrative that this is maybe an overreach by the U.S. government to try to reach in the private sector’s pockets to obtain funds for what potentially could be looked at as something that should be provided by the taxpayers. And so what we really just try to reiterate for any interested parties, and this is something that we’ve shared with other government agencies that have looked at the program to see if they could replicate this model, is just to, again, just try to emphasize the voluntary nature of the program, and that it is entirely up to an interested external party if they want to sign up for services. And we are as transparent with these entities as possible in terms of providing them with general cost estimates of what it could look like on the reimbursement front, being very clear as to the scope of services that we can provide. So, when you talk about lessons learned, it sometimes is a matter of just reminding some of these applicants that if they are selected for an agreement, they don’t have carte blanche over when and where they’re going to receive the services. Again, our local CBP leadership retains that operational autonomy over the services, but nonetheless, they’re going to get that face-to-face engagement with CBP to hash out exactly what scope of service is, it’s something that essentially CBP can concur with and hopefully, again, is mutually beneficial for all parties.
The post CBP’s latest partnerships let ports and companies pay for more support first appeared on Federal News Network.