President’s budget proposes folding beleaguered DHS intelligence office into headquarters
The new structure would shed some $53 million to combine the intelligence unit with the department’s Office of the Secretary and Executive Management, Management Directorate and Office of Situational Awareness into a single office reporting to the DHS secretary, the budget proposal says. It argues the restructuring of DHS HQ “would yield efficiencies and would enable better communication throughout the department and with external partners.”
The move, which would require congressional approval in upcoming appropriations talks, would mark the most significant change to the intelligence office to date, following efforts made last year to sharply scale it back.
I&A was slated for major workforce reductions in Trump’s second term, Nextgov/FCW first reported last July. Those plans, which would have only kept some 275 people, drew major pushback from law enforcement organizations and Jewish groups that long relied on the agency to disseminate timely intelligence about threats that concern state, local, tribal and territorial communities. One international organization privately warned Congress that the proposed cuts would create “dangerous intelligence gaps.”
The downsizing was put on hold just days later, but I&A reignited efforts soon after to more gradually shed its workforce. As of late last year, the office had around 500 or so full-time employees, a figure that preserved more staff than the initial plans to cap the workforce at 275, though that still halved the 1,000-person operation in place earlier last year. It’s possible that more people have since departed.
In November, Nextgov/FCW reported that the House Intelligence Committee privately weighed a measure in the annual intelligence community authorization bill to significantly curtail the size and scope of I&A. The provision would have barred the office from gathering and analyzing intelligence, effectively turning I&A into a clearinghouse for intelligence findings produced elsewhere and stripping it of standard spy agency collection authorities.
The move proposed in the FY27 budget would likely raise questions from some lawmakers about the independence of DHS’s primary intelligence arm, as well as congressional oversight and how threat information is shared with state and local partners. Any concerns may be buoyed by ongoing fears about oversight of Immigration and Customs Enforcement and U.S. Border Patrol.
As part of its mission, I&A also helps manage a series of fusion centers around the country that facilitate intelligence sharing between federal agencies and state and local law enforcement, raising questions about stakeholder engagement under the proposed restructuring.
For years, lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have argued that I&A needs major reform.
Democrats have faulted the office for overstepping its domestic surveillance authorities and for failing to maintain robust civil liberties protections, especially during the 2020 racial justice protests. Republicans, meanwhile, have accused it of drifting into partisanship and falling short in providing timely intelligence to state and local partners, particularly on border threats.
A 2022 DHS oversight report also assessed that I&A had advanced visibility into online threats before the January 6, 2021 Capitol riot but failed to elevate or share that information in time to be useful.
The Intelligence and Analysis unit holds a unique place in the federal oversight landscape.
As one of 18 intelligence agencies managed by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, it falls within the purview of the Senate and House Intelligence committees. But its status as a DHS component also subjects it to oversight from the Homeland Security panels in both chambers.
It’s not clear whether the proposed consolidation would formally reduce the number of U.S. intelligence agencies statutorily managed under ODNI. Nextgov/FCW has asked ODNI and DHS spokespeople for comment.
I&A was born as part of the creation of the Department of Homeland Security after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks to coordinate intelligence on homeland threats and expand information sharing with state and local authorities.
Its placement in DHS has put it at the center of recurring jurisdictional tensions with the FBI, which drives much of the nation’s domestic intelligence, counterterrorism and counterintelligence work under the Justice Department. Researchers have long argued the division of labor creates a fragmented architecture that splits operational responsibilities across agencies whose missions too often overlap.
]]>