Pennsylvania has compiled a lackluster report card in overseeing the spending of hundreds of millions of dollars in homeland security grants that the federal government has allocated to the Keystone State since Sept. 11, 2001. But so have other states.

Based on three reports, it's now clear that the commonwealth failed to use the people most capable of organizing an effort of such dimensions to ensure that Pennsylvania would be a model of efficiency and good judgment, rather than an example to be avoided.

The reports, which were prepared by the Office of Inspector General of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, the Pennsylvania Legislative Budget and Finance Committee and a private firm, detail a pattern in which state and local officials were short on strategy and coordination when deciding how to spend the money.

Those shortcomings are at least part of the reason why, according to the reports, this state misspent $721,300 between 2002 and 2004 on maintenance agreements, spare parts and warranties. The studies on which the reports were based also found that state officials did not ensure that equipment purchases for first responders followed the state's disaster-security strategy and that, in general, the Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agency didn't properly manage the security grant program as it continued to grow.

Also, the state didn't set up a centralized inventory to keep track of what equipment was bought and where that equipment now is located.

While it can be said that the suddenness of the big push to beef up homeland security in the wake of 9/11 found Pennsylvania, and other states, not sufficiently prepared to quickly prioritize the most effective use of the money coming from Washington, that doesn't forgive state officials' failure to install safeguards to ensure that all of the money received was spent effectively.

Pennsylvania residents are justified in being skeptical about whether more than $3 million in grants awarded to some of this state's least-populated counties was the best use for that money. Likewise, some state residents are no doubt wondering whether a hovercraft bought with Homeland Security funds for Falls Township, Bucks County, was targeted more for rescuing fishermen who fall through ice than for thwarting terrorism.

Pennsylvania isn't alone in allowing questionable use of the federal money. There are many other eye-opening "homeland security" spending decisions from across the country, like the quarter of a million dollars spent last year by Newark, N.J., on new, state-of-the-art, air-conditioned garbage trucks; more than $557,400 allocated for the town of North Pole, Alaska, which has a population of just 1,570 people (to protect Santa Claus?); and $63,000 spent for a decontamination unit that is stored in a Washington State warehouse because there is no HAZMAT team to use it.

Regarding homeland security grants, it was the federal government that embraced the role of Santa Claus, and federal and state lawmakers welcomed their role as gift-giving elves to ensure that everyone received a share, not just those places where the money would do the most good.

The relevant question is:How many serious homeland security issues have not been addressed, especially in the big cities such as New York, Chicago and Los Angeles, even Pittsburgh, because of the flawed attitudes and flawed controls that guided distribution of the funds?

There was much misspending of money in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina and other natural disasters that struck this nation. Although unacceptable, the errors in decision making and spending were a result of a chaotic state of emergency.

The distribution of money after 9/11 hasn't been ruled by that kind of urgency — thus, there was time to properly scrutinize and evaluate spending proposals and establish a system to track and monitor the actual money distribution and spending. It just wasn't done.

Pennsylvania might not merit a failing grade for its handling of the homeland security money, but, based on the studies' findings, its performance is certainly not praiseworthy.

The state cannot be excused for its embarrassing failures regarding this important mission.