By Mickey McCarter, HSToday Senior Washington Correspondent

Retired Coast Guard Admiral James Loy once told me that he found no greater satisfaction in his life than his devotion to public service.

So then is there also great satisfaction in witnessing such a public servant render his duties effectively with earnestness and dedication. George Foresman has been one such official at the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and it is unfortunate for the department that, as undersecretary of Preparedness, he submitted his resignation on March 29, shortly before he transitioned into his current role of undersecretary of National Protection and Programs.

When Foresman joined DHS near the end of 2005, he lost no time in rehabilitating the public image of the department. He reached out to those who could help communicate his mission at the department. This reporter first met him at a meet and greet at the Heritage Foundation shortly after his arrival in Washington. His ability to speak forthrightly with the benefit of his years in state government impressed those gathered that he would provide some much needed gravitas to DHS, which was then taking the worst of a public pummeling for its mismanagement of Hurricane Katrina.

Unfortunately for Foresman, he was to head a directorate that included parts taken from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Congress wanted those parts restored and others added from Foresman's Preparedness Directorate to FEMA in order to boost the agency's effectiveness. Thus, not even a year after his arrival, Foresman found that more than half of his organization was going to FEMA with the October 2006 passage of the Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act.

Although Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff then reorganized the remains of Preparedness with other elements into the National Protection and Programs Directorate, it's not hard to suppose that Foresman lost his momentum in the direction of DHS preparedness activities, which included the chief medical officer, the cyber security office, the Office of Grants and Training, and other offices—the heads of which Foresman envisioned as forming kind of a board of directors for preparedness activities.

That the reorganization has anything to do with Foresman's departure is mere conjecture on my part. And Foresman made significant contributions to the department's processes during his time there.

"Through his tireless dedication, George helped sharpen the federal government's focus in the areas of infrastructure protection, including the security of chemical facilities, national information technology and telecommunications systems, and he has been instrumental in leading refinements to our grants processes, approaches to risk management, use of biometrics, and communications interoperability," Chertoff said in a statement on Foresman's resignation.

Foresman also took some criticism, along with other officials, in 2006 for homeland security grants that appeared to defy common sense by cutting the level of funds to New York City and Washington, DC. But he helped to strengthen a process that appears to have been the beginning of an improved grant awards process that will remain within the National Protection and Programs Directorate. That process attempts to measure the progress of projects within communities receiving homeland security funds and hold their governments responsible for their use of federal dollars.

In his years as a homeland security official, Foresman has worked for Democrats and Republicans alike, proving his capability to marshal appropriate resources to prepare for and respond to terrorist threats and natural disasters. His departure is a loss to DHS.

This commentary reflects the opinion of the author and does not necessarily represent the opinions of HSToday.us or its other staff members.