In fiscal years 2003, 2004, and 2005, Congress earmarked a total of $15  million for soft target protection each year, particularly to address security  vulnerabilities at overseas schools. State Lacks a Strategy to Cover Soft Target Areas; Key Issues Need to Be Resolved

State has a number of programs and activities designed to protect U.S.  officials and their families outside the embassy, including security  briefings, protection at schools and residences, and surveillance detection. However, State has not developed a comprehensive strategy that clearly  identifies safety and security requirements and resources needed to  protect U.S. official and their families. They said that providing U.S. government funds to protect U.S.  officials and their families at private sector locations or places of worship  was unprecedented and raised a number of legal and financial  challenges—including sovereignty and separation of church and state— that have not been resolved by the department. State Has Not Fully Implemented ARB Training and Accountability Recommendations to Improve Security for Embassy Personnel

To identify vulnerabilities in State’s soft target protection, and determine if  State had corrected these vulnerabilities, we reviewed the ARB reports  conducted after U.S. officials were assassinated outside the embassy. Despite State’s assurances  to Congress that it would implement recommendations aimed at reducing  these vulnerabilities, we found that State’s hands-on training course is still  not mandatory, and procedures to monitor compliance with security  requirements have not been fully implemented. We also found that  ambassadors, deputy chiefs of mission, and regional security officers were  not trained in how to implement embassy procedures intended to protect  U.S. officials outside the embassies. Senior DS officials said they recognize that security briefings are no longer  adequate to protect against current terrorist threats. In response to a 2003 ARB, State took a number of steps to improve  compliance with State’s personal security procedures for officials outside  the embassy. State Develops Soft Targets Program for Schools, but Scope Is Not Yet Fully Defined

In response to several congressional committee reports, State began  developing a “Soft Targets” program in 2003 to help protect overseas  schools against terrorism. In anticipation of any future phases of the Soft Targets program, RSOs  have been asked to identify other facilities and areas that Americans  frequent, beyond schools and off-compound employee association  facilities, that may be vulnerable to a terrorist attack. Issues Related to the Protection of U.S. Officials and Their Families at Residences against Terrorist Threats

State has a responsibility for providing a secure housing environment for  U.S. officials and their families overseas. However, we found that State’s  primary program in place to protect U.S. officials and their families at  residences, the Residential Security program, is principally designed to  deter crime, not terrorism. The program includes basic security hardware  and guard service; and as the crime threat increases, the hardware and  guard services can be correspondingly increased at the residences. State  officials said that while the Residential Security program, augmented by  the local guard program, provides effective deterrence against crime, it  could provide limited or no deterrence to minimize the risk and  consequences of a residential terrorist attack. To provide greater protection against terrorist attacks, most posts we  visited used surveillance detection teams in the residential areas.
Why GAO Did This Study

U.S. government officials working overseas are at risk from terrorist threats. Since 1968, 32 embassy officials have been attacked--23 fatally--by terrorists outside the embassy. As the State Department continues to improve security at U.S. embassies, terrorist groups are likely to focus on "soft" targets--such as homes, schools, and places of worship. GAO was asked to determine whether State has a strategy for soft target protection; assess State's efforts to protect U.S. officials and their families while traveling to and from work; assess State's efforts overseas to improve security at schools attended by the children of U.S. officials; and describe issues related to protection at their residences.

What GAO Found

State has a number of programs and activities designed to protect U.S. officials and their families outside the embassy, including security briefings, protection at schools and residences, and surveillance detection. However, State has not developed a comprehensive strategy that clearly identifies safety and security requirements and resources needed to protect U.S. officials and their families abroad from terrorist threats outside the embassy. State officials raised a number of challenges related to developing and implementing such a strategy. They also indicated that they have recently initiated an effort to develop a soft targets strategy. As part of this effort, State officials said they will need to address and resolve a number of legal and financial issues. Three State initiated investigations into terrorist attacks against U.S. officials outside of embassies found that the officials lacked the necessary hands-on training to help counter the attack. The investigations recommended that State provide hands-on counterterrorism training and implement accountability measures to ensure compliance with personal security procedures. After each of these investigations, State reported to Congress that it planned to implement the recommendations, yet we found that State's hands-on training course is not required, the accountability procedures have not been effectively implemented, and key embassy officials are not trained to implement State's counterterrorism procedures. State instituted a program in 2003 to improve security at schools, but its scope has not yet been fully determined. In fiscal years 2003 and 2004, Congress earmarked $29.8 million for State to address security vulnerabilities against soft targets, particularly at overseas schools. The multiphase program provides basic security hardware to protect U.S. officials and their families at schools and some off-compound employee association facilities from terrorist threats. However, during our visits to posts, regional security officers were unclear about which schools could qualify for security assistance under phase three of the program. State's program to protect U.S. officials and their families at their residences is primarily designed to deter crime, not terrorism. The Residential Security program includes basic security hardware and local guards, which State officials said provide effective deterrence against crime, though only limited deterrence against a terrorist attack. To minimize the risk and consequences of a residential terrorist attack, some posts we visited limited the number of U.S. officials living in specific apartment buildings. To provide greater protection against terrorist attacks, some posts we visited used surveillance detection teams in residential areas.