DOD and State officials reviewed proposals—approved by the geographic  combatant command and ambassador or chief of mission—and selected  projects to recommend to the Secretaries of Defense and State. PPD 23 identified key project planning elements for the  United States to consider, including project objectives, absorptive  capacity, baseline assessments, and sustainment plans. Each of these 41 notifications included (1) information about  project objectives; (2) a similar statement, noting that the partner nation  “has been assessed as capable to absorb effectively and benefit from the  assistance proposed via this program;” (3) a description of the  assessment framework; and (4) a statement about arrangements for  sustainment, such as “while  might provide some  national funds to help sustain this capability, it is very likely that Foreign  Military Financing (FMF) will also be required to support future year  sustainment and training of this capability.”

		Fiscal Year 2015 Project Proposals Consistently Documented Consideration of Only One of Four Key Elements

While DOD officials told us that they considered each of four key  elements highlighted in PPD 23, fiscal year 2015 Global Train and Equip  project proposal packages did not always document consideration of  baseline assessments and sustainment plans, and rarely did so for  absorptive capacity. However, despite agency  guidance, such documentation was not always complete. Incomplete assessments may affect DOD’s ability to design  appropriate capacity building projects and to assess project outcomes,  thus limiting information on program effectiveness that could help inform  future assistance decisions. The remaining 13 proposals did  not include sustainment cost estimates. Clearly documenting information  such as estimates of annual sustainment costs could help improve  decision makers’ ability to assess the sustainability of proposed projects  in making funding decisions. DOD Reporting on Project Assessments Has Not Met Statutory Deadlines but Indicates Some Progress in Building Foreign Partner Capacity

DOD reporting to Congress on the achievement of Global Train and  Equip project objectives has not met reporting deadlines, but those  reports—dating back to 2012—indicate that projects have made some  progress building partner capacity to combat terrorism and conduct  stability operations. DOD’s fiscal year 2012, 2013, 2014, and 2015 reports included  assessments of the recipient units of 61 of the 208 projects implemented  in fiscal years 2006 through 2013, which represents 28 percent of the $2  billion in assistance implemented in those fiscal years. Proposal design and interpretation. As pictured in figure 7, this same assessment  reported that spotting scopes provided to enhance counterterrorism  capabilities were too tall for use in a prone position, exposing the  spotter. Equipment delivery and procurement. DOD’s fiscal year 2013,  2014, and 2015 assessment reports were late. Recommendations for Executive Action

To improve management of and reporting on the Global Train and Equip  program, we recommend that the Secretary of Defense take the following  three actions:  take steps to require that information about the absorptive capacity of recipient units be documented in project proposal packages, take steps to ensure that documentation requested in project proposal packages is complete, and take steps to develop a process for improving the timely completion and submission of required assessment reports to Congress. This report examines (1) the  extent to which the Department of Defense (DOD) considered and  documented consideration of key security assistance planning elements  for fiscal year 2015 project proposals and (2) the results that have been  reported on the achievement of project objectives since fiscal year 2009. DOD uses a standard framework for  evaluating the capabilities and performance of each recipient unit. Appendix II: Allocation of Funds for Fiscal Year 2015 Global Train and Equip Projects

	Combatant command

	U.S. Africa Command

	U.S. European Command

	Total

Appendix III: State and DOD Views on the Availability of Funds for Long-term Sustainment of Global Train and Equip Projects

DOD’s fiscal year 2015 Global Train and Equip project proposal template  did not request information about the sources of U.S. funds to be used for  long-term sustainment.
Why GAO Did This Study

The United States has undertaken several efforts, including DOD's Global Train and Equip program, to build the capacity of its foreign partners to counter terrorism. Funding allocated for this program totals $2.3 billion since 2009. DOD and State select projects from proposals that use a standard planning template. Once projects are approved by DOD with concurrence from State, DOD submits congressional notifications that summarize certain aspects of each project.
The fiscal year 2015 National Defense Authorization Act included a provision for GAO to review the Global Train and Equip Program. This report examines (1) the extent to which DOD considered and documented consideration of key security assistance elements for fiscal year 2015 project proposals, and (2) the results that have been reported on the achievement of project objectives since fiscal year 2009. GAO analyzed agency data and program documents, and interviewed DOD and State officials in Washington, D.C., and at selected combatant commands and embassies.

What GAO Found

The Departments of Defense (DOD) and State (State) officials consistently considered four key security assistance project planning elements for fiscal year 2015 Global Train and Equip project proposals. However, project proposals did not always adhere to federal internal control standards for clearly documenting three of those elements—absorptive capacity, project assessment, and sustainment plans. For example, DOD did not require project proposal packages to document information about the recipient unit's absorptive capacity. In addition, assessments of recipient unit baseline capabilities did not always include all information required by agency guidance to facilitate project assessment. Lastly, 13 of 54 project proposals did not include required estimates of annual sustainment costs. The sharp increase in funding for program activities in fiscal year 2015, as shown in the figure above, heightens the importance of documenting consideration of key planning elements to provide decision makers sufficient information about recipient units' ability to use and sustain assistance. Moreover, incomplete baseline assessments may limit DOD's ability to conduct project assessments to inform future funding decisions.
DOD reporting on Global Train and Equip project assessments has not met statutory deadlines but identifies some progress in building partner nation capabilities. Despite a legal requirement to complete and submit to Congress annual assessments within 90 days of the end of each fiscal year, DOD's fiscal year 2013, 2014, and 2015 assessment reports were submitted up to 21 months late. Untimely reporting may limit decision makers' ability to use assessments to inform future project selection and sustainment decisions. DOD's assessments—which cover 28 percent of funds allocated in fiscal years 2006 through 2013—indicate some progress in building capability to combat terrorism and conduct stability operations. They also identify factors that challenge the achievement of project objectives such as proposal design and interpretation and equipment delivery and procurement. For example, one country received sniper spotting scopes that were too tall for use in a prone position, exposing the spotter.

What GAO Recommends

GAO is making two recommendations to enhance DOD's documentation and management of the Global Train and Equip program and one to ensure timely completion of required assessment reporting to Congress. DOD concurred with GAO's recommendations.