1.) 2.) S/CT  provides minimal policy guidance to help determine ATA priorities and  ensure that assistance provided supports broader U.S. policy goals. In  addition, S/CT and DS/T/ATA did not systematically use country-specific  needs assessments and program reviews to plan what types of assistance  to provide partner nations in accordance with State policy guidance. However, S/CT provides little additional guidance  to DS/T/ATA regarding program priorities and how to allocate program  funding. S/CT Has Established Various Mechanisms to Coordinate Program Assistance

As a part of its responsibility, S/CT has established mechanisms to  coordinate the ATA program with other U.S. government international  counterterrorism training assistance and to help avoid duplication of  efforts. The  Training Assistance Subgroup includes representatives from the  Departments of State, Defense, Justice, Homeland Security, Treasury, and  other agencies. Based on our review of program documents, interviews, and meetings  with officials in the four countries we visited, we did not find any  significant duplication or overlap among U.S. agencies’ country-specific  training programs aimed at combating terrorism. S/CT and DS/T/ATA Do Not Assess Sustainability of Capabilities

Despite progress towards establishing goals and intended outcomes, State  has not developed clear measures and a process for assessing  sustainability and has not integrated the concept into program planning. State Reporting on U.S. Counterterrorism Assistance Abroad Has Been Incomplete and Inaccurate

Since 1996, State has not complied with a congressional mandate to  report to Congress on U.S. international counterterrorism assistance. Additionally, State’s annual reports on ATA have contained inaccurate  data regarding basic program information, do not provide systematic  assessments of program results, and lack other information necessary to  evaluate program effectiveness. S/CT is responsible for preparing the reports on U.S. international  counterterrorism assistance. 3. 4. Appendix I: Scope and Methodology

To assess State’s guidance for determining country recipients, aligning  program assistance with partner nation needs, and coordinating  Antiterrorism Assistance (ATA) with other U.S. government  counterterrorism programs, we  Interviewed cognizant officials from the Office of Coordinator for  Counterterrorism (S/CT) and the Bureau of Diplomatic Security, Office of  Antiterrorism Assistance (DS/T/ATA) in Washington, D.C., including senior  officials responsible for overseeing and managing ATA and ATA program  managers responsible for each of the six in-country programs:  Afghanistan, Colombia, Indonesia, Kenya, Pakistan, and the Philippines. Reviewed and analyzed State planning, funding, and reporting documents  concerning ATA, including relevant reports from State’s Office of  Inspector General on the management and implementation of ATA; S/CT’s  fiscal year 2007 tiered lists of priority countries for ATA assistance and  S/CT criteria for establishing the tier list; DS/T/ATA budget information for  fiscal years 2000 to 2008; a 1991 State policy memorandum delineating  S/CT’s and DS/T/ATA’s roles and responsibilities for ATA; relevant  sections of State’s Foreign Affairs Manual summarizing roles and  responsibilities for ATA; DS/T/ATA internal policy and procedure  documents, including DS/T/ATA’s Assessment, Review and Evaluations  Unit’s most current (2004) standard operations procedures; State  documents and U.S. embassy cables regarding the Regional Strategic  Initiative; and DS/T/ATA’s Annual Reports to Congress on the ATA for  fiscal years 1997 to 2005.
Why GAO Did This Study

The Department of State's (State) Antiterrorism Assistance (ATA) program's objectives are to provide partner nations with counterterrorism training and equipment, improve bilateral ties, and increase respect for human rights. State's Office of the Coordinator for Counterterrorism (S/CT) provides policy guidance and its Bureau of Diplomatic Security, Office of Antiterrorism Assistance, (DS/T/ATA) manages program operations. GAO assessed (1) State's guidance for determining ATA priorities, (2) how State coordinates ATA with other counterterrorism programs, (3) the extent State established ATA program goals and measures, and (4) State's reporting on U.S. international counterterrorism assistance. To address these objectives, GAO reviewed State documents and met with cognizant officials in Washington, D.C., and four ATA program partner nations.

What GAO Found

S/CT provides minimal guidance to help prioritize ATA program recipients, and S/CT and DS/T/ATA do not systematically align ATA assistance with U.S. assessments of foreign partner counterterrorism needs. S/CT provides policy guidance to DS/T/ATA through quarterly meetings and a tiered list of priority countries, but the list does not provide guidance on country counterterrorism related program goals, objectives, or training priorities. S/CT and DS/T/ATA also did not consistently use country-specific needs assessments and program reviews to plan assistance. S/CT has established mechanisms to coordinate the ATA program with other U.S. international efforts to combat terrorism. S/CT holds interagency meetings with representatives from the Departments of State, Defense, Justice, and Treasury and other agencies as well as ambassador-level regional strategic coordinating meetings. GAO did not find any significant duplication or overlap among the various U.S. international counterterrorism efforts. State has made progress in establishing goals and intended outcomes for the ATA program, but S/CT and DS/T/ATA do not systematically assess the outcomes and, as a result, cannot determine the effectiveness of program assistance. For example, although sustainability is a principal focus, S/CT and DS/T/ATA have not set clear measures of sustainability or integrated sustainability into program planning. State reporting on U.S. counterterrorism assistance abroad has been incomplete and inaccurate. S/CT has not provided a congressionally mandated annual report to Congress on U.S. government-wide assistance related to combating international terrorism since 1996. After 1996, S/CT has only submitted to Congress annual reports on the ATA program. However, these reports contained inaccurate program information, such as the number of students trained and courses offered. Additionally, the reports lacked comprehensive information on the results of program assistance that would be useful to Congress.