Organizations Have Taken Steps to Collaborate, but Continue to Face Challenges

Global, regional, and country-level organizations recognize the importance  of collaborating to effectively combat human trafficking. They may treat foreign trafficking victims as illegal immigrants and  deport them back to their home countries, rather than protect them. Host governments bear  ultimate responsibility for combating trafficking within their borders, and  governments of the countries we visited have taken some steps to  collaborate. For example, the Indonesian and Thai governments have  passed national antitrafficking laws and enacted national action plans that  define common outcomes, outline strategies, and assign roles and  responsibilities. Although both the Indonesian and Thai governments hold  interagency meetings, the ministries responsible for coordinating  antitrafficking efforts have limited authority and operational capacity,  according to officials we interviewed. The U.S. embassies in the three  countries we visited, Indonesia, Thailand, and Mexico, include trafficking  in persons in their mission performance plans, which establish combating  trafficking as a component of the U.S. government’s overall strategy in each  country. U.S. Government- Funded Antitrafficking Projects Lack Some Key Monitoring Elements; Little Is Known about Project Impact Due to Difficulties in Conducting Evaluations

Antitrafficking project documents we reviewed generally include  monitoring elements, such as an overarching goal and related activities;  however, they often lack other monitoring elements, such as targets for  measuring performance. These factors include  questionable estimates of the number of trafficking victims at the project  level, which are needed to evaluate the effectiveness of specific  antitrafficking interventions. However,  the office has not established written guidance for conducting such  oversight. Factors Impede Evaluations of Antitrafficking Projects and Little Is Known about Project Impact

Various factors impede impact evaluations of antitrafficking projects. First,  data on human trafficking are questionable, including estimates of the  number of trafficking victims, making it difficult to determine a preproject  baseline. Expert Panel Identified Ways to Address the Difficulties of Monitoring and Evaluating Antitrafficking Projects

A GAO-convened panel of experts identified and discussed ways to address  the factors that make it difficult to monitor and evaluate antitrafficking  projects. Panelists suggested approaches to improve the monitoring and  evaluation of antitrafficking projects, by improving information on the  severity of human trafficking and addressing weaknesses in the design of  antitrafficking projects. Panel members suggested several  sampling methods that have been used to sample other hard-to-reach  populations, including the homeless, hidden migrants, missing and  exploited children, domestic violence victims, inmates, and drug users. One suggested method is sampling of “hot spots”—an intensive search  for victims in areas known to have high concentrations of victims or in  areas to which many victims return. They also recommended that officials design  projects that clearly link activities to intended outcomes, identify  measurable indicators, and establish procedures for setting and  modifying targets. As organizations around the world increasingly collaborate in  combating trafficking, their ultimate success will depend on the extent to  which they are able to overcome difficult challenges, such as varying levels  of government commitment and capacity, that have impeded collaboration  in the past. However, few impact evaluations have been completed due to the  difficulties involved. Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

Our objectives were to examine (1) collaboration among organizations  involved in international antitrafficking efforts, (2) U.S. government  agencies’ monitoring of antitrafficking projects and difficulties in  evaluating these projects, and (3) suggestions for strengthening monitoring  and evaluation. Moreover, project-level estimates are needed for  baselines by which to evaluate how effectively interventions are  reducing trafficking.
Why GAO Did This Study

Human trafficking--a worldwide crime involving the exploitation of men, women, and children for others' financial gain--is a violation of human rights. Victims are often lured or abducted and forced to work in involuntary servitude. Since 2001, the U.S. government has provided about $447 million to combat global human trafficking. As GAO previously reported, estimates of the number of trafficking victims are questionable. In this report, GAO examines (1) collaboration among organizations involved in international antitrafficking efforts, (2) U.S. government monitoring of antitrafficking projects and difficulties in evaluating these projects, and (3) suggestions for strengthening monitoring and evaluation. GAO analyzed agency documents; convened an expert panel; interviewed officials; and conducted fieldwork in Indonesia, Thailand, and Mexico.

What GAO Found

While governments, international organizations, and nongovernmental organizations have recognized the importance of collaborating and have established some coordination mechanisms and practices, they will need to overcome challenges that have impeded collaboration in the past for their efforts to be successful. In two of the three countries GAO visited, it found that host governments--which bear ultimate responsibility for combating trafficking within their borders--have passed national antitrafficking laws and enacted national action plans. However, organizations continue to face numerous challenges when collaborating to combat human trafficking, including varying levels of government commitment and capacity. For example, some governments treat foreign trafficking victims as illegal immigrants and deport rather than protect them. In addition, according to officials in two of the three countries GAO visited, the ministries responsible for coordinating antitrafficking efforts have limited authority and capacity. U.S. government-funded antitrafficking projects often lack some important elements that allow projects to be monitored, and little is known about project impact due to difficulties in conducting evaluations. Project documents GAO reviewed generally include monitoring elements, such as an overarching goal and related activities, but often lack other monitoring elements, such as targets for measuring performance. To oversee projects, State officials supplement their efforts with assistance from U.S. embassy staff, but have not established written guidance for oversight. Officials said that they are working to improve performance measures and develop monitoring guidance. Conducting impact evaluations of antitrafficking projects is difficult due to several factors, including questionable project-level estimates of the number of trafficking victims. These estimates are needed for baselines by which to evaluate how effectively specific interventions are reducing trafficking. Elements in the design of certain projects, such as objectives that are too broad, further impede evaluation. Because of these difficulties, few impact evaluations have been completed, and little is known about the impact of antitrafficking interventions. A GAO-convened panel of experts identified and discussed ways to address the factors that make it difficult to monitor and evaluate antitrafficking projects. Panelists' suggested approaches included improving information on the nature and severity of trafficking and addressing monitoring and evaluation in project design. To improve information on trafficking, panelists suggested methods that have been used to sample other hard-to-reach populations, including domestic violence victims. One suggested method is sampling of "hot spots"--an intensive search for victims in areas known to have high concentrations of victims. To address weaknesses in project design that impede monitoring and evaluation, panelists suggested that officials design projects that clearly link activities to intended outcomes, identify measurable indicators, and establish procedures for setting and modifying targets.