According to the legislation the purpose of ATA is “(1) to  enhance the antiterrorism skills of friendly countries by providing training  and equipment to deter and counter terrorism; (2) to strengthen the  bilateral ties of the United States with friendly governments by offering  concrete assistance in this area of great mutual concern; and (3) to  increase respect for human rights by sharing with foreign civil authorities  modern, humane, and effective antiterrorism techniques.”

		ATA Program Assistance

ATA offers a wide range of counterterrorism assistance to partner nations,  but most assistance consists of (1) training courses on tactical and  strategic counterterrorism issues and (2) grants of counterterrorism  equipment, such as small arms, bomb detection equipment, vehicles, and  computers. S/CT provides little guidance to DS/T/ATA beyond the tiered list, although  the 1991 State policy guidance memorandum states that S/CT’s written  policy guidance for the program should include suggested country training  priorities. S/CT and DS/T/ATA Did Not Systematically Align Program Assistance with Counterterrorism Needs

According to the 1991 State policy guidance memorandum and DS/T/ATA  standard operations procedures, ATA country-specific needs assessments  and program reviews are intended to guide program management and  planning. Country Assistance Plans Were Not Used or Were Not Linked to Needs Assessments

Although the 1991 State policy memorandum states that DS/T/ATA should  create annual country assistance plans that specify training objectives and  assistance to be provided based upon the needs assessments and program  reviews, we found that S/CT and DS/T/ATA did not systematically use the  assessments to create annual plans for the five in-country programs. S/CT Has Established Various Mechanisms to Coordinate Program Assistance

S/CT has mechanisms to coordinate the ATA program with other U.S.  government international counterterrorism training assistance and to help  avoid duplication of efforts. S/CT also established the Regional Strategic  Initiative in 2006 to coordinate regional counterterrorism efforts and  strategy. 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. State Had Made Progress in Establishing ATA Goals, but S/CT and DS/T/ATA Did Not Assess Sustainability

In response to concerns that ATA lacked elements of adequate strategic  planning and performance measurement, State took action to define goals  and measures related to the program’s mandated objectives. S/CT and DS/T/ATA Did Not Assess Sustainability of Capabilities

Despite progress towards establishing goals and intended outcomes, State  had not developed clear measures and a process for assessing  sustainability and had 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 contained inaccurate data  regarding basic program information, did not provide systematic  assessments of program results, and lacked other information necessary to  evaluate program effectiveness. ATA Annual Reports Contain Inaccuracies

Recent ATA annual reports have contained inaccurate data relating to  basic program information on numbers of students trained and courses  offered. For example,    Afghanistan. Specifically, minimal guidance from S/CT makes it difficult  to determine the extent to which program assistance directly supports  broader U.S. counterterrorism policy goals. 4. Comply with the congressional mandate to report to Congress on U.S.  international counterterrorism assistance.
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. counterterrorism assistance. This statement is based on a February 2008, GAO report titled Combating Terrorism: State Department's Antiterrorism Program Needs Improved Guidance and More Systematic Assessments of Outcomes, GAO-08-336 (Washington, D.C.: Feb. 29, 2008).

What GAO Found

S/CT provides minimal guidance to help prioritize ATA program recipients, and S/CT and DS/T/ATA did not systematically align ATA assistance with U.S. assessments of foreign partner counterterrorism needs. S/CT provided policy guidance to DS/T/ATA through quarterly meetings and a tiered list of priority countries, but the list did 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 had established mechanisms to coordinate the ATA program with other U.S. international efforts to combat terrorism. S/CT held interagency meetings with officials from the Department 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 had made progress in establishing goals and intended outcomes for the ATA program, but S/CT and DS/T/ATA did not systematically assess the outcomes and, as a result, could not determine the effectiveness of program assistance. For example, although sustainability is a principal focus, S/CT and DS/T/ATA had not set clear measures of sustainability or integrated sustainability into program planning. State reporting on U.S. counterterrorism assistance abroad was incomplete and inaccurate. S/CT had 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, such as the number of students trained and courses offered. Moreover, these reports contained inaccurate program information. Additionally, the reports lacked comprehensive information of the results on program assistance that would be useful to Congress.