Security Assistance: U.S. Agencies Should Establish a Mechanism to Assess Caribbean Basin Security Initiative Progress

The Caribbean region, which shares geographic proximity and common interests with the United States, faces high rates of crime and violence. In 2010, the United States and Caribbean countries formally launched CBSI, which aims to increase citizen safety. GAO was asked to examine U.S. assistance through CBSI. This report (1) discusses U.S. funding for CBSI activities, (2) examines the extent to which there is a planning and reporting process for CBSI, and (3) examines the extent to which State and USAID have established objectives and performance indicators to measure progress of their CBSI activities. GAO analyzed State and USAID data; assessed government strategies and performance reports; selected a non-generalizable sample of 25 CBSI activities and analyzed State and USAID documentation related to those activities; interviewed relevant officials; and conducted fieldwork in Barbados, Dominican Republic, and Jamaica, which are the countries generally receiving the most CBSI funding.

U.S. agencies have allocated more than $560 million for the Caribbean Basin Security Initiative (CBSI) from fiscal years 2010 through 2018 for activities related to the three pillars of CBSI—reduce illicit trafficking (such as in narcotics and firearms), improve public safety and security, and promote social justice. For example, State Department's (State) Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs (INL) has ongoing activities such as advisory programs and equipment procurements, while the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) has activities aimed at increasing economic opportunities for at-risk youth and improving the skills of prosecutors.

The U.S. government has undertaken some planning and reporting of CBSI activities, but State has not created an initiative-wide planning and reporting mechanism. Agencies individually set strategic goals and priorities with CBSI countries and plan and report on their CBSI activities on a country-specific basis. However, State has not created an initiative-wide planning and reporting mechanism that facilitates interagency coordination or establishes consistent performance indicators across agencies, countries, and activities—key elements for effectively aligning foreign assistance strategies. Without such a planning and reporting mechanism, overall progress of the initiative cannot be assessed.

State and USAID have established objectives and performance indicators for selected CBSI activities, and INL is taking steps to improve identified weaknesses in its program monitoring. State and USAID had established objectives and performance indicators for the 25 activities in our sample. However, INL cannot ensure the reliability of its program monitoring data because collection and maintenance of this data is conducted differently in each country and there is no centralized data storage system. INL recently contracted to improve and standardize its program monitoring data for Western Hemisphere activities, but according to INL officials, data challenges remain—in particular, how to collect standardized data from each of the embassies and how to build a data management system that is compatible with State requirements. Without reliable data, INL may continue to struggle with program monitoring of CBSI activities.

GAO recommends that State (1) create an initiative-wide planning and reporting mechanism for CBSI that includes the ability to monitor, evaluate, and report the results of collaborative efforts, and (2) ensure that INL develops and implements a data management system for centrally collecting reliable CBSI data. State agreed with the recommendations, noting that it plans to develop an updated Results Framework for initiative-wide planning and reporting and to improve centralized data collection through an enhanced data management system.

The United States has long recognized the importance of the Caribbean  region to the overall stability of the Western Hemisphere. Sometimes  referred to as the “third border,” the Caribbean region shares geographic  proximity, common interests, and societal ties with the United States.  However, this region also faces security threats that jeopardize its  economic growth and development. Situated between drug production  sources in South America and consumer markets in North America and  Europe, the Caribbean is a major transit zone for illicit narcotics. The  United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, the World Bank, and the Inter- American Development Bank have identified drug trafficking as a primary  driver of homicide and other violent crime in the region. Caribbean  countries suffer from some of the highest per-capita murder rates in the  world, and many countries lack the ability to counter these threats. In  2010, the United States, Caribbean Community member nations, and the  Dominican Republic formally launched the Caribbean Basin Security  Initiative (CBSI) to help Caribbean countries develop the capacity to  respond to these threats.

You asked us to review assistance provided through CBSI. In this report,  we (1) provide information on U.S. funding for CBSI activities, (2)  examine the extent to which the U.S. Department of State (State) and  U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), in conjunction with  other agencies, have implemented a planning and reporting process for  CBSI, and (3) examine the extent to which State and USAID have  established objectives and performance indicators to measure the  progress of their CBSI activities.

To provide information on U.S. funding for CBSI, we analyzed State and  USAID data on allocations, unobligated balances, unliquidated  obligations, and disbursements by fiscal year, funding account, and  country for fiscal years 2010 through 2018. We compared the data to  those previously reported and determined that they were reliable for the  purpose of reporting them according to these categories. We also  obtained illustrative examples of the types of activities funded through  CBSI.

To examine the extent to which State and USAID have implemented a  planning and reporting process for the initiative, we obtained relevant  CBSI planning and reporting documents, including those related to the  Caribbean-U.S. Security Cooperation Dialogue and strategy documents  such as Integrated Country Strategies and Country Development  Cooperation Strategies, and interviewed relevant State and USAID  officials. We compared the planning and reporting procedures in place to  the key elements for effectively aligning foreign assistance strategies in  situations where multiple agencies work together to deliver foreign  assistance.

To examine the extent to which State and USAID have established  objectives and performance indicators to measure progress of their CBSI  activities, we selected three case study countries—Barbados, the  Dominican Republic, and Jamaica. We selected these three countries  because they receive the greatest amount of CBSI funding and because  they have program officials from State and USAID in their embassies. For  each country, we requested lists of all ongoing and completed CBSI  activities from State and USAID and used the lists to select a non- generalizable sample of activities, 15 implemented by State and 10  implemented by USAID, which were selected to provide a range of  activity costs, implementing partners, types of activity, and location. We  reviewed State and USAID documentation related to performance  management for these activities, specifically focusing on the use of  activity objectives and performance indicators, which are used to set and  measure progress toward activity goals. Specifically, we examined  contracts and agreements and program monitoring and progress reports,  as well as country-level and regional-level reporting that encompassed  these activities. The objectives and performance indicators in place for  these activities do not represent those in place for all CBSI activities, but  offer illustrative examples. We compared the performance management  practices in place for the sample activities to State and USAID policies  related to program management, found in the Foreign Affairs Manual  (FAM) and Automated Directives System (ADS), respectively. We also  interviewed officials from State, USAID, the Department of Defense  (DOD), the Department of Justice, the Department of Homeland Security,  and other implementing partner officials in Washington, D.C.; Barbados;  the Dominican Republic; and Jamaica; and conducted site visits in these  countries to determine the types of performance indicators tracked for  each project.

We conducted this performance audit from November 2017 to February  2019 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing  standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to  obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for  our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe  that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings  and conclusions based on our audit objectives.

Economic, Security, and Illicit Drug Trafficking Challenges in the Caribbean

The countries of the Caribbean are diverse in size, culture, and level of  development, and face various interrelated economic and security  challenges. According to a recent International Monetary Fund report,  Caribbean countries have recently fallen into a pattern of low growth and  high debt, and those with tourism-intensive economies are characterized  by high rates of unemployment. They have endured frequent natural  disasters that reduced economic output and imposed reconstruction  costs, as well as deep macroeconomic, financial, and structural  challenges that have resulted in lower-than anticipated rates of economic  growth, according to the same report.

Recent reports emphasize that crime and violence in the Caribbean have  inflicted widespread costs, generating a climate of fear for citizens and  diminishing economic growth. These reports note that Caribbean  countries have some of the highest per-capita murder rates in the world,  with assault rates that are significantly above the world average, and high  crime rates have stretched the capacity of their criminal justice systems,  which are small and largely characterized as weak and ineffective.

Because of their location between drug production sources in South  America and consumer markets in North America and Europe, Caribbean  countries have become a major transit zone for illicit drugs, particularly  drugs destined for the United States. With long coastlines that are difficult  to comprehensively patrol, and limited air and sea capabilities to support  interdictions, the Caribbean countries often struggle to control territorial  waters and stem the flow of drugs northwards.

Over the years, the United States has created several initiatives to  engage with the countries of the Caribbean Basin region to address  economic and political issues. In May 2010, the United States, Caribbean  Community member states, and the Dominican Republic formally launched CBSI to strengthen regional cooperation on security. At its  inception in 2010, CBSI’s aim was to increase citizen safety through  provision of U.S. foreign assistance to CBSI partner countries to reduce  illicit trafficking, improve public safety and security, and promote social  justice; these three “pillars” remain the overall goals of CBSI.

There are thirteen CBSI partner countries—Antigua and Barbuda,  Bahamas, Barbados, Dominica, the Dominican Republic, Grenada,  Guyana, Jamaica, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Lucia, St. Vincent and the  Grenadines, Suriname, and Trinidad and Tobago (see fig. 1).

U.S. Government Agencies Involved in Funding and Implementing CBSI Activities

The U.S. agencies and offices currently funding CBSI activities are  State’s Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs  (INL), State’s Bureau of Political-Military Affairs (PM), and USAID (see fig.  2). State’s Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs (WHA) plays a  coordinating role for CBSI. To implement CBSI activities, State and  USAID partner with nongovernmental and multilateral organizations as  well as other government agencies, such as DOD and the Departments of  Homeland Security, Justice, and Treasury.

U.S. Government Agencies Have Allocated More Than $560 Million in CBSI Funds from Fiscal Years 2010 through 2018 to Support Various Security Activities

From fiscal years 2010 through 2018, U.S. agencies have allocated more  than $560 million in funding for CBSI activities. Since fiscal year 2012,  annual allocations have remained relatively constant, ranging between  $56.6 million and $63.5 million. Of the 13 CBSI partner countries, U.S.  agencies have provided the most CBSI funding to the Dominican  Republic, Jamaica, and the countries covered by the Eastern Caribbean  embassy. State and USAID disbursed funds to support activities in  partner countries that improve law enforcement and maritime interdiction  capabilities, support activities to train and otherwise improve the  capabilities of national security institutions, prevent crime and violence,  and deter and detect border criminal activity. These activities are  generally aligned with the three pillars of CBSI.

State and USAID Allocated More Than $560 Million to CBSI from Various Foreign Assistance Accounts

From fiscal years 2010 through 2018, State and USAID allocated more  than $560 million in funding for CBSI activities. Of that amount, U.S.  agencies have disbursed or committed approximately $361 million for  CBSI activities in the 13 CBSI partner countries and for region-wide  activities. Funding for CBSI activities comes from a combination of U.S.  foreign assistance accounts—mostly through INCLE, ESF, and FMF, with  a small amount of funding provided through NADR and DA (see textbox).

U.S. Foreign Assistance Accounts That Have Been Used to Fund  Caribbean Basin Security Initiative (CBSI) Activities  International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement (INCLE): The  Department of State (State)’s Bureau of International Narcotics and Law  Enforcement Affairs (INL) manages the INCLE account, which provides  assistance to foreign countries and international organizations to develop  and implement policies and programs that maintain the rule of law and  strengthen institutional law enforcement and judicial capabilities, including  countering drug flows and combatting transnational crime. Generally,  INCLE funds are available for obligation for 2 fiscal years and must be  disbursed within 5 years of the end of the period of availability for new  obligations.

Economic Support Fund (ESF): State and the U.S. Agency for  International Development (USAID) share responsibility for managing the  ESF account. For CBSI activities, it is primarily USAID who uses ESF funds  to assist foreign countries in meeting their political, economic, and security  needs.  Generally, ESF funds are available for obligation for 2 fiscal years  and must be disbursed within 5 years of the end of the period of availability  for new obligations.   Foreign Military Financing (FMF): State’s Bureau of Political-Military  Affairs manages the FMF account, which provides grants and loans to  foreign governments and international organizations for the acquisition of  U.S. defense equipment, services, and training. The Department of Defense  is the main implementer of this funding. Previous acts appropriating funds  for FMF have generally provided that such funds are available for obligation  for 1 year, and deem such funds to be obligated upon apportionment.

Nonproliferation, Anti-terrorism, Demining, and Related Programs  (NADR): State manages the NADR account, which funds contributions to  organizations supporting nonproliferation and provides assistance to foreign  countries for nonproliferation, antiterrorism, demining, export control  assistance, and other related activities. Generally, NADR funds are  available for obligation for 2 fiscal years and must be disbursed within 5  years of the end of the period of availability for new obligations.

Development Assistance (DA): USAID manages the DA account, which  responds to long-term challenges to human and economic security by  funding activities in areas such as economic growth and education.  Generally, DA funds are available for obligation for 2 fiscal years and must  be disbursed within 5 years of the end of the period of availability for new  obligations.

Since 2012, allocations have remained relatively constant each year,  ranging between $56.6 million and $63.5 million. Table 1 summarizes  the INCLE, ESF, NADR, and DA allocations and disbursements and the  FMF allocations and commitments by year of appropriation. Appendix II  includes a breakdown of allocated, obligated, and disbursed funds for  INCLE, ESF, NADR, and DA accounts; appendix III includes a breakdown  of FMF funding that State has allocated and committed to CBSI.

Since fiscal year 2010, U.S. agencies have provided the most CBSI  funding to the Dominican Republic, Jamaica, and the countries covered  by the Eastern Caribbean embassy. These countries received  approximately 66 percent of total CBSI allocations from fiscal years 2010  through 2018. Approximately 13 percent of total CBSI allocations went to  the Bahamas, Guyana, Suriname, and Trinidad and Tobago, while 21  percent of total CBSI allocations went to regional activities. Table 2  provides a breakdown of allocated funds by country for CBSI activities.

U.S. Government Agencies Support Various Security Activities throughout the Caribbean in Line with the Three CBSI Pillars

State and USAID fund various security activities in partner countries.  State uses INCLE and FMF funds to conduct activities in support of CBSI  goals at all seven embassies, covering all 13 CBSI countries. State uses  several different implementing mechanisms—including contracts,  cooperative agreements, and interagency agreements. According to INL  officials, INL has an average of 10-50 distinct ongoing activities within any  individual country program at any given time, ranging from multi-year,  multi-million dollar embedded advisory programs to one-time  procurements for equipment or individual trainings. USAID uses ESF  funds for activities in three missions—the Dominican Republic, Eastern  and Southern Caribbean, and Jamaica. In general, USAID uses similar  implementing mechanisms, but typically has fewer projects that cover  multiple years.

State primarily focuses on funding CBSI activities that fall within the pillar  of reducing illicit trafficking, and USAID concentrates on funding activities  within the pillar of promoting social justice. Both agencies fund activities in  the pillar of improving public safety and security.

Reducing illicit trafficking. State uses INCLE and FMF funds, through  interagency agreements with DOD and other implementing partners, to  increase Caribbean countries’ control over their territorial maritime  domain and reduce illicit trafficking, such as narcotics and firearms, as the  examples below illustrate.

Eastern Caribbean. INL and PM have provided training and  equipment to the Regional Security System, a collective defense  organization of Eastern Caribbean countries whose responsibilities  include regional law enforcement training and narcotics interdiction.  For example, U.S. assistance funded the refurbishment of aircraft  operated by the Regional Security System to provide equipment for  intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance related to drug  interdiction.

Jamaica. INL and PM have provided boats to the government of  Jamaica to increase the government’s capacity to conduct  counternarcotic operations (see fig. 3).

Throughout the Caribbean. INL supports activities providing training,  technical assistance, policy guidance, and basic equipment to  enhance the capacity of CBSI countries to combat illicit small arms  and ammunition trafficking through operational forensic ballistics.

Throughout the Caribbean. State uses an interagency agreement to  support the Technical Assistance Field Team (TAFT) program. This  program, supported by both FMF and INCLE funds, aims to build  maritime capacity of partner countries throughout the Caribbean. The  team is composed of 15 Coast Guard and DOD engineers,  technicians, specialists, and logisticians, based at U.S. Southern  Command, who assist Caribbean maritime security forces with  maintenance and sustainment issues. The advisors have worked to  implement inventory management systems within CBSI countries and  conduct regular site visits to CBSI countries to assist in the  maintenance and logistics of maritime assets.

Promoting social justice. USAID and its implementing partners— multilateral and nongovernmental organizations, for the most part—use  ESF funds in an effort to increase economic opportunities for at-risk youth  and vulnerable populations, improve community and law enforcement  cooperation, improve the juvenile justice sector, and reduce corruption in  public and private sectors.

Dominican Republic. USAID has provided assistance for community- based activities, such as the Community Justice Houses. These  centers are designed to provide services related to the justice sector,  such as public defense and mediation efforts for populations in areas  of high violence that have limited access to traditional justice  institutions.

Dominican Republic and Barbados. USAID’s implementing partners  work with at-risk youth to provide skills training and education for  those individuals in vulnerable populations.

Jamaica. USAID’s implementing partners work with youth in the  juvenile justice system to provide marketable technical skills, life skills,  and individualized psychosocial attention to assist in their  reintegration into society.

Eastern and Southern Caribbean. USAID partners use a community- based approach to crime prevention to identify the underlying causes  of crime and violence by collecting standardized crime data across the  region.

Increasing public safety and security. State uses INCLE to fund  activities to increase the rule of law and reduce transnational crime.  USAID uses ESF to support public safety and security activities by  funding training and support programs that aim to build institutional  capacity for police and judicial systems.

Jamaica. INL works to enhance the government of Jamaica’s capacity  to disrupt and deter money laundering operations and other financial  crimes by providing technical assistance, equipment and training for  combating money laundering and financial crime, and for the seizure  of criminally-acquired assets.

Eastern Caribbean. INL uses training, technical assistance,  equipment purchases, and operational support to combat financial  crimes and increase asset forfeiture efforts.

Dominican Republic. INL has provided funding for the government’s  creation of a centralized emergency “911” response system to  increase citizen safety and security.

Dominican Republic. Both INL and USAID provide assistance to the  Dominican National Police, and USAID’s implementing partners work  with the judicial sector to improve the skills of prosecutors (see fig. 4).  INL provides assistance to the Dominican National Police through  funding training to increase police professionalization and supports  training on enforcing legislation for prosecutors and judges. USAID  funding works to support the reform and modernization of the  Dominican National Police by strengthening the management capacity  and accountability of the organization. USAID implementing partners  also work with prosecutors to strengthen the criminal justice system in  the Dominican Republic.

State and USAID Undertake Some Planning and Reporting of CBSI Activities but the U.S. Government Cannot Assess Initiative-wide Progress

The United States and Caribbean countries meet periodically to set  strategic goals and to designate high-level priorities for the subsequent  year, and U.S. agencies individually plan and report on CBSI activities on  a country-specific basis through a variety of reporting mechanisms (see  fig. 5). However, State has not created an initiative-wide mechanism for  planning and reporting on CBSI activities and the U.S. government  cannot assess initiative-wide progress.

State and USAID Establish Strategic Goals and Priorities for CBSI with Partner Countries

At the strategic and political level, U.S. government agencies and CBSI  partner countries engage on a periodic basis to set strategic goals and to  designate high-level priorities for the subsequent year. The process  involves various technical working groups meeting throughout the year,  culminating in the Caribbean-United States Security Cooperation  Dialogue meeting, attended by the Caribbean Community, the Dominican  Republic, the United States, and other interested Caribbean states and  international partners. At the 2017 meeting, participants set strategic  goals by reaffirming the initiative’s three pillars of substantially reducing  illicit trafficking, advancing public safety and security, and promoting  social justice. Participants also produced a high-level plan of action that  aimed to strengthen commitment and accountability of the countries  involved and to ensure political support for implementation. Within each  goal, the plan identified high-level priorities such as counternarcotics,  anti-money laundering, border security, justice reform, and anti- corruption.

State and USAID Generally Plan CBSI Activities on a Country- Specific Basis

At the implementation level, State and USAID separately plan and report  their CBSI activities, generally on a country-specific basis. Within State,  INL develops multi-year country plans that are the basis for making  decisions on CBSI activities for each country, according to INL officials.  The plans describe objectives within a country for program areas such as  law enforcement professionalization, rule of law, and counternarcotics,  and include performance indicators related to those program areas. INL  developed a country plan for each of the seven embassies in CBSI from  fiscal years 2017 through 2021. In addition, a portion of INL’s CBSI  funding is devoted to regional activities (i.e., activities that are  implemented in more than one CBSI country), and INL developed the  CBSI Regional Implementation Plan to describe the objectives and  performance indicators for regional activities. The CBSI activities that  are funded through FMF are planned and implemented by DOD in  coordination with PM.

USAID uses its Country Development Cooperation Strategies (CDCS) as  the basis for planning CBSI activities in each country, according to USAID  officials. USAID developed a CDCS for each of the three missions that  have a USAID presence among the CBSI countries—Eastern and  Southern Caribbean, the Dominican Republic, and Jamaica. The  strategies outline priorities for each mission and typically cover 5 years. In  each of the CDCS, USAID outlines three development objectives,  including one that is CBSI-related—on crime prevention and reduction— and two that are not CBSI-related—on climate change and health care.

According to INL and USAID officials, coordination of CBSI activities  between the two agencies primarily occurs at the embassy level through  routine meetings. Officials at embassies in the CBSI countries also  compile bimonthly reporting cables that contain information on selected  CBSI activities. State’s WHA, which plays a coordinating role for CBSI,  holds monthly coordination meetings for INL, PM, and USAID officials in  Washington, D.C. to discuss high-level issues and upcoming events  relevant to the initiative, as well as to prepare for meetings with  Caribbean partners, according to officials.

The U.S. Government Cannot Assess CBSI Initiative-wide Progress Because It Does Not Have an Initiative-wide Planning and Reporting Mechanism

While State and USAID set strategic goals and priorities with CBSI  partner countries and plan for and report on CBSI activities within each  agency or bureau, State has not established a CBSI-wide planning and  reporting mechanism that links agencies’ activities to the three overall  CBSI goals. State and USAID typically use Integrated Country  Strategies (ICS) to strategically plan in a given country, and  Performance Plans and Reports (PPR) to assess progress made relative  to the foreign assistance priorities in a given country. Each of the U.S.  embassies that cover the CBSI countries has both an ICS and PPR.  However, the PPRs for the individual CBSI countries are for bi-lateral  funds, and the ICSs serve as a whole-of-U.S.-government strategy in a  country.

According to State officials, since CBSI is a regional initiative, CBSI  activities are included in the scope of the relevant regional planning and  reporting documents. These regional documents include the WHA Joint  Regional Strategy and the WHA PPR. However, these documents  represent the entire Western Hemisphere and are not specific to CBSI  activities. The Joint Regional Strategy does not serve as a planning  mechanism for CBSI-wide activities and does not establish CBSI specific  targets or performance indicators. Moreover, while the PPR reports  outputs and outcomes, CBSI results are aggregated with other regionally  funded activities in the Western Hemisphere, such as the Central America  Regional Security Initiative. For example, while the PPR may report the  number of judicial personnel trained with U.S. government assistance,  that number may include officials in the Dominican Republic, Jamaica,  Honduras, or any other number of countries within the Western  Hemisphere. Therefore, the most recent WHA PPR does not serve as a  CBSI reporting mechanism as it is not possible to always know which  results are related to CBSI activities, and the CBSI-wide outputs and  outcomes can be indiscernible from other regional efforts.

In 2012, State created the CBSI Results Framework, recognizing the  importance of tracking initiative-wide results. The Framework included the  three CBSI pillars—reducing illicit trafficking, improving public safety and  security, and promoting social justice—and specified intermediate results,  such as reducing drug demand in target areas, improving security at ports  of entry, and improving community and law enforcement cooperation.  Each of the intermediate results included performance indicators for  measuring and reporting CBSI results. According to WHA officials, WHA  had envisioned establishing baseline data, obtaining annual reporting  from each embassy, and reporting on a subset of the indicators.  However, neither State nor USAID currently use the framework to gauge  overall progress of CBSI. State officials that we interviewed were not  aware of the reason for discontinuing use of the framework and stated  that the decision to discontinue using it pre-dated their tenure. According  to State officials and our assessment of program documentation, State  does not currently use the framework in any official capacity. While  USAID officials stated that they continue to use the framework as internal  guidance on CBSI’s direction, they stated that they do not use it to track  progress.

The delivery of U.S. foreign assistance often involves multiple agencies or  a whole-of-government approach. We have previously identified key  elements for effectively aligning foreign assistance strategies in situations  where multiple agencies are working together to deliver foreign  assistance, such as CBSI. These elements include, among others, the  establishment of interagency coordination mechanisms, integration of  strategies with relevant higher- or lower-level strategies, and assessment  of progress toward strategic goals through the articulation of desired  results, activities to achieve the results, performance indicators, and  monitoring and evaluation plans and reports. We found that agencies that  establish strategies aligned with partner agencies’ activities, processes,  and resources are better positioned to accomplish common goals,  objectives, and outcomes. For foreign assistance that involves multiple  agencies, strategies that consistently address agencies’ roles and  responsibilities and interagency coordination mechanisms can help guide  implementation and reduce potential program fragmentation.

The absence of a functioning CBSI-wide planning and reporting  mechanism leaves open the possibility that State’s and USAID’s existing  planning efforts may be inadequate in ensuring that activities are  effectively coordinated to reduce fragmentation or overlap. In 2016,  USAID contracted for an independent assessment of all of its CBSI  activities. Since USAID implements CBSI in conjunction with other U.S.  agencies, such as State, one of the objectives within the assessment was  to determine the degree to which USAID’s activities were complementary  with those of other U.S. agencies and whether there were instances of  overlap. The assessment noted that coordination and information  exchange between the agencies about individual CBSI activities and their  components appeared to be relatively ad hoc and was primarily seen as  the mandate of staff in the field, though at that level, information sharing  and coordination had been widely variable. It noted that in general, the  level and type of communication between USAID and INL tended to be  influenced by personalities, and information was not shared  systematically. The assessment concluded that there was a potential for  overlap between USAID and INL and recommended that USAID and INL  take several actions to strengthen information sharing and coordinate and  align activities. This coordination is important since overlap or unintended  competition between INL’s and USAID’s CBSI activities has been  documented on at least one occasion. According to the fiscal year 2017  annual report submitted by an implementing partner for one of USAID’s  activities in the Dominican Republic, the partner was directed to suspend  several of its activities related to training to strengthen standards for  criminal case preparation and training for police and prosecutors,  reportedly because State realigned the task to INL. The report cited poor  delineation of roles and relationships as an underlying cause.

While State and USAID set strategic goals and plan and report on CBSI  activities in individual countries, the U.S. government does not have a  functioning initiative-wide planning and reporting mechanism that links  CBSI activities to overall goals or specifies a means for assessing  initiative-wide progress through articulation of desired results,  performance indicators, and a monitoring and evaluation plan. Without  such a mechanism that establishes consistent performance indicators  across agencies, countries, and activities and determines baselines and  targets, it is difficult to measure CBSI’s activities across the initiative,  making it difficult to assess any progress made toward achieving CBSI’s  overall goals. Consequently, the U.S. government has limited ability to  evaluate CBSI’s successes and limitations and use such information to  better guide future decision-making.

State and USAID Established Objectives and Performance Indicators and INL Is Taking Steps to Improve Weaknesses in Program Monitoring

USAID and implementing partners have established objectives and  performance indicators for selected CBSI activities that we reviewed and  have been measuring and reporting on progress for those activities.  Within State, INL and implementing partners have established objectives  and performance indicators for all of the activities that we reviewed, and  INL and PM receive quarterly monitoring reports containing performance  information on the TAFT program. In response to identified weaknesses  in its program monitoring, INL is taking steps to improve program  monitoring for its Western Hemisphere programs, which include CBSI  activities.

State and USAID Established Objectives and Performance Indicators for Selected CBSI Activities

State and USAID policies related to program management—found in the  FAM and ADS, respectively—require the establishment of objectives and  performance indicators for program monitoring. We found that USAID  and its implementing partners established objectives and performance  indicators for all 10 of the CBSI activities in our sample and use these  indicators to measure activity progress. Table 3 includes examples of  the types of indicators established for USAID activities in our sample.

In addition to establishing performance indicators, USAID and its  implementing partners are using these indicators to measure the progress  of CBSI activities. We found that implementing partners for nearly all of  the activities in our sample had submitted progress reports to USAID that  used the performance indicators to measure progress and identify  challenges in achieving the activities’ goals.

State and its implementing partners also established objectives and  performance indicators for all 15 of the CBSI activities that we reviewed.  See table 4 for examples of the types of indicators established for INL  activities in our sample.

INL Cannot Ensure the Reliability of Its Program Monitoring Data but Is Taking Steps to Address Weaknesses in Western Hemisphere Program Monitoring

INL cannot ensure the reliability of its CBSI program monitoring data but  is taking steps to improve its ability to consistently collect and store such  data for its activities in the Western Hemisphere, including CBSI activities.  We have previously reported that effective program monitoring of foreign  assistance requires quality data for performance reporting. Specifically,  leading practices for monitoring of foreign assistance activities include  development of objectives and relevant performance indicators,  procedures for assuring quality of data on performance indicators, and  submission of performance reports.

According to INL officials, in the absence of a centrally available data  management system, program monitoring data is collected and  maintained at each embassy. As a result, compiling and providing  program monitoring data is time-consuming. For example, when we  requested a list of all completed and ongoing INL-funded CBSI activities  from fiscal years 2012 through 2017, INL responded that it would take  several months to compile that information.

Further, INL officials told us that they cannot ensure the reliability of their  program monitoring data because of questions about the comparability of  data collected across embassies. During the course of our work, INL  officials at headquarters and overseas told us that program monitoring is  conducted differently in every embassy, and program monitoring data is  not defined or recorded in a standardized manner. These variations can  result in discrepancies in how program performance data is defined and  collected. For example, INL officials explained that in order to collect drug  seizure information that can be analyzed across countries, the data needs  to be collected in the same units of measurement and over the same time  period in each country, but currently, they are not. According to INL,  absent a standardized data collection process, it is difficult to track data  trends across programs.

INL has expressed concerns about its program monitoring and an inability  to centrally collect reliable program monitoring data. In 2015, an  independent evaluation of INL’s CBSI activities noted that lack of  monitoring information hinders INL’s efforts to link assistance directly to  goals, objectives, and results laid out in the CBSI Results Framework. It  recommended that INL prioritize improving internal program monitoring  capacity. INL’s Functional Bureau Strategy, released in 2018, states that  INL’s program monitoring efforts are often constrained by the availability  of reliable data.

In response to these concerns about program monitoring, the INL office  for Western Hemisphere Programs contracted with a private firm in 2017  to improve its program monitoring capabilities by creating new  performance indicators meant to standardize data collection across INL’s  programs in the Western Hemisphere and better capture the impact of  INL’s assistance. The contract also included the creation of a centralized  data management system for collecting and storing the program  monitoring data associated with the performance indicators.

According to INL officials and progress reports submitted by the  contractor, some progress has been made. To date, the contractors have  been studying the availability of data, reviewing existing performance  indicators, and proposing new indicators. The contractors have been  considering options for designing and building the centralized data  management system. However, INL officials acknowledge that data  challenges remain, such as the issue of how to collect standardized data  from each of the embassies and how to build a functioning data  management system that is compatible with State requirements. As of  October 2018, according to INL officials, the characteristics of the  centralized data management system had not yet been determined, and  consequently, they are uncertain what capabilities the final data  management system will have. Therefore, it is unclear whether the  system will allow for the consistent collection and storage of reliable  program monitoring data for all CBSI activities and the ability to  distinguish these data from those of other Western Hemisphere activities.  In the absence of centrally-available, reliable data for CBSI activities, INL  may continue to struggle with effective program monitoring for these  activities.

The Caribbean region faces a variety of economic and security  challenges that jeopardize the region’s economic growth and  development. Because of close societal ties and geographic proximity,  these challenges also threaten U.S. security. CBSI was created to  respond to these threats—to provide mutually beneficial assistance that  would increase citizen security for residents of the Caribbean region and  bolster economic opportunities. However, while U.S. agencies have  allocated more than $560 million to CBSI since 2010, they cannot attest  to the initiative’s success or failure. State’s WHA, which plays the  coordinating role for CBSI, has not established an initiative-wide planning  and reporting mechanism that ensures CBSI activities are being  coordinated to maximize the impact of assistance and prevent overlap,  and that provides a means for assessing overall progress. Without such a  mechanism, the ability to demonstrate the efficacy of the initiative, and to  emphasize positive results that have been achieved, is limited.

Although USAID and State have established objectives and performance  indicators for the CBSI activities we reviewed, State does not have a  process for centrally collecting and storing reliable program monitoring  data for the activities it funds through CBSI, particularly those managed  by INL. While INL is taking steps to address these challenges by  improving program monitoring across its activities in the western  hemisphere, without reliable performance data specific to CBSI, State  cannot report comprehensively or accurately on its CBSI activities or track  data trends across countries.

We are making the following two recommendations to State:  The Secretary of State should, in consultation with USAID and other  stakeholders as appropriate, create an initiative-wide planning and  reporting mechanism for CBSI that includes the ability to monitor,  evaluate, and report the results of their collaborative efforts  (Recommendation 1).

The Secretary of State should ensure that INL’s Office of Western  Hemisphere Programs develops and implements a data management  system for centrally collecting reliable program monitoring data for all INL- funded CBSI activities through its current program monitoring contract or  by some other means (Recommendation 2).

We provided a draft of this report to State and USAID, DOD, the  Department of Justice, and the Department of Homeland Security for  review and comment. In its comments, reproduced in appendix IV, State  concurred with our two recommendations. State noted that it plans to  develop an updated Results Framework for CBSI that will provide the  basis for initiative-wide planning and reporting. State also noted that INL’s  Office of Western Hemisphere Programs is working through its existing  monitoring and evaluation contract to improve centralized data collection  and is developing plans for an enhanced data management system that  will facilitate the collection and management of both strategic and  implementer-reported data. In addition, State reported that INL is  developing complementary bureau-wide monitoring and evaluation  guidance and procedures to ensure the consistency and reliability of  collected data across INL programs, which include CBSI activities. USAID  also provided written comments, which we have reproduced in appendix  V. State, USAID, DOD, and the Department of Homeland Security  provided technical comments, which we have incorporated as  appropriate. The Department of Justice reviewed the report but did not  provide comments.

We are sending copies of this report to the appropriate congressional  committees, the Secretary of State, the Administrator of USAID, and other  interested parties. In addition, the report is available at no charge on the  GAO website at http://www.gao.gov.

If you or your staffs have any questions about this report, please contact  me at (202) 512-7141 or groverj@gao.gov. Contact points for our Offices  of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last  page of this report. GAO staff who made key contributions to this report  are listed in appendix VI.

Appendix I: Objectives, Scope and Methodology

We were asked to review security assistance to the Caribbean region  provided through the Caribbean Basin Security Initiative (CBSI). In this  report we (1) provide information on U.S. funding for CBSI activities, (2)  examine the extent to which the U.S. Department of State (State) and  U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), in conjunction with  other agencies, have implemented a planning and reporting process for  CBSI, and (3) examine the extent to which State and USAID have  established objectives and performance indicators to measure the  progress of their CBSI activities.

To provide information on U.S. funding for CBSI, we obtained State and  USAID data for fiscal years 2010 through 2018. We analyzed these data  to determine allocations, unobligated balances, unliquidated obligations,  and disbursements by fiscal year, funding account, and country. We  compared the data to those previously reported to identify  inconsistencies, and interviewed State and USAID officials. We  determined these data were sufficiently reliable for reporting allocations,  unobligated balances, unliquidated obligations, and disbursements by  fiscal year, funding account, and country. To obtain additional detail on  the types of assistance provided by the United States, we reviewed  activity documentation; interviewed State and USAID officials in  Washington, D.C. and traveled to Barbados, the Dominican Republic, and  Jamaica to meet with State, USAID, and implementing partner officials.  We also observed CBSI activities in these countries. We selected these  countries for fieldwork because they were among the countries receiving  the largest amount of CBSI funding and the embassies there included  CBSI program officials from State and USAID. The findings from these  countries are not generalizable to all CBSI countries.

To determine the extent to which State and USAID have implemented a  planning and reporting mechanism for CBSI, we obtained relevant CBSI  planning and reporting documents, including State Bureau of International  Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs (INL) country and regional  implementation plans and documents related to the Caribbean-U.S.  Security Cooperation Dialogue; and strategy documents such as  Integrated Country Strategies, Country Development Cooperation Strategies, and Functional Bureau Strategies. We also assessed relevant  Performance Plans and Reports for Caribbean countries and the Western  Hemisphere and interviewed State officials to determine how information  on CBSI activities is aggregated and reported on a country level and  initiative-wide basis. In addition, we interviewed relevant State and USAID  officials in Washington, D.C. and in Barbados, the Dominican Republic,  and Jamaica, about their planning processes for CBSI activities. We  compared the planning and reporting procedures in place to the key  elements for effectively aligning foreign assistance strategies in situations  where multiple agencies work together to deliver foreign assistance.

To determine the extent to which State and USAID have established  objectives and performance indicators to measure the progress of CBSI  activities, we selected three case study countries—Barbados, the  Dominican Republic, and Jamaica. We selected these three countries  because they receive the greatest amount of CBSI funding and because  they have program officials from State and USAID in their embassies. We  requested lists of all ongoing and completed CBSI activities from State  and USAID for fiscal years 2012 through 2017 and used the lists to select  a non-generalizable sample of activities, 15 implemented by State and 10  by USAID. The activities were chosen to provide a range of  implementing partners, types of activity, and location. We requested State  and USAID documentation related to the activities in our sample,  including applications for funding, contracts, agreements, program  monitoring and progress reports, financial reports, and evaluations. We  reviewed the documentation to assess the performance management  practices in place for these activities, as well as country-level and  regional-level reporting related to the activities—specifically focusing on  the use of program objectives and performance indicators, which are used to set and measure progress toward program goals. The objectives  and performance indicators in place for these activities do not represent  those in place for all CBSI activities, but offer illustrative examples. We  compared the performance management practices in place for the  sample activities to State and USAID policies. For the Technical  Assistance Field Team (TAFT) program implemented by the Department  of Defense (DOD) and the U.S. Coast Guard on behalf of State’s Bureau  of Political-Military Affairs, we reviewed quarterly reports between fiscal  years 2014 and 2018 for performance management information. The  TAFT program is designed to provide technical assistance to enhance  operational readiness and maintenance of equipment used by CBSI  countries. The quarterly reports include articulation of objectives,  descriptive information on the support TAFT members provided during  each visit, assessments of host country capabilities, and details on where,  when, and how funds were expended. While this information is not  reported in the same manner as State’s and USAID’s performance data,  we determined it appropriate to treat the information provided in the TAFT  quarterly reports as comparable to the setting of objectives and  performance indicators as generally carried out by State and USAID. We  also interviewed State, USAID, DOD, the Department of Justice, the  Department of Homeland Security, and other implementing partner  officials in Washington, D.C.; Barbados; the Dominican Republic; and  Jamaica; and conducted site visits in these countries to determine the  types of performance indicators tracked and reported on for each activity.

To demonstrate how funding for Caribbean Basin Security Initiative  (CBSI) activities have been allocated, obligated and disbursed, we are  providing a status of CBSI funds as of November 2018. Tables 5-9 below  show CBSI funding from the International Narcotics Control and Law  Enforcement (INCLE); Economic Support Fund (ESF); Nonproliferation,  Anti-terrorism, Demining, and Related Programs (NADR); and  Development Assistance (DA) accounts. These tables illustrate, by year  of appropriation, how U.S agencies have allocated, obligated, and  disbursed funds for activities in CBSI partner countries. Specifically, the  tables include unobligated balances—that is, portions of allocated funds  that have not yet been obligated—and unliquidated obligations (i.e.  obligated balances)—that is, amounts already incurred for which payment  has not yet been made.

Appendix III: Status of Caribbean Basin Security Initiative Foreign Military Financing Account Funds

Table 10 below provides the status of Caribbean Basin Security Initiative  (CBSI) Foreign Military Financing (FMF) funds as of November 2018. The  presentation of FMF allocations and commitments in this table is different  from presentations on allocations, obligations, and disbursements of the  other CBSI accounts in tables 5-9 in appendix II because FMF funds are  budgeted and tracked in a different way.

The Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) and the Defense  Financing and Accounting Service (DFAS) are responsible for the  financial systems that account for FMF funds as well as for tracking the  implementation and expenditure of those funds. According to DSCA  officials, FMF funds are obligated on apportionment. Further, DSCA’s  system can track only uncommitted and committed amounts, not  unliquidated obligations or disbursements, of FMF funds. DFAS tracks  obligations and disbursements using the Defense Integrated Finance  System; however, there is no direct link between the DSCA and DFAS  systems and the DFAS system does not track funding for specific  initiatives, such as CBSI.

Appendix IV: Comments from the Department of State

Appendix V: Comments from the U.S. Agency for International Development

Appendix VI: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments

In addition to the contact named above, Thomas Costa (Assistant  Director), Jennifer Young, Martin Wilson, Peter Choi, Debbie Chung,  Benjamin Licht, Martin de Alteriis, Neil Doherty, and Mark Dowling made  key contributions to this report.

The U.S. government and Caribbean countries formally launched the Caribbean Basin Security Initiative in 2010 to try to reduce drug trafficking, increase public safety, and promote social justice in the region. U.S. agencies allocated more than $560 million from 2010 through 2018 for this collaborative effort with 13 nations.

The State Department doesn’t know. We found that while U.S. agencies plan and report on their activities with specific countries, the State Department hasn’t established a way to assess overall progress.

We recommended that State improve its ability to monitor, evaluate, and report on the Initiative.