December 3, 2021

News

News Network

International Military Education and Training: Agencies Should Emphasize Human Rights Training and Improve Evaluations

23 min read
<div>Since 1976, the International Military Education and Training (IMET) program has provided education and training to foreign military personnel. The program's objectives include professionalizing military forces and increasing respect for democratic values and human rights. In 2010, Congress appropriated $108 million in IMET funding for more than 120 countries. The Department of State (State) and the Department of Defense (DOD) share responsibility for IMET. In response to a mandate in the conference report accompanying the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2010, this report assesses (1) changes in the program from fiscal years 2000 to 2010, by funding levels, students trained, and recipient countries; (2) the program's provision of and emphasis on human rights training for its students; and (3) the extent to which State and DOD monitor IMET graduates and evaluate program effectiveness. GAO reviewed and analyzed agency funding, planning, and performance management documents, and interviewed U.S. officials in Washington, D.C., and overseas.Although IMET funding has increased by more than 70 percent since fiscal year 2000, the number of students trained has decreased by nearly 14 percent. Over the last 10 years, countries in the Europe and Eurasia region have continued to receive the largest portion of IMET funding, receiving $30 million in 2010. However, all regions have received increased IMET funding since fiscal year 2000, with the levels of funding to the Near East and South and Central Asia regions more than doubling from fiscal year 2000 to fiscal year 2010. Professional military education represents the largest single use of IMET funds-- nearly 50 percent in fiscal year 2010. Other major types of training funded by IMET include English language training and technical training, which represented 13 and 11 percent, respectively, of fiscal year 2010 IMET program costs. Training to build respect for internationally recognized human rights standards is provided to IMET students through various in-class and field-based courses, but human rights training was generally not identified as a priority in the IMET country training plans GAO reviewed. IMET students primarily receive human rights training through human rights courses that focus on promoting democratic values, and through a voluntary program that sends them on visits to democratically oriented institutions. However, human rights and related concepts were identified as key objectives in only 11 of the 29 country training plans GAO reviewed for IMET participant countries that received low rankings for political and civil freedoms by Freedom House, an independent nongovernmental organization. State and DOD's ability to assess IMET's effectiveness is limited by several weaknesses in program monitoring and evaluation. First, State and DOD have not established a performance plan for IMET that explains how the program is expected to achieve its goals and how progress can be assessed through performance measures and targets. Second, State and DOD have limited information on most IMET graduates, due to weaknesses in efforts to monitor these graduates' careers after training. DOD has collected updated career information on only 1 percent of IMET graduates. Training managers identified limited resources and lack of host country cooperation as among the key challenges to monitoring IMET graduates. Third, the agencies' current evaluation efforts include few of the evaluation elements commonly accepted as appropriate for measuring progress of training programs, and do not objectively measure how IMET contributes to long-term, desired program outcomes. The agencies could incorporate existing evaluation practices, including those of other State and DOD entities, or suggestions from training managers overseas to improve IMET monitoring and evaluation efforts. IMET training managers have offered suggestions for improving monitoring efforts, such as by clarifying DOD's monitoring guidance and strengthening DOD's IMET data systems. Training managers also offered ideas to improve program evaluations, such as surveying U.S. military groups to assess participant nations' proficiency in key areas, assessing career progress of IMET graduates against non-IMET graduates in specific countries, and testing students before and after training to measure changes in knowledge or attitudes. GAO recommends that the Secretaries of State and Defense (1) ensure human rights training is a priority in IMET recipient countries with known human rights concerns, and (2) take initial steps to begin developing a system to evaluate the effectiveness of the IMET program, including adopting existing evaluation practices used by other State and DOD agencies and soliciting IMET training managers for suggestions on improving monitoring and evaluation efforts. State and DOD both concurred with our recommendations.</div>
Department of Defense The Secretaries of State and Defense should take several steps to emphasize human rights training and improve evaluations for the IMET program. Specifically, the Secretaries of State and Defense should take steps to ensure that human rights training is identified as a priority for those IMET recipient countries with known records of human rights concerns. These steps may include highlighting human rights and related concepts in country training plans.

Closed – Implemented

In their agency comments on this recommendation, the Departments of Defense (DOD) and State (State) stated that they concurred with our recommendation. In a January 2013 memo, DOD said that, in direct response to the GAO recommendations, DOD and State added a series of questions to the annual Combined Education and Training Programs Plan to emphasize human rights training; these plans are completed each year by security cooperation training officers for IMET recipient countries. The additional questions address whether specific countries have received poor marks on human rights from internationally recognized organizations, such as Freedom House, and, if yes, to what degree the military is part of the rationale for the poor marks. There is also a question on how IMET training for countries that receive poor marks can address human rights. In taking these actions, State and DOD have addressed our recommendation. In addition, State reported that, in fiscal year 2012, Security Cooperation Officers at post that execute IMET began collecting responses to these questions regarding human rights and providing them to State. State noted that it expected to collect additional responses, after which it plans to analyze them to develop a list of countries where additional human rights training may be warranted.

Department of State The Secretaries of State and Defense should take several steps to emphasize human rights training and improve evaluations for the IMET program. Specifically, the Secretaries of State and Defense should take steps to ensure that human rights training is identified as a priority for those IMET recipient countries with known records of human rights concerns. These steps may include highlighting human rights and related concepts in country training plans.

Closed – Implemented

In their agency comments on this recommendation, the Departments of Defense (DOD) and State (State) stated that they concurred with our recommendation. In a January 2013 memo, DOD said that, in direct response to the GAO recommendations, DOD and State added a series of questions to the annual Combined Education and Training Programs Plan to emphasize human rights training; these plans are completed each year by security cooperation training officers for IMET recipient countries. The additional questions address whether specific countries have received poor marks on human rights from internationally recognized organizations, such as Freedom House, and, if yes, to what degree the military is part of the rationale for the poor marks. There is also a question on how IMET training for countries that receive poor marks can address human rights. In taking these actions, State and DOD have addressed our recommendation. In addition, State reported that, in fiscal year 2012, Security Cooperation Officers at post that execute IMET began collecting responses to these questions regarding human rights and providing them to State. State noted that it expected to collect additional responses, after which it plans to analyze them to develop a list of countries where additional human rights training may be warranted.

Department of Defense The Secretaries of State and Defense should take several steps to emphasize human rights training and improve evaluations for the IMET program. Specifically, the Secretaries of State and Defense should take initial steps toward developing a system for evaluating the effectiveness of the IMET program. These steps should build on current efforts toward a more systematic collection of performance information–at multiple points in time, over several years, and for a set of objective performance measures–and should include: (1) adopting existing evaluation practices used by other State and DOD agencies, such as periodically surveying program participants to assess changes in knowledge or attitudes, and (2) soliciting ideas from training managers and applying their suggestions on improving program monitoring practices and evaluations, including for the development of objective performance measures that could assess program impact over time.

Closed – Implemented

In their agency comments on this recommendation, DOD and State stated that they concurred with our recommendation. In response, DOD and State have taken steps to more systematically collect performance information and monitor IMET graduates. In a January 2013 memo, DOD noted that, in direct response to the GAO recommendations, DOD and State developed a series of questions that were added to the Combined Education and Training Programs Plan that is required each year for IMET recipient countries. These included questions on whether countries’ track their IMET graduates, and if IMET students are placed in follow on positions that allow them to use the skills gained through their IMET courses. DOD also told us that, in response to the GAO recommendation, it expanded a database to enable security cooperation training officers to collect information on all IMET graduates’ career progression. Previously, these officers had tracked information on only the small percentage of IMET graduates who had attained a position of prominence within their host country military or civilian government. According to DOD, this effort will provide DOD and State with a more systematic collection of program performance information over time. In addition, DOD and State are undertaking an ongoing multi-year study of IMET graduates. This study intends to assess graduates’ understanding of key IMET objectives including human rights, civilian control of the military, and democracy in the United States.

Department of State The Secretaries of State and Defense should take several steps to emphasize human rights training and improve evaluations for the IMET program. Specifically, the Secretaries of State and Defense should take initial steps toward developing a system for evaluating the effectiveness of the IMET program. These steps should build on current efforts toward a more systematic collection of performance information–at multiple points in time, over several years, and for a set of objective performance measures–and should include: (1) adopting existing evaluation practices used by other State and DOD agencies, such as periodically surveying program participants to assess changes in knowledge or attitudes, and (2) soliciting ideas from training managers and applying their suggestions on improving program monitoring practices and evaluations, including for the development of objective performance measures that could assess program impact over time.

Closed – Implemented

In their agency comments on this recommendation, DOD and State stated that they concurred with our recommendation. In response, DOD and State have taken steps to more systematically collect performance information and monitor IMET graduates. In a January 2013 memo, DOD noted that, in direct response to the GAO recommendations, DOD and State developed a series of questions that were added to the Combined Education and Training Programs Plan that is required each year for IMET recipient countries. These included questions on whether countries’ track their IMET graduates, and if IMET students are placed in follow on positions that allow them to use the skills gained through their IMET courses. DOD also told us that, in response to the GAO recommendation, it expanded a database to enable security cooperation training officers to collect information on all IMET graduates’ career progression. Previously, these officers had tracked information on only the small percentage of IMET graduates who had attained a position of prominence within their host country military or civilian government. According to DOD, this effort will provide DOD and State with a more systematic collection of program performance information over time. In addition, DOD and State are undertaking an ongoing multi-year study of IMET graduates. This study intends to assess graduates’ understanding of key IMET objectives including human rights, civilian control of the military, and democracy in the United States.

More from:

News Network

  • Former Army Green Beret Sentenced for Russian Espionage Conspiracy
    In Crime News
    A Virginia man and former Army Green Beret was sentenced today to XX years in prison for conspiring with Russian intelligence operatives to provide them with U.S. national defense information.
    [Read More…]
  • July 29, 2021, letter commenting on AICPA’s February 2021 Exposure Draft, “Proposed Statements on Quality Management Standards – Quality Management”
    In U.S GAO News
    This letter provides GAO's response to the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) Auditing Standards Board's (ASB) Proposed Statement on Quality Management Standards – Quality Management: A Firm's System of Quality Management (SQMS No. 1); Proposed Statement on Quality Management Standards – Engagement Quality Reviews (SQMS No. 2); and Proposed Statement on Auditing Standards, Quality Management for an Engagement Conducted in Accordance with Generally Accepted Auditing Standards (QM SAS). GAO provides standards for performing high-quality audits of government organizations, programs, activities, and functions and of government assistance to contractors, nonprofit organizations, and other nongovernment organizations with competence, integrity, objectivity, and independence. These standards, often referred to as generally accepted government auditing standards (GAGAS), are to be followed when required by law, regulation, agreement, contract, or policy. For financial audits, GAGAS incorporates by reference the AICPA's Statements on Auditing Standards (SAS). For attestation engagements, GAGAS incorporates by reference the AICPA's Statements on Standards for Attestation Engagements.
    [Read More…]
  • Member of White Supremacist Gang Pleads Guilty to Violent Assault and Conspiracy to Sell Firearms
    In Crime News
    A member of the Aryan Circle (AC) pleaded guilty Thursday to his role in an October 2016 violent assault, as well as conspiring to sell firearms to a convicted felon. Another individual pleaded guilty on April 19, to conspiring with members of the AC to sell methamphetamine.
    [Read More…]
  • Twenty-Two Charged in Connection with a More than $11-Million Paycheck Protection Program Fraud Scheme
    In Crime News
    Seventeen more individuals have been charged in connection with a fraudulent scheme to obtain approximately $11.1 million in Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) loans and to use those funds to purchase luxury vehicles, jewelry and other personal items.
    [Read More…]
  • South Texan handed significant sentence for trafficking cocaine
    In Justice News
    A 46-year-old Alton man [Read More…]
  • Department of Energy: Improvements Needed to Strengthen Strategic Planning for the Acquisition Workforce
    In U.S GAO News
    What GAO Found The Department of Energy (DOE) is one of the largest civilian contracting agencies in the federal government, with about 80 percent of its annual obligations for contracts. Staff in most federal positions in DOE are involved in the acquisition process, according to officials from offices included in GAO's review—the Office of Science, the Office of Environmental Management (EM), and the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA). Some of these staff, such as contracting officers, hold federal or DOE acquisition certifications. DOE generally requires acquisition-related training only for certified staff—which represent about 15 percent of DOE's workforce (see figure)—and maintains training requirements for only these staff through the agency's Acquisition Career Management Program. Numbers of DOE Staff with Acquisition Certifications, as of March 2021 DOE generally does not require acquisition-related training for noncertified staff, many of whom may play a critical role in DOE's acquisition process. Office of Federal Procurement Policy guidance states that agencies should consider the functions performed by staff members, such as requirements development by a technical expert, and include any significant acquisition-related positions in their acquisition training programs. By reviewing the criteria for inclusion in its Acquisition Career Management Program and developing training requirements for noncertified staff that meet these criteria, DOE can better ensure it has the capacity to oversee its contracts. The three DOE offices included in GAO's review have each implemented two of the five leading practices for effective strategic planning for their acquisition workforces, and have partially implemented the remaining three practices. For example, these offices have taken some steps to identify workforce need, but have not fully identified skill and competency gaps—including types and numbers of positions required to close gaps—for their acquisition workforces, as recommended by leading practices. Further, senior DOE and NNSA officials have raised concerns that they do not have enough staff or staff with the right skills in the acquisition workforce to properly oversee contracts. However, NNSA has conducted limited evaluations of gaps in skills and competencies for some positions in its acquisition workforce, and the other offices in GAO's review have not conducted such analyses. With a more complete and thorough understanding of skill and competency gaps for its acquisition workforce, DOE can improve the information it has available to develop its budget and other strategies to build a workforce with the right skills and of the right size to address the agency's long-standing issues with contract management. Why GAO Did This Study DOE's federal acquisition workforce is responsible for managing risks throughout the contracting, or acquisition, process. GAO designated DOE contract and project management as a high-risk area because of DOE's record of inadequate contract management. Senate Report No. 116-48 accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 includes a provision for GAO to review issues affecting DOE's acquisition workforce. This report examines (1) the positions included in DOE's acquisition workforce and the extent to which this workforce receives acquisition-related training and (2) the extent to which DOE has implemented leading practices for effective strategic planning for its acquisition workforce. GAO's review included the Office of Science, EM, and NNSA, which represented over 75 percent of DOE obligations for contracts in fiscal year 2019. GAO reviewed regulations, policies, and workforce planning documents; interviewed officials; and compared information to leading practices on workforce planning.
    [Read More…]
  • Monaco National Day
    In Crime Control and Security News
    Antony J. Blinken, [Read More…]
  • Justice Department Warns About Fake Unemployment Benefit Websites
    In Crime News
    The Department of Justice has received reports that fraudsters are creating websites mimicking unemployment benefit websites, including state workforce agency (SWA) websites, for the purpose of unlawfully capturing consumers’ personal information.
    [Read More…]
  • Former Rapides Parish Correctional Officer Sentenced for Violating the Civil Rights of Three Inmates
    In Crime News
    A former correctional officer with the Rapides Parish Sheriff’s Office (RPSO), Detention Center 1, in Alexandria, Louisiana, was sentenced today in federal court for violating the civil rights of three inmates in his custody.
    [Read More…]
  • Mauritania’s National Day 
    In Crime Control and Security News
    Antony J. Blinken, [Read More…]
  • Special Envoy for the Horn of Africa Feltman to Speak on Ethiopia
    In Crime Control and Security News
    Office of the [Read More…]
  • Release and Departure of U.S. Citizen Vitali Shkliarov from Belarus
    In Crime Control and Security News
    Michael R. Pompeo, [Read More…]
  • Montserrat Travel Advisory
    In Travel
    Reconsider travel to [Read More…]
  • Secretary Blinken’s Travel to Latvia and Sweden
    In Crime Control and Security News
    Ned Price, Department [Read More…]
  • Ohio Man Charged with Hate Crime Related to Plot to Conduct Mass Shooting of Women, Illegal Possession of Machine Gun
    In Crime News
    A federal grand jury has charged a self-identified “incel” with attempting to conduct a mass shooting of women and with illegally possessing a machine gun.
    [Read More…]
  • Northern Triangle of Central America: The 2019 Suspension and Reprogramming of U.S. Funding Adversely Affected Assistance Projects
    In U.S GAO News
    What GAO Found Starting in March 2019, the Trump administration suspended most new foreign assistance funding from the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and the Department of State to El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras—the “Northern Triangle” of Central America—for up to 14 months and reprogrammed approximately $396 million (85 percent) of fiscal year 2018 funding to other countries. In June 2020, the administration ended the suspension of assistance funding. After the end of the suspension, USAID adjusted its assistance portfolio to implement projects that focused on deterring migration and designed new indicators to assess the relationship between its assistance projects and migration from the region. Officials from State and USAID said their overall assistance approach of promoting prosperity, good governance, and security remained the same after the suspension. Although some previously funded projects continued operating as planned, the 2019 suspension and reprogramming of assistance funding adversely affected 92 of USAID's 114 projects and 65 of State's 168 projects. Both USAID and State reported that commonly experienced adverse effects on project implementation were delays from planned timeframes and decreased frequency, quality, or types of services provided to beneficiaries (see figure). USAID and State/INL Northern Triangle Projects Reporting One or More Adverse Effects Due to the 2019 Suspension and Reprogramming of Assistance Funding USAID and State reported missing some of their performance targets due to the 2019 suspension and reprogramming of assistance funding. For example, USAID reported missing 19 percent (35 of 182) of its targets in fiscal year 2019, while State reported missing 30 percent (three of 10). Why GAO Did This Study The U.S. has funded assistance to the Northern Triangle of Central America for many years. This assistance aims to promote prosperity, good governance, and security in the region; to address the causes of migration; and to combat transnational crime. In March 2019, the administration suspended foreign assistance funding from the Northern Triangle countries until the governments in the region agreed to take actions to reduce the number of migrants coming to the U.S. border. GAO was asked to review the effects of the 2019 suspension and reprogramming of assistance funding to the Northern Triangle. This report (1) identifies the funding appropriated by Congress for the Northern Triangle that was suspended and reprogrammed to other countries, and how the approach to U.S. assistance to the region changed after March 2019; (2) examines the effects of suspending and reprogramming assistance funding on project implementation; and (3) examines the extent to which the suspension and reprogramming of assistance funding affected the ability of U.S. agencies to meet their foreign assistance performance targets for the region. GAO analyzed agency funding data and performance and monitoring reports, surveyed agency project managers, and interviewed agency officials as well as selected implementing partners in the U.S. and in the Northern Triangle countries. For more information, contact Chelsa Kenney at (202) 512-2964 or kenneyc@gao.gov.
    [Read More…]
  • Additions of Cuban Military-Owned Companies to the Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons List
    In Crime Control and Security News
    Michael R. Pompeo, [Read More…]
  • NASA’s Perseverance Rover Goes Through Trials by Fire, Ice, Light and Sound
    In Space
    The agency’s new [Read More…]
  • VA Disability Benefits: Process for Identifying Conditions Presumed to be Service Connected and Challenges in Processing Complex Gulf War Illness Claims
    In U.S GAO News
    GAO has reported on the Department of Veterans Affairs' (VA) use of research to identify and add new illnesses to its list of presumptive conditions for both Gulf War Illness and Agent Orange—a tactical herbicide used extensively during the Vietnam Era. VA entered into agreements with the National Academy of Sciences to assess the link between certain exposures and illnesses experienced by veterans, and uses the Academy's findings to inform its lists of presumptive conditions. GAO also reported in 2017 that VA did not have a single set of uniform criteria to define Gulf War Illness (a case definition) that could improve research, clinical diagnosis, and treatment of Gulf War veterans. GAO recommended that VA prepare and document a plan to develop a single case definition. In response, VA convened a group of subject matter experts from VA and the Department of Defense to create a multi-step plan to develop a case definition. According to VA, it is in the final stages of the plan and will bring together experts in 2021 to review new research and work toward delineating a definition. Further, according to VA, the department continues to support research on conditions related to Gulf War service as well as Agent Orange exposure and will use the findings to consider future presumptive conditions. In 2017, GAO reported on challenges that VA faced in processing complex, presumptive disability claims for veterans who served in the Gulf War—claims that were being denied at higher rates than other disability claims. At the time of GAO's review, VA officials stated that Gulf War Illness claims may be denied at a higher rate, in part, because they are not always well understood by VA staff, and veterans sometimes do not have medical records to adequately support their claims. The challenges we identified included: Inconsistent requests for disability medical exams. VA claims processors can request that a veteran undergo a disability medical exam to help determine whether the conditions in the claim exist and are linked to service. GAO found that claims processors were inconsistent in asking for an exam, in part, due to confusion about the guidance. VA issued training on the topic and in April 2017 completed a review of Gulf War claims to assess the effectiveness of the training and help ensure future consistency. Inconsistent disability medical exam reports. Veterans Health Administration disability medical examiners did not always complete medical exam reports properly and sometimes offered a medical opinion when one was not necessary. GAO recommended that VA require all examiners to complete Gulf War medical exam training before conducting these exams, and VA implemented this recommendation. Since our 2017 report, VA has allowed contracted medical examiners to complete these exams, and in 2018 GAO found VA was not monitoring whether all contractors completed required training. GAO recommended VA improve its oversight of training, but the department has not fully implemented this recommendation from GAO's 2018 report. VA provides disability compensation to millions of veterans with service-connected disabilities. Veterans are generally entitled to these benefits if they can prove their injuries or illnesses were incurred or aggravated by active military service. For certain claims, VA presumes a condition is due to a veteran's service. For example, VA can provide benefits to any veteran with certain symptoms, from respiratory disorders to gastrointestinal issues, who served in Southwest Asia from 1990 to the present, without the veteran needing to prove cause. GAO refers to these as Gulf War Illness claims. In 2017, GAO issued Gulf War Illness: Improvements Needed for VA to Better Understand, Process, and Communicate Decisions on Claims ( GAO-17-511 ), which identified needed improvements in VA's processing of Gulf War Illness claims. In 2018, GAO issued Agent Orange: Actions Needed to Improve Accuracy and Communication of Information on Testing and Storage Locations ( GAO-19-24 ). This statement summarizes information from these reports on how VA determined certain presumptive conditions and challenges VA faced with processing Gulf War Illness claims. In GAO's 2017 report, it recommended that VA develop a plan to establish a single case definition of Gulf War Illness and make Gulf War Illness training mandatory for medical examiners. VA implemented the recommendations. For more information, contact Elizabeth Curda at (202) 512-7215 or curdae@gao.gov.
    [Read More…]
  • The Federal Republic of Somalia’s National Day
    In Crime Control and Security News
    Antony J. Blinken, [Read More…]

Crime

Network News © 2005 Area.Control.Network™ All rights reserved.