This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-10-431 
entitled 'International Security: DOD and State Need to Improve 
Sustainment Planning and Monitoring and Evaluation for Section 1206 
and 1207 Assistance Programs' which was released on April 15, 2010. 

This text file was formatted by the U.S. Government Accountability 
Office (GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as 
part of a longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility. 
Every attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data 
integrity of the original printed product. Accessibility features, 
such as text descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes 
placed at the end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, 
are provided but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format 
of the printed version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an 
exact electronic replica of the printed version. We welcome your 
feedback. Please E-mail your comments regarding the contents or 
accessibility features of this document to Webmaster@gao.gov. 

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright 
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed 
in its entirety without further permission from GAO. Because this work 
may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the 
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this 
material separately. 

Report to Congressional Committees: 

United States Government Accountability Office: 
GAO: 

April 15, 2010: 

International Security: 

DOD and State Need to Improve Sustainment Planning and Monitoring and 
Evaluation for Section 1206 and 1207 Assistance Programs: 

GAO-10-431: 

GAO Highlights: 

Highlights of GAO-10-431, a report to congressional committees. 

Why GAO Did This Study: 

In 2006, the United States created two new programs, authorized in 
Sections 1206 and 1207 of the Fiscal Year 2006 National Defense 
Authorization Act, to respond to the threats of global terrorism and 
instability. These programs have provided over $1.3 billion in 
military and nonmilitary aid to 62 countries and are due to expire in 
2011 and 2010, respectively. The Congress mandated that GAO assess the 
programs. This report addresses the extent to which the programs (1) 
are consistent with U.S. strategic priorities, (2) are distinct from 
other programs, (3) address sustainment needs, and (4) incorporate 
monitoring and evaluation. GAO analyzed data and program documents 
from the Departments of Defense (DOD) and State (State), and the U.S. 
Agency for International Development (USAID), and interviewed U.S. and 
host country officials. 

What GAO Found: 

The Section 1206 and 1207 programs have generally been consistent with 
U.S. strategic priorities. The Section 1206 program was established to 
build the military capacity of foreign countries to conduct 
counterterrorism and stabilization operations. DOD and State have 
devoted 82 percent of this program’s funds to address specific 
terrorist threats, primarily in countries the U.S. intelligence 
community has identified as priorities for the counterterrorism 
effort. The Section 1207 program was established to transfer DOD funds 
to State for nonmilitary assistance related to stabilization, 
reconstruction, and security. DOD, State, and USAID have devoted 77 
percent of this program’s funds to countries at significant risk of 
instability, mostly those the United States has identified as 
vulnerable to state failure. 

Based on agency guidelines, the Section 1206 program is generally 
distinct from other programs, while the Section 1207 program is not. 
In most cases, Section 1206 projects addressed urgent and emergent 
counterterrorism and stabilization priorities of combatant commanders 
and did so more quickly than other programs, sometimes in a year, 
whereas Foreign Military Financing (FMF) projects can take up to 3 
years to plan. DOD and embassy officials GAO spoke to consistently 
explained why projects do not overlap those of FMF and other programs, 
although project proposals GAO reviewed did not always document these 
distinctions. Section 1207 projects are virtually indistinguishable 
from those of other foreign aid programs in their content and time 
frames. Furthermore, the Section 1207 program has entailed additional 
implementation costs and funding delays beyond those of traditional 
foreign assistance programs, while the 1206 program has not. 

The uncertain availability of resources to sustain Section 1206 
projects poses risks to achieving long-term impact. Enabling nations 
to achieve sustainable counterterrorism capabilities is a key U.S. 
policy goal. The long-term viability of Section 1206 projects is 
threatened by (1) the limited ability or willingness of partner 
nations to support new capabilities, as 76 percent of Section 1206 
projects are in low- or lower-middle-income countries, and (2) U.S. 
legal and policy restrictions on using FMF and additional Section 1206 
resources for sustainment. In contrast, sustainment risks for Section 
1207 projects appear minimal, because State, USAID, and DOD are not 
restricted from drawing on a variety of overlapping funding sources to 
continue them. 

DOD and State have incorporated little monitoring and evaluation into 
the Section 1206 and 1207 programs. For Section 1206 projects, the 
agencies have not consistently defined performance measures, and 
results reporting has generally been limited to anecdotal information. 
For Section 1207 projects, the agencies have defined performance 
measures and State requires quarterly reporting on project 
implementation. However, State has not fully analyzed this information 
or provided it to DOD to inform program management. As a result, 
agencies have made decisions to sustain and expand both Section 1206 
and 1207 projects without documentation of progress or effectiveness. 

What GAO Recommends: 

For Section 1207, unless DOD and State resolve the issues GAO 
identified, including duplication, the Congress should consider not 
reauthorizing this program and instead appropriating funding to State 
and USAID. For Section 1206, GAO recommends that DOD (1) establish a 
monitoring and evaluation system, (2) base sustainment funding 
decisions on assessment of results, (3) estimate sustainment costs and 
seek funding commitments from partner nations, and (4) seek guidance 
from the Congress on how to sustain projects. DOD concurred. 

View [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-10-431] or key 
components. For more information, contact Joseph Christoff at (202) 
512-8979 or christoffj@gao.gov. 

[End of section] 

Contents: 

Letter: 

Results in Brief: 

Background: 

Section 1206 and 1207 Programs Are Generally Consistent with U.S. 
Strategic Priorities: 

Section 1206 Program Is Generally Distinct, but Section 1207 Program 
Is Not: 

Long-term Impact of Section 1206 Projects at Risk without Sustainment 
Planning: 

Section 1206 and 1207 Program Monitoring and Evaluation Is Weak: 

Conclusions: 

Matter for Congressional Consideration: 

Recommendations for Executive Action: 

Agency Comments and Our Evaluation: 

Appendix I: Scope and Methodology: 

Appendix II: Descriptions of Traditional DOD and State Assistance 
Programs: 

Appendix III: Section 1206 and 1207 Funding Allotments: 

Appendix IV: Types of Assistance Provided through Section 1206 and 
1207 Programs: 

Appendix V: Comments from the Department of Defense: 

Appendix VI: Comments from the Department of State: 

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

Appendix VIII: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments: 

Tables: 

Table 1: Types of Assistance Provided by the Section 1206 Program, 
Fiscal Years 2006-2009: 

Table 2: Types of Assistance Provided by the Section 1207 Program, 
Fiscal Years 2006-2009: 

Table 3: Descriptions of Select U.S. Foreign Assistance Programs and 
Accounts: 

Table 4: Section 1206 and 1207 Recipients and Funding Allotments, 
Fiscal Years 2006-2009: 

Table 5: Types of Assistance Provided to Section 1206 Recipient 
Nations, Fiscal Years 2006-2009: 

Table 6: Reconstruction, Stabilization, and Security Activities 
Provided to Section 1207 Recipient Nations, Fiscal Years 2006-2009: 

Figures: 

Figure 1: Geographic Distribution of Section 1206 Funds, Fiscal Years 
2006-2009: 

Figure 2: Geographic Distribution of Section 1207 Funds, Fiscal Years 
2006-2009: 

Figure 3: Radar and Command and Control Equipment Provided to Malaysia 
under Section 1206 Program to Conduct Coastal Surveillance, November 
2009: 

Figure 4: Section 1206 Funds Allotted to Projects That Target Specific 
Terrorist Threats, Fiscal Years 2007-2009: 

Figure 5: Percentage of Section 1207 Funds Allotted to Countries at 
Risk of Instability, Fiscal Years 2006-2009: 

Figure 6: Boat, Ground Vehicles, and Portable Command Center Provided 
to the Bahamas under Section 1206 Program to Conduct Counterterrorism 
Operations, September 2009: 

Figure 7: Spare Parts Provided to Kazakhstan to Maintain Ground 
Vehicles for Potential Stability and Peacekeeping Operations, October 
2009: 

Figure 8: Construction and Renovation of Police Buildings under 
Section 1207 Program to Help Stabilize the Cité Soleil Neighborhood in 
Port-au-Prince, Haiti, September 2009: 

Figure 9: Food Distribution and Well Construction to Aid Internally 
Displaced Persons in Skra, Georgia, under Section 1207 Program 
Following 2008 Conflict with Russia, October 2009: 

Figure 10: Road Construction and Airport Runway Extension in Mindanao 
Region of the Philippines Provided under Section 1207 Program to 
Promote Economic Growth and Stability, November 2009: 

Figure 11: Section 1206 Funds Provided to U.S. Geographic Combatant 
Commands, Fiscal Years 2006-2009: 

Figure 12: Section 1207 Funds Provided to U.S. Geographic Combatant 
Commands, Fiscal Years 2006-2009: 

Abbreviations: 

DOD: Department of Defense: 

FMF: Foreign Military Financing: 

IMET: International Military Education and Training: 

NDAA: National Defense Authorization Act: 

OSD: Office of the Secretary of Defense: 

SAO: security assistance officer: 

USAID: U.S. Agency for International Development: 

[End of section] 

United States Government Accountability Office: 
Washington, DC 20548: 

April 15, 2010: 

Congressional Committees: 

With the threats of terrorism and instability continually emerging and 
evolving overseas, the Departments of Defense (DOD) and State (State) 
have recognized the need for more flexibility in the tools used to 
address these challenges. Sections 1206 and 1207 of the fiscal year 
2006 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) created funding 
authorities for DOD to formulate and implement security assistance 
programs jointly with State.[Footnote 1] Section 1206 authorizes DOD 
to use its own funds to train and equip partner nations' national 
military and maritime forces to conduct counterterrorism operations or 
to participate in or support military or stability operations in which 
the U.S. armed forces participate. Section 1207 authorizes DOD to 
transfer funds to State for reconstruction, stabilization, and 
security activities in foreign countries. Both authorities have been 
renewed as part of national defense authorization legislation. 
Currently, the Section 1207 authority will expire after fiscal year 
2010, and the Section 1206 authority will expire after fiscal year 
2011, unless they are renewed again. The fiscal year 2010 NDAA Report 
of the House of Representatives Committee on Armed Services requires 
us to report to the Senate and House of Representatives Committees on 
Armed Services, Foreign Affairs (House), and Foreign Relations 
(Senate) on the timeliness, effectiveness, and interagency 
coordination of these programs.[Footnote 2] 

DOD and State have established two programs to implement these broad 
authorities, and have written separate guidelines for each program. 
[Footnote 3] The agencies have revised both sets of guidelines 
periodically to reflect lessons learned, congressional interests, and 
other considerations. Though the guidelines for each program are 
unique, reflecting fundamental differences in the nature of the two 
programs, as of fiscal year 2009 they have several key similarities: 
projects funded by the programs are required to address U.S. 
priorities, be distinct from those of other traditional foreign 
assistance programs, and include plans for long-term sustainment. 

For fiscal years 2006 through 2009, DOD has provided more than $1.3 
billion through both authorities to support projects in 62 countries. 
Through the Section 1206 program, DOD has allotted $985 million in 53 
countries for projects such as radars and other maritime surveillance 
equipment in several African countries along the Gulf of Guinea, 
trucks and small arms to suppress terrorist activities along the 
Yemeni border, boats for maritime interdiction in the Philippines, and 
training of Georgian mechanized infantry for deployment to 
Afghanistan. DOD has provided more than $350 million of Section 1207 
funds in 23 countries for projects such as judicial reform and police 
training in Somalia, postconflict removal of unexploded ordnance in 
Lebanon, reform of extremism education programs in Bangladesh, and 
transportation infrastructure initiatives in the Philippines. 

We reviewed DOD's and State's use of the Section 1206 and 1207 funding 
authorities from fiscal years 2006 through 2009. In particular, we 
examined the extent to which the Section 1206 and 1207 programs (1) 
have been consistent with U.S. government strategic priorities, (2) 
are distinct from other U.S. programs, (3) have addressed the 
sustainment needs of executed projects, and (4) incorporate monitoring 
and evaluation to assess implementation and effectiveness. 

To address these issues, we reviewed and analyzed Section 1206 and 
1207 project documentation and program guidelines. We interviewed 
agency officials from DOD, State, and the U.S. Agency for 
International Development (USAID) in Washington, D.C., and all six 
U.S. geographic combatant commands. We traveled to seven countries 
that received Section 1206 or 1207 funding (Albania, the Bahamas, 
Georgia, Haiti, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, and the Philippines) to 
interview U.S. embassy and host government officials, implementing 
agencies and organizations, as well as project beneficiaries, and to 
visit project sites and review relevant project records. In three 
additional countries (Ethiopia, Pakistan, and Uganda), we interviewed 
U.S. embassy officials in conjunction with other related work we were 
conducting. We also interviewed U.S. program officials via telephone 
in eight other countries (Honduras, Kenya, Lebanon, Mali, Mexico, 
Nigeria, Sri Lanka, and Ukraine). We selected the countries we visited 
and telephoned primarily based on the amount of Section 1206 and 1207 
funds those countries received, the maturity of the projects in those 
countries, and geographic distribution. Projects in these countries 
account for 62 percent ($831 million) of the $1.3 billion allotted 
through the Section 1206 and 1207 programs during fiscal years 2006 
through 2009. 

We conducted this performance audit from February 2009 to April 2010 
in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. 
These 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. Appendix I 
provides a more detailed description of our scope and methodology. 

Results in Brief: 

The Section 1206 and 1207 programs have generally been consistent with 
U.S. strategic priorities related to combating terrorism and 
addressing instability. The Section 1206 program is designed to build 
the capacity of a foreign country's national military forces in order 
for that country to (1) conduct counterterrorist operations and (2) 
participate in or support military and stability operations in which 
the U.S. armed forces are a participant.[Footnote 4] We found that 
from fiscal years 2006 to 2009, DOD and State have devoted 82 percent 
of these funds to addressing specific terrorist threats, primarily in 
countries that the U.S. intelligence community has identified as 
priorities for the counterterrorism effort. U.S. law authorizes the 
Section 1207 program to fund reconstruction, stabilization, and 
security activities overseas.[Footnote 5] We found that DOD, State, 
and USAID devoted 77 percent of Section 1207 program resources to 
countries at significant risk of instability, mostly those the U.S. 
government has identified as vulnerable to state failure. 

The Section 1206 program is generally distinct from other programs, 
but the Section 1207 program is not. According to DOD and State 
guidelines for fiscal year 2009, the Section 1206 program should be 
used for projects that (1) address U.S. military priorities; (2) 
respond to urgent and emergent needs; (3) do not overlap with other 
State and DOD train and equip programs, such as Foreign Military 
Financing (FMF); and (4) are administered jointly by DOD and State. 
DOD has demonstrated that most approved Section 1206 projects address 
U.S. military priorities and urgent and emergent counterterrorism and 
stabilization needs identified by DOD combatant commanders. Further, 
Section 1206 projects have done so more quickly than other programs 
could have--sometimes within a year, whereas FMF projects can take up 
to 3 years to plan. Also, DOD and embassy officials we spoke to 
consistently described the distinctions of Section 1206 projects from 
those of other programs, although project proposals we reviewed did 
not always document these distinctions. In addition, DOD and State 
have used a "dual key" decision-making process for selecting Section 
1206 projects. According to DOD and State guidelines, the Section 1207 
program should fund activities that are distinct from those of other 
U.S. foreign assistance programs and address urgent or emergent 
threats or opportunities that other programs cannot address in the 
required time frame. However, the Section 1207 program has funded a 
wide range of activities with objectives that other aid programs 
commonly address. Our review of all 28 project proposals funded by the 
Section 1207 program indicates that 22 expand on recent or ongoing 
activities funded through other foreign assistance accounts. In 
December 2009, Congress established a new USAID contingency fund, 
which provides greater flexibility to USAID to prevent or respond to 
emerging or unforeseen complex crises overseas. Moreover, State and 
DOD have not necessarily implemented projects more rapidly through the 
Section 1207 program than through other programs. Finally, the Section 
1207 program has entailed additional implementation costs and funding 
delays beyond those of traditional foreign assistance programs, while 
the 1206 program has not. 

The long-term impact of Section 1206 projects is at risk because U.S. 
agencies have not fully addressed how to sustain these projects. 
According to State planning documents, enabling partner nations to 
achieve advanced and sustainable counterterrorism capabilities is a 
key foreign policy goal. However, the long-term impact of Section 1206 
projects is potentially threatened by limited ability or willingness 
of partner nations to support these new capabilities, as 76 percent of 
Section 1206 projects are in low-or lower-middle-income countries. 
Only 35 (26 percent) of the 135 approved project proposals we reviewed 
explicitly address the recipient countries' ability to sustain the 
projects, and 9 (7 percent) of those 135 proposals provided specific 
estimates of the costs involved. Furthermore, U.S. law potentially 
limits the availability of FMF funds for sustainment, and fiscal year 
2009 DOD and State guidelines for the 1206 program preclude funding 
projects that require follow-on U.S. resources to sustain them. For 
the Section 1207 program, there are no such statutory or policy 
restrictions for sustaining projects, and State, USAID, and DOD may 
draw on a variety of overlapping funding sources to continue and 
expand these projects. Thus, sustainment risks appear minimal. 

DOD and State have incorporated little monitoring and evaluation into 
the Section 1206 and Section 1207 programs. The Government Performance 
and Results Act of 1993 requires agencies to develop objective 
performance measures, monitor their progress in achieving goals, and 
report progress in their annual performance reports.[Footnote 6] In 
addition, federal standards for internal controls indicate that U.S. 
agencies should monitor and assess the quality of performance over 
time.[Footnote 7] We have previously reported that monitoring, 
evaluating, and reporting the results of collaborative programs, like 
the Section 1206 and 1207 programs, are key practices for enhancing 
and sustaining interagency cooperation.[Footnote 8] DOD and State have 
not consistently defined performance measures for the Section 1206 
projects, and reporting on progress and effectiveness has generally 
been limited to anecdotal information. For the Section 1207 program, 
implementing agencies have largely developed performance measures and 
submitted quarterly reports required by State. However, State has not 
analyzed all the information in these reports or disseminated them to 
DOD to inform program management and funding decisions. As a result of 
these deficiencies, U.S. agencies have made decisions to sustain and 
expand both Section 1206 and 1207 projects without documented 
assessments of project progress or impact. 

In preparing to reauthorize U.S. national defense programs, the 
Congress should consider requiring the Secretaries of Defense and 
State to document how Section 1207 projects are distinct from those of 
other foreign assistance programs and that these projects incur no 
additional implementation costs and experience no funding delays 
beyond those of other foreign assistance programs. Without this 
documentation, the Congress should consider not reauthorizing the 
Section 1207 program for fiscal year 2011 and, instead, appropriate 
funds to State and USAID programs. We are also making several 
recommendations for both programs. For the Section 1206 program, we 
recommend that the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the 
Secretary of State, (1) develop and implement specific plans to 
monitor, evaluate, and report routinely on Section 1206 project 
outcomes and their impact on U.S. strategic objectives; (2) base 
further decisions about sustaining existing Section 1206 projects on 
the results of such monitoring and evaluation; (3) estimate the cost 
of sustaining projects at the time they are proposed and, where 
possible, obtain a commitment from partner nations to fund those 
costs; and (4) seek further guidance from the Congress on what funding 
authorities are appropriate to sustain Section 1206 projects when the 
Secretary determines that (a) projects address specific terrorist and 
stabilization threats in high-priority countries, (b) reliable 
monitoring and evaluation has shown that projects are effective, and 
(c) partner nation funds are unavailable. For the Section 1207 
program, we recommend that the Secretary of Defense, in consultation 
with the Secretary of State and the Administrator of USAID, develop 
and implement specific plans to monitor, evaluate, and report on their 
outcomes and their impact on U.S. strategic objectives to determine 
whether continued funding for these projects is appropriate under 
other authorities and programs. 

The Departments of Defense and State and the U.S. Agency for 
International Development provided written comments on a draft of this 
report (see appendices V, VI, and VII respectively). DOD concurred 
with all of our recommendations. State indicated in written comments 
that it would take our observations into account when shaping the new 
contingency fund requested for fiscal year 2011 to replace the Section 
1207 program. State explained that this new fund will solve many of 
the issues outlined in our report, including funding delays. State 
also found our findings regarding limited monitoring and evaluation 
for the Section 1207 program and additional implementation costs 
entailed by the program to be contradictory, noting that State's 
increased monitoring and evaluation has required adequate funding 
support. We disagree. We do not believe that State's monitoring and 
evaluation efforts through the time of our review justified the 
additional fees charged to the program beyond those that State and 
USAID already charged to implement the projects. USAID noted in its 
written comments that our report highlights several issues of interest 
to all agencies participating in the 1207 process and that USAID looks 
forward to continuing to refine its business processes based on our 
review. 

Background: 

The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 
established the authority for the Section 1206 and 1207 programs. 
Section 1206 authorizes the Secretary of Defense to use up to $350 
million each year, with the concurrence of the Secretary of State, to 
train and equip foreign military and nonmilitary maritime forces, such 
as coast guards, to conduct counterterrorist operations or to support 
military and stability operations in which the U.S. armed forces are a 
participant. The authority will expire at the end of fiscal year 2011 
if it is not renewed. Section 1207 of the fiscal year 2006 NDAA 
provides authority for DOD to transfer up to $100 million per fiscal 
year to State to support reconstruction, stabilization, and security 
activities in foreign countries. A congressional notification 
describing the project is required upon the exercise of the transfer 
authority. The funds are subject to the authorities and limitations in 
the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, the Arms Export Control Act, or 
any law making appropriations to carry out such acts. The funds also 
remain available until expended. This authority was intended to be 
temporary and expires at the end of fiscal year 2010. 

The Foreign Military Financing[Footnote 9] program has traditionally 
been the primary mechanism for providing training and equipment 
assistance to foreign military forces.[Footnote 10] State and USAID 
have traditionally addressed civilian reconstruction, stabilization, 
and security needs abroad through programs funded by several foreign 
operations appropriations accounts, including Development Assistance; 
Economic Support Funds; Freedom Support Act (now Assistance for 
Europe, Eurasia, and Central Asia); International Narcotics Control 
and Law Enforcement; Nonproliferation, Antiterrorism, Demining, and 
Related Programs; Peacekeeping Operations; and Transitions 
Initiatives. (See appendix II for a description of U.S. foreign 
assistance programs and accounts.) 

For both the Section 1206 and 1207 programs, DOD and State established 
an interagency process to implement each program. Within DOD, the 
Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations, 
Low Intensity Conflict, and Interdependent Capabilities has overall 
responsibility for both programs. This office coordinates primarily 
with State's Bureau of Political-Military Affairs for the Section 1206 
program and with State's Office of the Coordinator for Reconstruction 
and Stabilization (State/S/CRS) for the Section 1207 program. DOD and 
State solicit project proposals for each program annually, in 
accordance with guidelines and project proposal instructions for each 
program that are revised periodically to reflect lessons learned, 
congressional concerns, and other considerations. Interagency boards 
review the proposals--approved by both the relevant U.S. combatant 
commander and ambassador--and select projects to recommend to the 
Secretaries of Defense and State for final funding approval. Once 
projects are approved, DOD and State may begin implementation after 
notification to designated congressional committees.[Footnote 11] For 
approved Section 1206 projects, the Defense Security Cooperation 
Agency assumes overall responsibility for procuring training and 
equipment, while security assistance officers (SAO)[Footnote 12]--
posted at U.S. embassies and reporting to both the ambassador and the 
relevant U.S. geographic combatant commands[Footnote 13]--are 
responsible for coordinating in-country project implementation. For 
approved Section 1207 projects, country teams at U.S. embassies are 
responsible for implementing projects in cooperation with relevant 
State and USAID offices, while State/S/CRS is responsible for 
oversight. 

For fiscal years 2006 through 2009, DOD has allotted about $985 
million for Section 1206 projects in 53 countries and $350 million for 
Section 1207 projects in 23 countries.[Footnote 14] Figures 1 and 2 
depict the geographic distribution of Section 1206 and 1207 resources, 
respectively. (See appendix III for detailed information on the 
geographic distribution of Section 1206 and 1207 funds.) 

Figure 1: Geographic Distribution of Section 1206 Funds, Fiscal Years 
2006-2009: 

[Refer to PDF for image: world map] 

Albania; 
Algeria; 
Azerbaijan; 
Bahamas; 
Bahrain; 
Belize; 
Bangladesh; 
Benin; 
Cameroon; 
Cape Verde; 
Chad; 
Djibouti; 
Dominican Republic; 
Ethiopia; 
Gabon; 
Gambia; 
Georgia; 
Ghana; 
Guinea; 
Guyana; 
Honduras; 
Indonesia; 
Kazakhstan; 
Kenya; 
Kyrgyzstan; 
Lebanon; 
Liberia; 
Macedonia; 
Malaysia; 
Mali; 
Mauritania; 
Mauritius; 
Mexico; 
Morocco; 
Mozambique; 
Nicaragua; 
Niger; 
Nigeria; 
Pakistan; 
Panama; 
Philippines; 
São Tomé and Principe; 
Senegal; 
Seychelles; 
Sierra Leone; 
Sri Lanka; 
Suriname; 
Tanzania; 
Togo; 
Tunisia; 
Ukraine; 
Yemen. 

Sources: GAO analysis of DOD and State data; MapInfo (map). 

Note: The area of each proportionally sized circle included in this 
figure represents the amount of funding provided to individual partner 
nations. 

[End of figure] 

Figure 2: Geographic Distribution of Section 1207 Funds, Fiscal Years 
2006-2009: 

[Refer to PDF for image: world map] 

Afghanistan; 
Bangladesh;
Colombia; 
Democratic Republic of Congo; 
Georgia; 
Haiti; 
Indonesia; 
Kenya; 
Lebanon; 
Malaysia; 
Mali; 
Mauritania; 
Morocco; 
Nepal; 
Niger; 
Panama; 
Paraguay; 
Philippines; 
Somalia; 
Sri Lanka; 
Tajikistan; 
Uganda; 
Yemen. 

Sources: GAO analysis of DOD and State data; MapInfo (map). 

Note: The area of each proportionally sized circle included in this 
figure represents the amount of funding provided to individual partner 
nations. 

[End of figure] 

The Section 1206 and 1207 programs incorporate a wide variety of 
assistance. The most common types of Section 1206 program assistance 
have been training and technical assistance and radios and other 
communications equipment. Under the Section 1207 program, the most 
common types of assistance activities are local government capacity 
development and police training and equipment. Tables 1 and 2 list the 
types of assistance provided by the Section 1206 and 1207 programs, 
respectively, and the number of countries receiving them. (See 
appendix IV for more detailed information on the types of assistance 
provided through the Section 1206 and 1207 programs from fiscal years 
2006 to 2009.) 

Table 1: Types of Assistance Provided by the Section 1206 Program, 
Fiscal Years 2006-2009: 

Type of assistance: Training/technical assistance; 
Number of recipient countries: 47. 

Type of assistance: Spare parts/tools; 
Number of recipient countries: 43[A]. 

Type of assistance: Communication equipment/radios; 
Number of recipient countries: 41. 

Type of assistance: Radar/surveillance equipment; 
Number of recipient countries: 37. 

Type of assistance: Boats; 
Number of recipient countries: 28. 

Type of assistance: Computers/software; 
Number of recipient countries: 25. 

Type of assistance: Ground vehicles; 
Number of recipient countries: 24. 

Type of assistance: Body armor/individual equipment; 
Number of recipient countries: 17. 

Type of assistance: Global positioning systems; 
Number of recipient countries: 14. 

Type of assistance: Night vision devices; 
Number of recipient countries: 12. 

Type of assistance: Facilities; 
Number of recipient countries: 12. 

Type of assistance: Small arms/machine guns; 
Number of recipient countries: 11. 

Type of assistance: Ammunition; 
Number of recipient countries: 7. 

Type of assistance: Site surveys and assessments; 
Number of recipient countries: 3. 

Type of assistance: Helicopters/aircraft; 
Number of recipient countries: 2. 

Type of assistance: Miscellaneous equipment; 
Number of recipient countries: 25. 

Source: GAO analysis of DOD congressional notifications. 

[A] According to the Defense Security Cooperation Agency Section 1206 
project manager, this number may be understated, as virtually all 
assistance the agency coordinates includes a basic spare parts 
allotment. 

[End of table] 

Table 2: Types of Assistance Provided by the Section 1207 Program, 
Fiscal Years 2006-2009: 

Type of assistance activity: Local government capacity building; 
Number of recipient countries: 13. 

Type of assistance activity: Police training and equipment; 
Number of recipient countries: 13. 

Type of assistance activity: Infrastructure improvements; 
Number of recipient countries: 11. 

Type of assistance activity: Public awareness campaigns; 
Number of recipient countries: 9. 

Type of assistance activity: Youth-targeted jobs, training; 
Number of recipient countries: 8. 

Type of assistance activity: Judicial sector reform; 
Number of recipient countries: 6. 

Type of assistance activity: Border security; 
Number of recipient countries: 5. 

Type of assistance activity: Education reform/school rehabilitation; 
Number of recipient countries: 5. 

Type of assistance activity: Jobs, vocational training; 
Number of recipient countries: 5. 

Type of assistance activity: National government capacity building; 
Number of recipient countries: 4. 

Type of assistance activity: Demining, unexploded ordnance removal; 
Number of recipient countries: 2. 

Type of assistance activity: Food, shelter assistance; 
Number of recipient countries: 2. 

Source: GAO analysis of DOD and State data. 

[End of table] 

Figure 3 shows an example of radar and surveillance equipment provided 
to Malaysia and 36 other countries under the Section 1206 program to 
conduct coastal surveillance. 

Figure 3: Radar and Command and Control Equipment Provided to Malaysia 
under Section 1206 Program to Conduct Coastal Surveillance, November 
2009: 

[Refer to PDF for image: 2 photographs] 

Source: GAO. 

[End of figure] 

Section 1206 and 1207 Programs Are Generally Consistent with U.S. 
Strategic Priorities: 

The Section 1206 and 1207 programs have generally been consistent with 
U.S. strategic priorities relating to combating terrorism and 
addressing instability. DOD and State have devoted 82 percent of 
Section 1206 counterterrorism resources spent through fiscal year 2009 
to addressing specific terrorist threats, primarily in countries 
designated as priorities by the U.S. government. DOD, State, and USAID 
devoted 77 percent of Section 1207 program resources to relatively 
unstable countries, mostly those the U.S. government has identified as 
vulnerable to state failure. 

Section 1206 Program Consistent with U.S. Counterterrorism Strategic 
Priorities: 

Implementation of the Section 1206 program has generally been in 
alignment with U.S. counterterrorism priorities. Section 1206 
authorizes DOD and State to build the capacity of partner nations' 
national military forces to (1) conduct counterterrorist operations or 
(2) participate in or support military and stability operations in 
which the U.S. armed forces are a participant. From fiscal year 2006 
to 2009, DOD and State allotted $932 million (95 percent) of all 
Section 1206 funding for counterterrorism-related equipment and 
training and $47 million (5 percent) to build the capacity of five 
partner nations to participate in stability operations with the United 
States.[Footnote 15] Overall, DOD and State have allotted 82 percent 
of these resources to projects that address specific terrorist 
threats, based on our review of approved project proposals. 
Furthermore, we found that most Section 1206 counterterrorism 
resources have been directed to countries that the U.S. intelligence 
community has identified as priority countries for the 
counterterrorism effort.[Footnote 16] 

The focus on specific terrorist threats increased in fiscal year 2009. 
In fiscal years 2007 and 2008, DOD and State allotted 75 percent ($405 
million) of $536 million to fund Section 1206 projects targeted at 
specific terrorist threats. Proposals for the remaining projects 
identify global terrorist threats in general or security issues 
indirectly related to terrorism, such as ungoverned spaces and 
smuggling.[Footnote 17] For example, in the Caribbean region, several 
Section 1206 projects funded in fiscal years 2007 and 2008 were 
justified as countering a terrorist threat but did not specifically 
identify the source of that threat, and appeared to address narcotics 
trafficking more directly. In Albania, a U.S. official noted that the 
country received Section 1206 funding in fiscal year 2008 even though 
there was no significant terrorist threat there. He explained that 
Section 1206-funded boats would be used primarily to respond to 
potential security threats such as smuggling and human trafficking in 
coastal waters that the Albanian government had not previously 
patrolled. For fiscal year 2009, DOD and State issued instructions 
that project proposals must describe the "actual or potential 
terrorist threat" to be addressed and how the project responds to "an 
urgent and emergent threat or opportunity." In line with these 
instructions, we found that 92 percent ($306 million) of the $334 
million approved for fiscal year 2009 proposals identified a specific 
terrorist threat to be addressed (see figure 4). 

Figure 4: Section 1206 Funds Allotted to Projects That Target Specific 
Terrorist Threats, Fiscal Years 2007-2009: 

[Refer to PDF for image: line graph] 

Fiscal year: 2007; 
Specific terrorist threats: 85%; 
Other: 15%. 

Fiscal year: 2008; 
Specific terrorist threats: 66%; 
Other: 34%. 

Average, Fiscal years 2007-2008: 75%. 

Fiscal year: 2009; 
Specific terrorist threats: 92%; 
Other: 8%. 

Source: GAO analysis of DOD and State data. 

[End of figure] 

Section 1207 Program Generally Consistent with U.S. Stabilization 
Priorities: 

The Section 1207 program has generally been consistent with U.S. 
stabilization priorities. According to State guidelines for the 
program, State uses DOD funds to provide reconstruction, 
stabilization, and security assistance to a foreign country for the 
purpose of restoring or maintaining peace and security. State has 
therefore indicated that countries eligible to receive Section 1207 
funding should be at significant risk of instability or working to 
recover from instability. State uses a U.S. government source--an 
interagency "watchlist" developed to identify countries vulnerable to 
state failure--to help determine which countries could merit conflict 
prevention and mitigation efforts, and has established inclusion on 
the list as one of the criteria for a country to receive funding 
through the Section 1207 program. We found that most countries 
receiving Section 1207 funding appear on this watchlist.[Footnote 18] 
Further, according to our analysis of data we obtained from an 
independent risk forecasting firm, DOD, State, and USAID allotted 77 
percent of Section 1207 funds to countries measuring high, very high, 
or extremely high levels of instability, as shown in figure 5. 
[Footnote 19] In addition, our review of all 28 approved proposals for 
Section 1207 projects shows that these projects address either the 
prevention of instability in a particular country or region or the 
recovery from instability or conflict. Eighteen proposals (about two-
thirds) were for projects to help countries recover from instability 
or conflict, as in Georgia, Kenya, and Lebanon.[Footnote 20] The 
remaining 10 proposals (about one-third) were for projects that help 
prevent instability, as in Bangladesh, Panama, and the Philippines. 
[Footnote 21] 

Figure 5: Percentage of Section 1207 Funds Allotted to Countries at 
Risk of Instability, Fiscal Years 2006-2009: 

[Refer to PDF for image: vertical bar graph] 

Political risk rating: Extremely high; 
Percentage of allocated Section 1207 funds: 12%. 

Political risk rating: Very high[A]; 
Percentage of allocated Section 1207 funds: 26%. 

Political risk rating: High; 
Percentage of allocated Section 1207 funds: 40%. 

Political risk rating: Moderate; 
Percentage of allocated Section 1207 funds: 13%. 

Political risk rating: Low; 
Percentage of allocated Section 1207 funds: 5%. 

Political risk rating: Very low; 
Percentage of allocated Section 1207 funds: 3%. 

Political risk rating: Not rated[B]; 
Percentage of allocated Section 1207 funds: 2%. 

Source: GAO analysis of IHS Global Insight data. 

Note: Totals may not equal 100 because of rounding. 

[A] "Very high" category includes Haiti and Somalia, which were not 
rated for short-term, internal political risk, but assigned to this 
category according to alternate scoring from IHS Global Insight. 

[B] "Not rated" category is for Paraguay, which was not rated for 
short-term, internal political risk and accounts for less than 2 
percent of Section 1207 funds. 

[End of figure] 

Section 1206 Program Is Generally Distinct, but Section 1207 Program 
Is Not: 

According to DOD and State guidelines, the Section 1206 program has 
generally been distinct from other train and equip programs. DOD and 
State have used it to address unforeseen U.S. military needs 
relatively quickly compared with FMF and other programs. The Section 
1207 program is not distinct from other programs, as it has funded 
reconstruction, stability, and security-related activities that are 
virtually indistinguishable from those of other foreign aid programs 
in their content and time frames. Furthermore, using Section 1207 
program funding for these projects has entailed additional 
implementation costs and funding delays. 

Section 1206 Program Is Generally Distinct from Other Train and Equip 
Programs: 

According to DOD and State guidelines for fiscal year 2009, the 
Section 1206 program should be distinct from security assistance 
programs in that its projects (1) address U.S. military priorities; 
(2) respond to urgent and emergent needs; (3) do not overlap with 
other State and DOD train and equip programs, such as FMF, by 
"backfilling" lower-priority projects unfunded by those programs; and 
(4) are administered with a dual key, or DOD and State interagency 
process, to ensure they accord with U.S. foreign policy. 

Addressing U.S. Military Priorities: 

DOD and State have consistently used Section 1206 to address U.S. 
military priorities. Each U.S. geographic military command reviews 
proposals from U.S. embassy country teams in its area of 
responsibility and endorses for final submission those proposed 
projects that address its highest priorities. Furthermore, the U.S. 
Special Operations Command reviews all Section 1206 project proposals 
to ensure that each aligns with U.S. military strategy and ranks each 
proposal across the geographic combatant commands in accordance with 
counterterrorism priorities.[Footnote 22] Our review of approved 
Section 1206 project proposals indicates that projects are designed 
primarily to address U.S. military requirements that are also aligned 
with the countries' security interests. DOD officials we interviewed 
described the Section 1206 program as a way to meet U.S. military 
priorities that they may not have been able to address without the 
Section 1206 program. For example, in Kazakhstan, according to a U.S. 
embassy official, DOD and State have used Section 1206 funds to 
address its priority of enhancing the country's counterterrorism 
capacity in the Caspian Sea, while Kazakhstan has requested FMF 
funding for its priority to develop its military airlift capability. 
In Pakistan, U.S. officials used Section 1206 funds to increase 
special operations capacity to support counterterrorism operations on 
its western border, a U.S. military counterterrorism priority for 
which DOD and State had not been able to persuade the country to use 
FMF resources. 

Responding to Urgent and Emergent Needs: 

DOD and State can use Section 1206 funds to respond to urgent and 
emergent needs more quickly than they have been able to do with FMF 
and other security assistance programs. With the Section 1206 program, 
DOD and State have often formulated and begun implementing projects 
within 1 fiscal year, while FMF projects have usually required up to 3 
years of planning. U.S. geographic combatant commands and embassies 
submit project proposals early in the fiscal year, and DOD and State 
select projects for funding in the months that follow. DOD and State 
had already approved Section 1206 project proposals for fiscal year 
2009 when we interviewed most SAOs, some of whom told us that 
equipment associated with those proposals had already begun to arrive 
in country. For example, radios approved as part of a fiscal year 2009 
equipment package for Mali arrived and were installed in September of 
that same fiscal year. In contrast, several SAOs we interviewed in 
fiscal years 2009 and the beginning of 2010 were either drafting or 
had recently submitted FMF requests for fiscal year 2012. This 
requires the SAOs to plan for training and equipment relatively far in 
advance, without necessarily knowing what the geopolitical context 
will be when the countries receive the assistance. According to DOD 
and State officials, this process, including consultation and 
negotiation with partner nations, incorporating funding requests into 
State's budget, and obtaining appropriations, can take up to 3 years. 
Because DOD and State can review and approve Section 1206 project 
proposals more quickly than this, SAOs have used Section 1206 projects 
to begin addressing new requirements that DOD may not have not 
foreseen when it submitted the FMF request for the same fiscal year. 

Avoiding Overlap with Other Train and Equip Programs: 

DOD officials we interviewed stated that the narrower goals of the 
Section 1206 program prevent overlap with the FMF program. They 
indicated that FMF program objectives have traditionally been to 
achieve a variety of U.S. foreign policy and partner nation military 
goals, which have not necessarily included counterterrorism and 
stability operations. For example, State has used the FMF program to 
strengthen bilateral relationships, gain access to foreign 
governments, foster long-term defense modernization of partner 
nations, and achieve other broad foreign policy objectives. Eight of 
15 SAOs we interviewed noted that the Section 1206 projects they were 
implementing addressed objectives substantially different from those 
of the FMF program. SAOs further explained that there is no guarantee 
that partner nations will use FMF to fund counterterrorism and 
stability operations. For example, the SAO in Kazakhstan explained 
that FMF has been used to enhance diplomatic relations with that key 
ally by responding to its request for helicopters. 

The Section 1206 program is also distinct in that it allows the United 
States to provide partner countries with complete assistance packages, 
whereas other funding sources might provide only a portion of the aid 
needed to build a counterterrorism or stability operations capability. 
Eight of the 15 SAOs we interviewed noted that the Section 1206 
program offered a unique means to provide bundled training and 
equipment, such as operations and maintenance training and spare 
parts. Agency officials in Washington, D.C., also attested that one of 
the unique strengths of the 1206 program is that it allows the United 
States to provide partner countries with comprehensive assistance 
packages. Of the 53 countries receiving assistance in fiscal years 
2006 through 2009, 50 (94 percent) received spare parts or training, 
and 40 (75 percent) received both. SAOs we interviewed indicated that 
other programs, such as FMF, may be used to fund spare parts, or that 
Joint Combined Exchange Training might be used to provide additional 
training for foreign troops, but those programs may not be able to 
independently provide all the equipment and training components 
typical of a Section 1206 package. 

Although DOD and embassy officials we interviewed consistently 
explained why there was no overlap between Section 1206 projects and 
other programs, project proposals we reviewed have not always 
documented the distinctions. DOD and State revised program guidelines 
in fiscal year 2009 in response to congressional concerns regarding 
program overlap with counternarcotics and other funding sources. 
However, in reviewing the 25 approved Section 1206 project proposals 
for fiscal year 2009, 11 identified similar ongoing efforts that were 
funded by FMF or other U.S. programs. Only 1 proposal clearly 
explained why there was no overlap with other programs, and the 
remaining proposals did not specifically address this issue. Also, 
during our overseas visits, we observed some potential overlap between 
Section 1206 projects and other U.S. security assistance programs that 
was not explained in corresponding project proposals. In the Bahamas, 
DOD and State used Section 1206 program funds to provide that country 
with the same type of boats that State had previously provided with 
International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement funding. (See 
figure 6.) 

Figure 6: Boat, Ground Vehicles, and Portable Command Center Provided 
to the Bahamas under Section 1206 Program to Conduct Counterterrorism 
Operations, September 2009: 

[Refer to PDF for image: 3 photographs] 

Source: GAO. 

[End of figure] 

In Kazakhstan, DOD and State used both the Section 1206 program and 
the Global Peace Operations Initiative to provide equipment to a 
Kazakh peacekeeping unit.[Footnote 23] The Global Peace Operations 
Initiative has also funded training and equipment for at least 572 
foreign troops worldwide for deployments to operations in Iraq and 
Afghanistan, which could overlap with Section 1206 program 
stabilization objectives.[Footnote 24] Figure 7 shows an example of 
U.S. assistance to Kazakhstan to build its capacity for conducting 
stability operations, in part by providing spare parts for its ground 
vehicles. 

Figure 7: Spare Parts Provided to Kazakhstan to Maintain Ground 
Vehicles for Potential Stability and Peacekeeping Operations, October 
2009: 

[Refer to PDF for image: photograph] 

Source: GAO. 

[End of figure] 

Using a Dual Key Interagency Approach: 

DOD and State have used a dual key decision-making process for 
selecting Section 1206 projects, and in doing so have addressed three 
key practices for interagency collaboration we have previously 
identified.[Footnote 25] DOD and State incorporate interagency input 
at several stages of the Section 1206 proposal development and 
selection process. First, SAOs at recipient country embassies have 
typically developed Section 1206 project proposals--including 
objectives and implementation strategies--with input from State and 
other colleagues. For instance, 12 of the 15 SAOs we interviewed 
indicated that they had requested country team counterparts to at 
least review, if not help draft, Section 1206 proposals before 
submitting them. Through this process, DOD and State have defined 
common outcomes and joint strategies for achieving them, two key 
practices for interagency collaboration. Second, the relevant regional 
U.S. geographic combatant commander and ambassador have approved each 
proposal before officially submitting them to the Joint Staff for 
consideration. Once a proposal is submitted, a DOD-State working group 
reviews it and considers how Section 1206 projects will support U.S. 
foreign policy and foreign assistance goals. Last, the Secretary of 
State concurs with the Secretary of Defense's approval of Section 1206 
projects, thereby leveraging resources for mutually beneficial 
projects--another key practice for enhancing interagency collaboration. 

Section 1207 Projects Are Largely Indistinguishable from Other State 
and USAID Activities, but Add Implementation Costs and Funding Delays: 

DOD and State guidelines indicate that Section 1207 projects should 
fund activities that are distinct from those of other U.S. government 
foreign assistance programs, and address urgent or emergent threats or 
opportunities that conventional foreign assistance programs cannot 
address in the required time frame. 

Funding Distinct Activities: 

Section 1207 program-funded projects are consistent with the purposes 
stated in the law but are not distinct from activities funded by other 
foreign assistance programs. Overall, Section 1207 projects achieved 
objectives commonly addressed through a variety of other programs. In 
our country visits to Haiti, Georgia, and the Philippines, we observed 
many Section 1207 program-funded activities with objectives similar to 
those of prior or existing State and USAID programs in those 
countries. Moreover, according to State and USAID officials in those 
countries, the same activities implemented through Section 1207 
funding could be accomplished with additional funding from traditional 
foreign assistance accounts, such as Economic Support Funds and 
Assistance for Europe, Eurasia, and Central Asia. 

* Haiti's Section 1207 project in fiscal year 2007 was aimed at 
stabilizing Cité Soleil, an urban area of Port-au-Prince, Haiti's 
capital, through rapid implementation of short-term job creation 
activities, infrastructure improvements, and security enhancement 
through police training and equipment. However, from 2004 to 2006 
(prior to the Section 1207 project) USAID had implemented the Haiti 
Transition Initiative, which attempted to stabilize urban areas, such 
as Cité Soleil, by rebuilding local services and infrastructure and 
providing short-term employment. In 2005, USAID also began the Urban 
Peace-Building Initiative, which attempted to stabilize urban areas, 
including Cité Soleil, through economic development. According to a 
USAID official in Haiti, this initiative was the precursor to Haiti's 
Section 1207 project. USAID used existing contracts with 
nongovernmental organizations implementing other projects to carry out 
the short-term job creation and infrastructure improvements in Haiti's 
Section 1207 project (see figure 8). 

Figure 8: Construction and Renovation of Police Buildings under 
Section 1207 Program to Help Stabilize the Cité Soleil Neighborhood in 
Port-au-Prince, Haiti, September 2009: 

[Refer to PDF for image: 2 photographs] 

Source: GAO. 

[End of figure] 

* Georgia's Section 1207 project in fiscal years 2008 and 2009 
provided reconstruction assistance after the August 2008 Russian 
invasion, including support for resettlement of internally displaced 
persons (see figure 9), police training and equipment, and removal of 
unexploded ordnance. However, according to State and USAID embassy 
officials, the Section 1207 project funded some activities with 
objectives that were previously being addressed through existing 
programs. For example, by amending a cooperative agreement with a 
nongovernmental organization partner, USAID carried out its Section 
1207-funded school rehabilitation activities through an infrastructure 
initiative that had been operating since 2004. Also, State's Bureau 
for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement's (State/INL) plans to 
use Section 1207 funds to upgrade the Ministry of Interior's emergency 
communications system and national criminal database were 
continuations of previously established State/INL programs in Georgia. 
The removal of unexploded ordnance to facilitate the return of 
internally displaced persons was carried out through a State 
humanitarian demining program that had been operating in Georgia for 
several years. 

Figure 9: Food Distribution and Well Construction to Aid Internally 
Displaced Persons in Skra, Georgia, under Section 1207 Program 
Following 2008 Conflict with Russia, October 2009: 

[Refer to PDF for image: 2 photographs] 

Source: GAO. 

[End of figure] 

* The Philippines' Section 1207 projects in fiscal years 2007 and 2009 
attempt to stabilize the region of Mindanao through economic 
development, with a focus on infrastructure development activities as 
well as police training and equipment. However, USAID implemented the 
Section 1207 infrastructure development activities in Mindanao through 
an existing program--Growth with Equity in Mindanao--which had been 
carrying out similar activities in the region since 1995 (see figure 
10). Also, the Department of Justice has been conducting similar 
police training and equipment activities in the Philippines, including 
in Mindanao, since 2006. 

Figure 10: Road Construction and Airport Runway Extension in Mindanao 
Region of the Philippines Provided under Section 1207 Program to 
Promote Economic Growth and Stability, November 2009: 

[Refer to PDF for image: 2 photographs] 

Source: GAO. 

[End of figure] 

In addition, we reviewed all 28 approved Section 1207 proposals for 
fiscal years 2006 through 2009, including the 6 proposals for the 
countries we visited. We found that 22 proposals expand on recent or 
ongoing State and USAID activities funded through other foreign 
assistance accounts. For example, Colombia's Section 1207 project in 
fiscal year 2007, which aimed to stabilize regions of that country 
recently freed from insurgent control, supported an interagency body 
of the Colombian government that the U.S. Southern Command had funded 
3 years earlier.[Footnote 26] In addition, Tajikistan's Section 1207 
project in fiscal year 2008, intended to reduce the potential for 
conflict in unstable areas, supports community policing and local 
government development activities that build upon previous and 
continuing USAID and State initiatives. Finally, Uganda's Section 1207 
project in fiscal year 2009, aimed at reestablishing the rule of law 
in the north of the country, includes training for police and 
construction of community justice centers, which have both been 
implemented under previous and current USAID initiatives. 

In December 2009, the Congress established the Complex Crises Fund, 
which provides greater flexibility to USAID to prevent or respond to 
emerging or unforeseen complex crises overseas. The Congress 
appropriated $50 million for this fund, with which the Administrator 
of USAID can fund such programs and activities, in consultation with 
the Secretary of State. Furthermore, in its proposed budget for fiscal 
year 2011, released in February 2010, State requested another $100 
million in flexible contingency funding to meet unforeseen 
reconstruction and stabilization needs. This request is intended to 
transition the funding of the Section 1207 program from DOD to State. 
DOD has not requested Section 1207 funding for fiscal year 2011. 

Addressing Urgent or Emergent Threats or Opportunities More Quickly 
than Other Programs: 

We found that State and USAID can provide funding to address urgent or 
emergent threats or opportunities just as quickly, or more quickly, 
through other foreign assistance programs, than through the Section 
1207 program. For example, in Georgia, where DOD and State allotted 
$100 million in Section 1207 funds for reconstruction projects after 
the 2008 Russian invasion, State provided over $50 million in Economic 
Support Funds to start similar projects before the full amount of 
Section 1207 funds was available. In the Philippines, when faced with 
an initial delay in receiving approved Section 1207 funds in fiscal 
year 2007 for police training in Mindanao, State reprogrammed 
International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement funds for this 
purpose. Furthermore, our review of Section 1207 project proposals 
shows that the proposals for projects in Lebanon in fiscal year 2006 
and Kenya in fiscal year 2009 describe using reprogrammed funds from 
conventional accounts alongside Section 1207 funds to help achieve 
similar stabilization goals. 

Additional Implementation Costs and Funding Delays: 

Using Section 1207 funding for reconstruction, stabilization, and 
security-related projects has created a new layer of program 
management through State's Office of the Coordinator for 
Reconstruction and Stabilization (State/S/CRS)--the office responsible 
for oversight of the Section 1207 program--which has entailed 
additional implementation costs and funding delays with negative 
consequences. 

* In addition to State and USAID's normal administrative costs for 
implementing an assistance project, State/S/CRS charges a fee for 
oversight of Section 1207 projects to cover the cost of program 
support and coordination from Washington, D.C., and in the field. For 
fiscal years 2008 and 2009, this fee totaled nearly $2.5 million, 
which State/S/CRS deducted from the project funds DOD transferred to 
State. When added to State and USAID administrative costs of nearly 
$5.4 million during the same period, the State/S/CRS fee represents an 
increase of 46 percent for overall administrative costs for Section 
1207 projects during these 2 years. Furthermore, according to embassy 
officials we spoke to in Haiti, Georgia, and the Philippines, 
State/S/CRS oversight over Section 1207 has not necessarily improved 
project implementation or effectiveness. State and USAID officials at 
these embassies questioned the added value of State/S/CRS's oversight 
of the Section 1207 program. According to the officials, State/S/CRS 
offers to coordinate interagency efforts and facilitate interagency 
collaboration within the country teams to help develop and execute 
Section 1207 projects. However, the embassy officials stated that 
interagency collaboration is already a part of how their country teams 
operate, through country team working groups and the development of 
mission strategic plans, and that the ambassador or deputy chief of 
mission can encourage such collaboration when necessary. In our 
discussions with State/S/CRS officials, they identified their ability 
to facilitate a whole-of-government approach for embassy country teams 
as their key added value and cited six countries--Lebanon, Nepal, 
Panama, Sri Lanka, Tajikistan, and Uganda--where their involvement 
brought benefits. However, they did not provide any documentation to 
support this claim. 

* We also found that addressing urgent or emergent threats or 
opportunities through the Section 1207 program has caused funding 
delays, which have had some negative consequences. In two countries we 
visited, funding for State/INL-implemented activities was 
significantly delayed compared with funding for USAID activities 
within the same project. In the Philippines, U.S. embassy officials 
told us that State borrowed funds from an existing police assistance 
project in order to start its Section 1207-funded police training on 
time, with an understanding that Section 1207 funds would arrive 
quickly for reimbursement. However, the Section 1207 funds took 6 
months longer than expected to arrive, which subsequently delayed the 
existing police assistance project by 18 months and decreased the 
overall quantity of equipment procured. According to officials at the 
U.S. embassy in Georgia, a 6-month delay in receiving State's Section 
1207 funds for law enforcement activities interfered with the 
embassy's goal of simultaneously improving the security and economy in 
the conflict zone. We also found in our review of quarterly reporting 
documents for all Section 1207 projects that funding delays for State 
activities was an issue in at least three other countries--Bangladesh, 
Kenya, and Malaysia. For example, in Kenya, U.S. embassy officials 
reported that the delay of Section 1207 funds for State's police 
assistance resulted in the postponement of a State/INL assessment 
visit necessary to begin providing assistance. 

In contrast, DOD and State implement the 1206 program within the 
existing management structure of FMF, under the auspices of the 
Defense Security Cooperation Agency. Hence, the Defense Security 
Cooperation Agency charges the same administrative fees for both 
programs and procures training and equipment at least as quickly for 
Section 1206 projects as for FMF.[Footnote 27] 

Long-term Impact of Section 1206 Projects at Risk without Sustainment 
Planning: 

The long-term impact of Section 1206 projects is at risk, because it 
is uncertain whether funds will be available to sustain the military 
capabilities that these projects are intended to build. U.S. law and 
DOD and State policies limit the use of U.S. government funds for 
sustainment of Section 1206 projects, and most participating countries 
have relatively low incomes and may be unwilling or unable to provide 
the necessary resources. For the Section 1207 program, since State, 
USAID, and DOD are not restricted by law or agency policy from drawing 
on a variety of overlapping funding sources to continue and expand 
Section 1207 projects, sustainment risks are not as significant. 

Availability of Funding to Sustain Section 1206 Projects Is Uncertain: 

According to State planning documents, including department-and bureau-
level performance plans, helping partner nations achieve sustainable 
counterterrorism capabilities is a key foreign policy objective. 
[Footnote 28] In addition, the joint DOD and State Inspectors General 
report on the Section 1206 program found that continued sustainment is 
essential to achieving the intended objectives of the Section 1206 
program and that long-term sustainability of Section 1206 projects 
depends on continued investment by the partner nations or U.S. 
government.[Footnote 29] DOD officials have noted that some Section 
1206 projects are intended to address an immediate threat and may not 
require long-term sustainment. Nevertheless, according to Section 1206 
project proposal instructions, proposals must explain how projects 
will be sustained in future years. 

However, we found that the availability of sustainment funds from the 
U.S. government is uncertain. DOD and State policy has potentially 
constrained the use of U.S. government funding for Section 1206 
project sustainment. According to fiscal year 2009 program guidelines, 
the Section 1206 program should not fund projects that must be 
continued over long periods (more than 3 years) to achieve a 
capability for a partner nation. However, Section 1206 projects are 
highly dependent on U.S. funding for long-term sustainment. Prior to 
fiscal year 2009, 62 (56 percent) of 110 approved Section 1206 
proposals we reviewed indicated that FMF resources would be used to 
sustain projects. Other potential sources of sustainment funds 
identified in proposals include partner nations' own resources and 
other U.S. programs. 

Despite the new guidelines, 13 (52 percent) of the 25 approved fiscal 
year 2009 Section 1206 proposals we reviewed indicated that partner 
nations would use FMF resources to sustain Section 1206 projects. 
Furthermore, 11 (73 percent) of the 15 SAOs we interviewed had already 
requested or planned to request FMF resources to sustain Section 1206 
projects. However, several SAOs were not certain that State would 
award the funds they had requested. State determines FMF allotments to 
recipient countries based on congressional direction and availability 
of funds, and at the time of our interviews, State had not finalized 
fiscal year 2010 allotments. Moreover, in fiscal years 2006 through 
2009, 18 (34 percent) of the 53 Section 1206 recipient countries did 
not receive any FMF funding. While proposals continue to cite FMF for 
Section 1206 project sustainment, a provision of the fiscal year 2009 
Omnibus Appropriations Act potentially further constrains the use of 
FMF to sustain Section 1206 projects.[Footnote 30] This provision, 
which prohibits the use of FMF funds to support or continue any 
Section 1206 projects unless the Secretary of State justifies such use 
to the Committees on Appropriations, may limit the availability of FMF 
for Section 1206 project sustainment. 

The ability of partner nations to sustain Section 1206 projects in the 
absence of U.S. funding is also uncertain. DOD and State have not 
required countries to sign formal commitments to sustain Section 1206 
projects, and only 35 (26 percent) of the 135 proposals we reviewed 
for fiscal years 2007-2009 projects explicitly address the recipient 
country's ability or willingness to bear sustainment costs. 
Furthermore, only 9 (7 percent) of those 135 proposals provided 
estimates of the project's maintenance, operation, or other 
sustainment costs. Moreover, DOD and State have implemented 113 (76 
percent) of 149 Section 1206 projects in low-or lower-middle-income 
countries, as classified by the World Bank, where funding for 
sustainment efforts may be scarce.[Footnote 31] Only 1 of the SAOs we 
interviewed in 15 countries indicated that he believed his partner 
nation had the ability to sustain its Section 1206 projects 
independently; 6 SAOs said that they did not believe their partner 
nations had this ability, and 8 were uncertain. For example, the SAO 
in Nigeria was concerned about that country's ability to support long-
term maintenance activities for the vehicles, surveillance, and other 
Section 1206-funded equipment. Similarly, the SAO in Mali noted that 
sustainment of the Section 1206 project to train and equip that 
country's light infantry units would be problematic if the country had 
to find its own funding. Only the SAO in Malaysia believed that the 
partner nation would fund the necessary sustainment of its maritime 
surveillance projects, based on that government's stated intention to 
do so. Furthermore, Section 1206 program managers at U.S. geographic 
combatant commands also questioned the likelihood of partner nations 
to sustain Section 1206 projects. For example, at the U.S. Africa 
Command, the Section 1206 program manager explained that while the 
command would prefer that partner nations budget for sustainment 
activities, it was unlikely this would happen.[Footnote 32] 

State and USAID Can Leverage Other U.S. Assistance Program Resources 
to Sustain Section 1207 Projects: 

Since the Section 1207 program does not have the same statutory or 
policy constraints as the Section 1206 program on using other U.S. 
assistance program resources to sustain projects, State and USAID use 
other U.S. assistance program resources for this purpose. State and 
DOD acknowledged in fiscal year 2008 guidelines that Section 1207 
projects should seek to achieve short-term security, stabilization, or 
reconstruction objectives that are coordinated with longer-term 
development efforts to be sustained by the host government, 
international organizations, or other forms of U.S. foreign 
assistance. In our visits to Haiti, Georgia, and the Philippines, we 
found that State and USAID have provided assistance through other 
projects that are similar to Section 1207 projects and help sustain 
and consolidate their impacts. For example, in Haiti, USAID's 
implementing partners have helped support the goals of the fiscal year 
2007 Section 1207 project by funding assistance activities in Cité 
Soleil and neighboring areas through other ongoing USAID projects. In 
addition, in September 2009, State and USAID officials in Haiti told 
us that they planned to continue efforts to stabilize Port-au-Prince 
by using Economic Support Funds and International Narcotics Control 
and Law Enforcement funding. In the Philippines, where the Section 
1207 project in fiscal year 2007 has attempted to stabilize the region 
of Mindanao through economic development, USAID applied funds from an 
ongoing project in the region to supplement a Section 1207 activity--
an upgrade to a local water distribution system--that required 
additional support. 

Furthermore, in our review of all 28 proposals for Section 1207 
projects, we found that 21 proposals address the issue of sustainment 
by identifying possible sources of funding to sustain or build on 
project results. Among the 21 proposals, 17 identify additional U.S. 
foreign assistance funding as a source, 10 cite host government 
resources, and 5 mention other donors, such as other countries and 
international organizations.[Footnote 33] Only 3 proposals identify 
host government resources as the sole source of possible sustainment 
funding: Two of these are for upper-middle-income countries and the 
third is in a lower-middle-income country. Not every project goal 
funded through the Section 1207 program requires sustainment funding. 
For example, in Georgia's Section 1207 project in fiscal year 2008, 
USAID funded a "winter wheat" initiative, which was designed as 
onetime assistance to provide seed, fertilizer, and other supplies so 
that farmers disrupted by the 2008 Russian invasion could produce a 
wheat crop in the months after the conflict. As a result of this 
initiative, the farmers harvested a better than expected wheat crop in 
the fall of 2009, according to the Georgian Deputy Minister of 
Agriculture. 

Section 1206 and 1207 Program Monitoring and Evaluation Is Weak: 

DOD and State have conducted little monitoring and evaluation of the 
Section 1206 and Section 1207 programs. DOD and State have not carried 
out systematic program monitoring for the Section 1206 program, and 
reporting has generally consisted of anecdotal information, although 
DOD has taken initial steps to establish such a system. For the 
Section 1207 program, State requires quarterly reporting on project 
implementation but has not analyzed this information or reported 
results to DOD to inform program management and funding decisions. As 
a result of these deficiencies, U.S. agencies have made decisions to 
sustain and expand both Section 1206 and 1207 projects without formal 
assessments of project progress or impact. 

The Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 requires agencies 
to develop objective performance measures, monitor progress on 
achieving goals, and report on their progress in their annual 
performance reports.[Footnote 34] Our previous work has noted that the 
lack of clear, measurable goals makes it difficult for program 
managers and staff to link their day-to-day efforts to achieving the 
agency's intended mission.[Footnote 35] Furthermore, according to 
Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government, U.S. 
agencies should monitor and assess the quality of performance over 
time.[Footnote 36] In addition, we have previously reported that key 
practices for enhancing and sustaining interagency collaboration 
include developing mechanisms to monitor, evaluate, and report the 
results of collaborative programs; reinforcing agency accountability 
for collaborative efforts through agency plans and reports; and 
reinforcing individual accountability for collaborative efforts 
through agency performance management systems.[Footnote 37] Also, the 
Congress has directed the Secretaries of Defense and State to report 
on the implementation and impact of Building Global Partnership 
authorities provided under the Section 1206 and 1207 authorities no 
later than December 31, 2010.[Footnote 38] 

Section 1206 Program Lacks Measurable Performance Objectives, 
Monitoring and Evaluation Plans, and Results Reporting: 

DOD and State have not consistently defined performance measures for 
their Section 1206 projects, although the agencies have made some 
improvement in doing so. Section 1206 program guidelines and 
instructions for fiscal year 2007 required project proposals to 
identify measures of effectiveness, and in fiscal year 2008, revised 
instructions required project proposals to identify the anticipated 
outcomes. However, we found that only 27 percent (30) of 110 approved 
proposals for fiscal year 2007 and 2008 provided this 
information.[Footnote 39] DOD and State refined the instructions for 
fiscal year 2009 by requiring project proposals to identify measures 
of effectiveness.[Footnote 40] As a result, 72 percent (18 of 25) of 
projects approved in fiscal year 2009 include this information. 
Overall, DOD and State have defined measures of effectiveness or 
anticipated outcomes for only 32 percent (48 of 149) of all projects 
approved from fiscal years 2006 through 2009. 

Furthermore, DOD and State have not established a plan to monitor and 
evaluate Section 1206 program results systematically. DOD officials 
stated that they had not consistently monitored Section 1206 projects, 
and State officials were not involved with or aware of a formal 
evaluation process. In addition, only 34 (25 percent) of 135 approved 
fiscal year 2007-2009 proposals we reviewed documented an intention to 
monitor project results. Some SAOs we interviewed noted that embassy 
officials sometimes informally monitor Section 1206 project 
activities. For example, in Georgia, U.S. military trainers observed 
the use and maintenance of some Section 1206 program-funded equipment 
when they helped prepare troops for deployment to Afghanistan. Also, 
in Sri Lanka, DOD officials inspected some Section 1206 equipment when 
they hosted an Inspector General visit to the country. 

Although regular reporting on performance is an established good 
management practice, DOD and State have not required Section 1206 
program managers to report on progress or results. Only one of the six 
U.S. geographic combatant commands indicated that it routinely 
required SAOs implementing Section 1206 projects overseas to submit 
regular progress reports. Furthermore, 13 of the 15 SAOs we 
interviewed indicated that they do not routinely submit any formal 
reports to DOD or State on the Section 1206 projects they implement. 
For example, 1 SAO indicated that no reports were required and that he 
had not volunteered to write any. A few SAOs noted that they report 
the status of equipment deliveries, but not project results or impact. 
DOD and State have undertaken two evaluations of the Section 1206 
program, focusing largely on initial projects. The first, prepared by 
a contractor in July 2008, addressed fiscal year 2006 and 2007 
projects in Lebanon, Yemen, Pakistan, and São Tomé and Principe. 
[Footnote 41] The second, prepared jointly by the DOD and State 
Inspectors General, focused on seven countries with projects approved 
in fiscal year 2006.[Footnote 42] Since DOD and State had not 
established objective performance measures for most of the projects 
reviewed, these reports relied heavily on anecdotal information to 
assess progress and effectiveness. 

These monitoring, evaluation, and reporting deficiencies may stem from 
DOD's and State's unclear assignment of roles and responsibilities for 
these tasks. We have previously reported that clearly identifying 
roles and responsibilities and establishing policies to operate across 
agency boundaries are key practices for enhancing interagency 
collaboration. However, DOD and State have not applied these practices 
for Section 1206 program monitoring and evaluation. Section 1206 
program managers we spoke to at U.S. geographic combatant commands had 
varied opinions regarding who should be responsible for monitoring 
Section 1206 projects. For example, officials at the U.S. Central 
Command indicated that monitoring and evaluation should be the joint 
responsibility of State, relevant embassies' chiefs of mission, U.S. 
geographic combatant commands, as well as the SAOs. The security 
assistance manager at the U.S. Africa Command understood that 
monitoring was a responsibility of the relevant embassy country teams. 
Meanwhile, DOD officials in the Office of the Secretary of Defense 
told us they thought the U.S. geographic combatant commands should 
evaluate Section 1206 projects. One project proposal indicated only 
that "the embassy" should be responsible for monitoring the project in 
question, without identifying any particular office for this task. 

DOD and State lack a monitoring and evaluation system; nevertheless, 
they have requested additional funding to sustain Section 1206 
projects without documented evidence of results. SAOs have sometimes 
submitted FMF requests for Section 1206 project sustainment before the 
projects are fully implemented in order to have those funds available 
by the end of the 2-year period for which spare parts are typically 
included in Section 1206 packages. For example, the SAO in Lebanon 
explained that the Lebanon Armed Forces planned to use FMF to sustain 
its Section 1206 projects, and that he had already submitted FMF 
requests to that end despite the fact that most Section 1206 projects 
in Lebanon have not yet been fully implemented. In Ukraine, the SAO 
has submitted FMF requests for fiscal years 2010 through 2012, 
although some of the Section 1206 equipment had not yet been shipped 
to the country. 

According to a DOD official in the Office of the Assistant Secretary 
of Defense for Special Operations, Low Intensity Conflict, and 
Interdependent Capabilities--the office with overall responsibility 
for the Section 1206 program--DOD has begun to implement a new two- 
phase initiative to assess Section 1206 projects. This assessment 
process is intended to use both quantitative and qualitative 
performance-related data to form the basis for measuring progress 
toward desired project outcomes. For the first phase, DOD has hired a 
contractor to identify current Section 1206 roles, data sources, and 
ongoing assessment activities to develop a framework for implementing 
Section 1206 assessments. The contract was signed in January 2010 and 
the final deliverable is due 8 months later. According to the officer, 
the second phase will consist of using the newly designed framework to 
assess a sample of Section 1206 projects. In addition, the official 
indicated that resources would not be available to evaluate all 
Section 1206 projects, and that the agency had not yet determined what 
sample of countries would be assessed. 

Section 1207 Projects Have Measures of Effectiveness, but State Has 
Conducted Limited Monitoring and Evaluation: 

In general, State and USAID have established measures of effectiveness 
for individual Section 1207 projects. In our review of all 28 approved 
proposals for the Section 1207 program, we found that 25 proposals 
identified measures of effectiveness or performance indicators. For 
example, in the Philippines, State and USAID indicated that they would 
assess the effectiveness of a Section 1207 project by measuring 
changes in private sector investment, the prevalence of waterborne 
diseases, and police response times, among other performance 
indicators. 

State and DOD first issued guidelines for Section 1207 project 
monitoring in January 2008, 2 years after the program began. According 
to these guidelines, embassies with Section 1207 projects are 
responsible for submitting quarterly progress reports containing both 
narrative and financial data to State's Office of the Coordinator for 
Reconstruction and Stabilization (State/S/CRS) and to DOD's Office of 
Partnership Strategy and Stability Operations.[Footnote 43] According 
to the guidelines, the reports should describe the project's progress 
against the measures of effectiveness established in the project 
proposal, identify any challenges expected over the next quarter, and 
describe the expenditure to date on different project activities. 
[Footnote 44] State/S/CRS officials told us that, initially, embassies 
typically submitted these reports several months later than expected, 
but that punctuality improved after State/S/CRS hosted a Section 1207 
program conference in May 2009. Since then, State/S/CRS officials said 
they usually receive reports within 30 days after the end of the 
quarter. 

State/S/CRS officials told us that they had not fully analyzed the 
quarterly reports they received. According to these officials, 
State/S/CRS began systematically analyzing the financial information 
contained in the reports in April 2009, thereby monitoring the 
progress of project implementation by tracking the obligation and 
expenditure of funds over time for each component of the projects. 
However, State/S/CRS officials indicated that they routinely reviewed 
the reports when they arrived, but had not systematically analyzed 
them, because of staffing shortages. Thus, State/S/CRS was not 
systematically monitoring project effectiveness or implementation 
challenges described in the narrative section of these reports as a 
basis for providing program oversight. In December 2009, State/S/CRS 
assigned an additional employee to review the narrative reports. 

Although Section 1207 program guidelines instruct embassies to submit 
quarterly reports to both State and DOD, embassies have not been 
sending these reports to DOD, and State/S/CRS has not forwarded them. 
State/S/CRS officials indicated that they have provided DOD 
information on problems with Section 1207 projects but not on progress 
or effectiveness. An official in DOD's Office of Partnership Strategy 
and Stability Operations responsible for the Section 1207 program 
issues told us that, as of mid-December 2009, he had not received any 
Section 1207 quarterly reports, but that he was working with 
State/S/CRS to develop an evaluation process for Section 1207 
projects. Because of limited monitoring and evaluation, State and DOD 
have made decisions about sustaining Section 1207 projects without 
documentation on project progress or effectiveness. For example, 
officials at the U.S. Southern Command told us that they did not 
support a proposal from the U.S. embassy in Haiti for a second Section 
1207 project in fiscal year 2008 because they were not aware of the 
implementation progress or results of the first project. Nevertheless, 
State/S/CRS officials told us that the information obtained from the 
quarterly reports informed decisions about proposal approval and 
funding at the decision-making level. 

State/S/CRS officials told us that in January 2010 they began efforts 
to develop information for the congressionally required report on the 
implementation and impact of the Section 1207 program, which is due on 
December 31, 2010. In particular, State/S/CRS offered to hire 
evaluation specialists to help embassies receiving Section 1207 
program funds in fiscal year 2009 meet the congressional reporting 
requirement by developing a monitoring strategy and carrying out data 
collection and analysis. State/S/CRS has not offered this assistance 
to embassies that received program funds in prior years, which 
represent 59 percent of all Section 1207 funding through fiscal year 
2009. 

Conclusions: 

The Section 1206 and 1207 programs are aimed at achieving high-
priority counterterrorism, stabilization, reconstruction, and security 
objectives for the United States. Anecdotal evidence from some early 
Section 1206 and 1207 projects suggests that individual projects under 
both programs could achieve noteworthy results, but achieving long-
term results from the projects is likely to require a sustained U.S. 
effort, especially in poorer countries. State and USAID can continue 
to draw upon traditional foreign aid programs to continue nonmilitary 
assistance initiated under Section 1207. However, as the appropriate 
funding source for sustaining military assistance under Section 1206 
is unclear, given current legal restrictions and agency policy, DOD 
and State need guidance from the Congress on how to fund longer-term 
assistance. Furthermore, without a rigorous monitoring and evaluation 
system, DOD and State have gathered little evidence to prove that the 
programs have been effective and whether continued funding should be 
provided to sustain the efforts they have initiated. The Section 1207 
authority has allowed DOD to infuse existing USAID and State programs 
with additional resources to help those agencies achieve their 
objectives. However, channeling these resources through the Section 
1207 authority has created a new layer of program management, which 
appears to be largely redundant and entails additional implementation 
costs and funding delays. Moreover, a new funding source for projects 
similar to those of the Section 1207 program may supplant the need to 
continue Section 1207 funding. 

Matter for Congressional Consideration: 

In preparing to reauthorize U.S. national defense programs, the 
Congress should consider requiring the Secretaries of Defense and 
State to document how Section 1207 projects are distinct from those of 
other foreign assistance programs and that these projects incur no 
additional implementation costs and experience no funding delays 
beyond those of other foreign assistance programs. In the absence of 
this documentation, the Congress should consider not reauthorizing the 
Section 1207 program for fiscal year 2011 and, instead, appropriate 
funds to State and USAID programs. 

Recommendations for Executive Action: 

We are making five recommendations relating to the Section 1206 and 
1207 programs. For the Section 1206 program, we recommend that the 
Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Secretary of State, (1) 
develop and implement specific plans to monitor, evaluate, and report 
routinely on Section 1206 project outcomes and their impact on U.S. 
strategic objectives; (2) base further decisions about sustaining 
existing Section 1206 projects on the results of such monitoring and 
evaluation; (3) estimate the cost of sustaining projects at the time 
they are proposed and, where possible, obtain a commitment from 
partner nations to fund those costs; and (4) seek further guidance 
from the Congress on what funding authorities are appropriate to 
sustain Section 1206 projects when the Secretary determines that (a) 
projects address specific terrorist and stabilization threats in high-
priority countries, (b) reliable monitoring and evaluation have shown 
that projects are effective, and (c) partner nation funds are 
unavailable. For the Section 1207 program, we recommend that the 
Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Secretary of State and 
the Administrator of USAID, develop and implement specific plans to 
monitor, evaluate, and report on their outcomes and their impact on 
U.S. strategic objectives to determine whether continued funding for 
these projects is appropriate under other authorities and programs. 

Agency Comments and Our Evaluation: 

We provided a draft of this report to DOD, State, and USAID. We 
received written comments from all three, which we have reprinted in 
appendixes V, VI, and VII, respectively. The agencies also provided 
technical comments, which we incorporated throughout the report, as 
appropriate. 

DOD concurred with all of our recommendations. 

State indicated in its written comments that it appreciated the 
observations contained in our report and would take them into account 
when shaping the Complex Crises Fund, which State requested for fiscal 
year 2011 to replace the Section 1207 program. State noted that this 
new fund will solve many of the issues outlined in our report, 
including an unwieldy funds transfer process that has sometimes 
prevented as rapid a response to immediate needs as State would have 
preferred. State also indicated that our findings regarding the 
limited monitoring and evaluation for the Section 1207 program and 
additional administrative costs entailed by the program were 
contradictory, noting that State has increasingly developed and 
refined its monitoring and evaluation of Section 1207 projects, 
requiring adequate administrative costs to carry out. We disagree. 
While State/S/CRS had taken some steps to increase its monitoring of 
Section 1207 projects, it had neither systematically analyzed embassy 
reports on the effectiveness of Section 1207 projects nor provided 
these reports to its DOD counterparts responsible for the projects' 
funding. Accordingly, we do not believe that these efforts justified 
the additional fees this office charged beyond those that State and 
USAID already charged to implement the projects. 

USAID noted in its written comments that our report highlights several 
issues of interest to all agencies participating in the Section 1207 
process and that USAID looks forward to continuing to refine its 
business processes based on our review. 

We are sending copies of the report to the Secretaries of Defense and 
State and other interested parties or interested congressional 
committees. In addition, the report will be available at no charge on 
the GAO Web site at [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]. 

If you or your staff have questions about this report, please contact 
me at (202) 512-8979 or at christoffj@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 VIII. 

Signed by: 

Joseph A. Christoff: 
Director, International Affairs and Trade: 

List of Congressional Committees: 

The Honorable Carl Levin:
Chairman:
The Honorable John McCain:
Ranking Member:
Committee on Armed Services:
United States Senate: 

The Honorable John F. Kerry:
Chairman:
The Honorable Richard G. Lugar:
Ranking Member:
Committee on Foreign Relations:
United States Senate: 

The Honorable Daniel K. Akaka:
Chairman:
The Honorable George V. Voinovich:
Ranking Member:
Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, the Federal 
Workforce, and the District of Colombia:
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs:
United States Senate: 

The Honorable Ike Skelton:
Chairman:
The Honorable Howard P. McKeon:
Ranking Member:
Committee on Armed Services:
House of Representatives: 

The Honorable Howard L. Berman:
Chairman:
The Honorable Ileana Ros-Lehtinen:
Ranking Member:
Committee on Foreign Affairs:
House of Representatives: 

[End of section] 

Appendix I: Scope and Methodology: 

Our review encompassed all projects funded by the Department of 
Defense (DOD) under authorities in Sections 1206 and 1207 of the 
National Defense Authorization Act of Fiscal Year 2006, as amended, 
during fiscal years 2006 through 2009. For more in-depth project 
review, we focused on 18 of the 62 countries receiving assistance 
under these programs: Albania, the Bahamas, Georgia, Haiti, 
Kazakhstan, Malaysia, and the Philippines, where we visited with U.S. 
embassy officials and host country officials, as well as implementing 
partner representatives in Section 1207 recipient countries; Ethiopia, 
Pakistan, and Uganda, where we interviewed U.S. embassy officials in 
conjunction with other GAO work; and Honduras, Kenya, Lebanon, Mali, 
Mexico, Nigeria, Sri Lanka, and Ukraine, where we conducted interviews 
with security assistance officers (SAO) or other project managers via 
telephone. To select countries to visit, we ranked all 62 countries 
based on the following criteria: (1) the amount of Section 1206 and 
1207 program funding a country had received in order to include 
countries representing a significant portion of total funding, as well 
as both large and small individual projects from each program; (2) the 
year when a country's projects began, in order to visit mature 
projects; (3) the presence of both Section 1206 and Section 1207 
projects in a country, in order to use our time efficiently in 
visiting projects from both programs in single country visits; (4) DOD 
and State suggestions; (5) recent GAO or DOD and State Inspectors 
General visits, to reduce the burden on embassies; (6) congressional 
interest; (7) security considerations; and (8) opportunities to 
consolidate the fieldwork of multiple GAO engagements. We selected the 
highest-ranking countries within the areas of responsibility of each 
of the six U.S. geographic combatant commands. For telephone 
interviews, we selected the next-highest-ranking country within the 
area of responsibility of each combatant command and four additional 
countries of strategic importance.[Footnote 45] The results of our 
work for the 18 countries we selected are not necessarily 
generalizable to all 62 countries receiving assistance under these 
programs. 

To assess the extent to which the Section 1206 and 1207 programs have 
been consistent with U.S. government strategic priorities, we 
conducted the following work. 

* We interviewed DOD, State, and U.S. Agency for International 
Development (USAID) officials involved in implementing Section 1206 
and 1207 programs and documented their views on how ongoing projects 
relate to U.S. strategies and priorities. At DOD we spoke to officials 
from the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) and Joint Staff and 
the Defense Security Cooperation Agency, in Washington, D.C.; the U.S. 
Special Operations Command in Tampa, Florida; the six geographic 
combatant commands--the U.S. Africa Command and the U.S. European 
Command in Stuttgart, Germany; the U.S. Central Command in Tampa, 
Florida; the U.S. Northern Command in Colorado Springs, Colorado (by 
telephone); the U.S. Pacific Command in Honolulu, Hawaii; and the U.S. 
Southern Command in Miami, Florida; and the Africa Command Navy 
component, in Naples, Italy. At State we spoke to officials in the 
Bureau of Political-Military Affairs and the Office of the Coordinator 
for Reconstruction and Stabilization (State/S/CRS) in Washington, D.C. 
At USAID we spoke to officials from the Office of the Chief Operating 
Officer and the Bureau for Democracy, Conflict, and Humanitarian 
Assistance in Washington, D.C. We also interviewed U.S. embassy 
officials (by telephone or in person) in all 18 countries we selected. 
[Footnote 46] To identify U.S. strategic priorities, we also obtained 
and analyzed documents, such as mission strategic plans and lists of 
priority countries identified by the U.S. intelligence community. 

* We analyzed Section 1206 program funding data and DOD's priority 
country list to determine the percentage of funding that has been 
allotted for countries on this list. We calculated this amount overall 
and for each year to identify any trends over time. Since the list of 
priority countries is classified, we aggregated the information we 
reported from our analysis to avoid disclosing classified information. 
We used funding data based on allotments for each Section 1206 
project, in line with DOD's notifications to the Congress, which we 
determined were sufficiently reliable for our purposes. 

* We analyzed all written project proposals for approved Section 1206 
program-funded projects to determine how many of them described 
specific terrorist threats. DOD officials consistently identified 
these proposals as the most authoritative and detailed documents about 
each project's purpose and objectives. In all, DOD and State have 
approved 92 proposals, accounting for 149 projects. No formal 
proposals had been submitted for the 11 projects approved in fiscal 
year 2006 and 3 projects approved in fiscal years 2007 and 2008. We 
analyzed the proposals for 135 projects from fiscal years 2007-2009: 
62 projects approved in 2007, 48 projects approved in 2008, and 25 
projects approved in 2009. We determined that a project proposal 
addressed a specific threat if it (1) provided information indicating 
that some terrorist act had occurred, had been attempted, or had been 
or was being planned for in the country/region of the project, or (2) 
referred to a terrorist organization or individual in the 
country/region of the project that posed a threat that was being 
targeted by the proposed project. If project proposals did not meet 
these criteria, we determined that they addressed a nonspecific 
threat. Projects that we determined fell into this second category 
included those that addressed the global threat of terrorism, the 
existence of ungoverned territory, illegal fishing, smuggling, 
narcotics trafficking, human trafficking, piracy, or other illegal 
activities not specifically tied to observable terrorist-related 
activity in the country/region in question. Two analysts independently 
reviewed all the proposals according to these criteria, and any 
disagreements in the determinations both made were resolved through 
discussion. 

* We reviewed applicable Section 1207 program guidelines to identify 
the requirements related to meeting U.S. stabilization priorities. We 
then analyzed Section 1207 program funding data and a U.S. government 
watchlist identifying countries vulnerable to state failure to 
determine the percentage of program funding that has been allotted for 
countries on this list. Since the watchlist is classified, we did not 
present specific data from our analysis to avoid disclosing classified 
information. We also analyzed political risk data compiled by IHS 
Global Insight, a private forecasting firm, to determine the 
percentage of project funds that were allotted to countries 
categorized as having high, very high, or extremely high short-term, 
internal political risk. This political risk score is a weighted 
average summary of probabilities that different political events, both 
domestic and external, such as civil war and trade conflicts, will 
reduce gross domestic product growth rates. The subjective 
probabilities are assessed by economists and country analysts at 
Global Insight on the basis of a wide range of information, and are 
reviewed by a team to ensure consistency across countries. The 
measures are revised quarterly; the measure we used comes from the 
first quarter of the year after each project proposal for the 
corresponding country was approved, except in the case of fiscal year 
2009 projects, for which we used data from the third quarter of 2009 
because data from the first quarter of 2010 were not yet available at 
the time of our review. We combined the results for all years to 
indicate what percentage of total funding was allotted to countries 
within each political risk category. To assess the reliability of the 
risk rating data, we interviewed officials of IHS Global Insight and 
reviewed related documents describing the methods used to gather these 
data and the internal control mechanisms employed to ensure 
consistency and reliability. We also compared the risk scores of 
similar sources of data related to country political risk to assess 
overall consistency. We determined that these risk rating data were 
sufficiently reliable for the purpose of assessing the general level 
of political stability of countries receiving Section 1207 program 
assistance. In addition, we reviewed all 28 approved proposals 
relating to 25 projects in the Section 1207 program in fiscal years 
2006 through 2009 and assessed the extent to which proposals were for 
projects to help countries recover from or prevent instability. 
[Footnote 47] We considered that a project proposal addressed the 
prevention of instability if (1) the project objectives described an 
attempt to prevent, deny, counter, or reduce threat(s) to stability, 
such as armed conflict, violence, extremism, or terrorism/terrorists, 
or (2) the project objectives described an attempt to strengthen or 
enhance stability, and (3) the project did not address recovery from a 
specific event or occurrence of instability. We considered that a 
project proposal addressed the recovery from instability if (1) the 
project objectives described a specific event or occurrence of 
instability (e.g., insurgency, war, or episodic or recurring violence) 
and supported postconflict reconstruction or rebuilding efforts, or 
(2) the project objectives described efforts to help foreign 
governments regain or reestablish control over territories or 
institutions that were previously ungoverned or under the control of 
criminals, terrorists, or insurgents. Two analysts independently 
reviewed all the proposals according to these criteria, and any 
disagreements in the determinations both made were resolved through 
discussion. We used funding data based on allotments for each Section 
1207 project, in line with DOD's notifications to the Congress, which 
we determined were sufficiently reliable for our purposes. 

To assess the extent to which the Section 1206 and 1207 programs are 
distinct from other U.S. programs, we conducted the following work. 

* We reviewed applicable Section 1206 program guidelines to identify 
the requirements relating to project distinctness. We then reviewed 
all available written proposals for projects to which these 
requirements applied (e.g., we compared projects approved in fiscal 
year 2009 with fiscal year 2009 guidelines) and analyzed the 
information that the proposals provided to distinguish the proposed 
project from those funded by other security assistance programs. We 
categorized each proposal based on whether the proposal (1) explained 
the reason(s), other than the lack of available funds, that another 
program could not be used; (2) did not address whether the proposed 
project was distinct from projects funded by other programs, other 
than the lack of available funds; or (3) identified one or more 
similar or related projects funded by another program but did not 
explain how the proposed project was distinct. Two analysts 
independently reviewed all the proposals according to these criteria, 
and any disagreements in the determinations both made were resolved 
through discussion. We considered only those proposals meeting the 
first criterion to have documented that the proposed project was 
distinct. 

* We also interviewed relevant staff--at OSD; State's Bureau for 
Political-Military Affairs; all six geographic combatant commands; the 
Africa Command Navy component; and the U.S. embassies in Albania, the 
Bahamas, Georgia, Kazakhstan, the Philippines, Malaysia, Ethiopia, 
Pakistan, Honduras, Lebanon, Mali, Mexico, Nigeria, Sri Lanka, and 
Ukraine--in person or by telephone, and documented their views on the 
factors that distinguish Section 1206 projects from other train and 
equip projects that they help implement under other programs. To 
determine whether funding assistance under Section 1206, instead of 
other traditional security assistance programs, entailed additional 
costs or funding delays, we asked an official from the Defense 
Security Cooperation Agency overseeing the Section 1206 program about 
the fees and implementation timing under this program and Foreign 
Military Financing (FMF). 

* We reviewed applicable Section 1207 program guidelines to identify 
the requirements relating to project distinctness. We then reviewed 
all proposals for projects to which these requirements applied (i.e., 
28 approved proposals for fiscal years 2006 through 2009) and assessed 
the extent to which the proposals included information to distinguish 
the respective project from those funded under other foreign 
assistance programs. We considered a proposed project to be distinct 
from other projects if (1) no other related projects were identified 
in the proposal, or (2) the proposed project did not fund a 
continuation of a prior or existing program in that country, through 
expansion of its geographic scope or an increase in the number of 
identical or closely related activities. For example, we did not 
consider an initiative to increase funding for an existing school 
construction program to build additional schools in other regions of a 
country to be distinct. We did not consider projects to be undertaken 
using existing contracting mechanisms, grants, or cooperative 
agreements to be distinct unless the type of proposed activity funded 
was described as being substantially different from ongoing 
activities. Two analysts independently reviewed all the proposals 
according to these criteria, and any disagreements in the 
determinations both made were resolved through discussion. 

* We reviewed quarterly reports from countries that received Section 
1207 program funding for State's Bureau of International Narcotics and 
Law Enforcement activities to determine if funding delays were an 
issue. We also reviewed Section 1207 program funding data to determine 
the administrative costs charged by State/S/CRS, State (at U.S. 
embassies), and USAID. In addition, we interviewed cognizant officials 
at the U.S. embassies in Georgia, Haiti, Malaysia, the Philippines, 
and Uganda, and documented their views of the factors that distinguish 
respective Section 1207 projects from other assistance activities that 
they help implement under other programs. We also interviewed 
cognizant officials at USAID, State/S/CRS, and five geographic 
commands and documented their views on this topic. 

To determine the extent to which the Section 1206 and 1207 projects 
have addressed the sustainment needs of executed projects, we 
conducted the following work. 

* We reviewed State and USAID documents describing U.S. foreign policy 
goals relating to sustainment of international counterterrorism- 
related efforts. We also reviewed Section 1206 program guidelines to 
identify requirements relating to project sustainment. We then 
reviewed all available written proposals for projects to which these 
requirements applied (i.e., projects approved in fiscal year 2009) and 
analyzed the information that each proposal included relating to 
project sustainment. We identified all the sources of funding that 
each proposal indicated would be used to sustain the project and 
categorized them as Foreign Military Financing, U.S. programs other 
than FMF, or host country funds. We also identified those proposals 
that indicated that host nation funds alone would be used for 
sustainment. Two analysts independently reviewed all the proposals 
according to these criteria, and any disagreements in the 
determinations both made were resolved through discussion. 

* We also interviewed cognizant officials at OSD, State's Bureau for 
Political-Military Affairs, all six geographic combatant commands, the 
Africa Command Navy component, and the U.S. embassies in Albania, the 
Bahamas, Ethiopia, Georgia, Honduras, Kazakhstan, Lebanon, Malaysia, 
Mali, Mexico, Nigeria, Pakistan, the Philippines, Sri Lanka, and 
Ukraine, and documented their views regarding sustainment of ongoing 
Section 1206 projects. We also used the World Bank's 2010 country 
income ratings to analyze the potential ability of recipient countries 
to independently sustain Section 1206 projects. 

* We reviewed applicable Section 1207 program guidelines to identify 
the requirements relating to project sustainment. We then reviewed all 
available written proposals to which these requirements applied (i.e., 
all 28 approved proposals for fiscal years 2006 through 2009) and 
assessed whether each proposal included information relating to 
project sustainment. We identified all the sources of funding that 
each proposal indicated would be used to sustain the project and 
categorized them as U.S. government assistance, host nation funds, or 
non-U.S. donors or other sources. We also identified those proposals 
that indicated that host nation resources alone would be used for 
sustainment. Two analysts independently reviewed all the proposals 
according to these criteria, and any disagreements in the 
determinations both made were resolved through discussion. In 
addition, we interviewed relevant staff at U.S. embassies in Georgia, 
Haiti, Malaysia, and the Philippines, and documented their views 
regarding sustainment of ongoing Section 1207 projects. We also 
documented the views on this topic from cognizant officials at USAID, 
State/S/CRS, and five geographic combatant commands. For those 
projects where potential sustainment from U.S. or other donor sources 
was not addressed by project proposals, we used the World Bank's 2010 
country income ratings to analyze the potential ability of the 
recipient countries to independently sustain Section 1207 activities. 
We determined that these data were sufficiently reliable for the 
purpose of this analysis. 

To establish the extent to which the Section 1206 and 1207 programs 
incorporate plans for monitoring and evaluation to assess project 
impact and inform program implementation, we conducted the following 
work. 

* We reviewed applicable Section 1206 and 1207 program guidelines, as 
well as authorizing legislation, the Government Performance and 
Results Act of 2003, and Standards for Internal Controls in the 
Federal Government to identify the requirements relating to project 
monitoring and evaluation. 

* To determine what monitoring and evaluation has been conducted and 
what was planned for the Section 1206 program, we interviewed 
cognizant DOD and State officials in Washington, D.C., and at the six 
U.S. geographic combatant commands and the Africa Command Navy 
component, as well as U.S. officials in Albania, the Bahamas, 
Ethiopia, Georgia, Honduras, Kazakhstan, Lebanon, Malaysia, Mali, 
Mexico, Nigeria, Pakistan, the Philippines, Sri Lanka, and Ukraine in 
person or via telephone. We also analyzed the 135 available written 
project proposals to determine the extent to which they identified 
measurable program objectives. We considered a proposal as having a 
measurable objective if (1) it identified an objective or an expected 
outcome and a means of quantitatively or qualitatively assessing 
achievement of that objective or outcome, or (2) it identified a 
specific expected outcome, such as the establishment of a particular 
military capability or deployment of troops in a particular 
stabilization operation, specific enough that an observer could 
reasonably be expected to determine by objective means whether the 
outcome had been achieved. We did not consider a proposal as having a 
measurable objective if (1) it did not identify any objective or 
expected outcome or (2) it described the objective or expected outcome 
in general terms, such as achieving long-term stability or 
establishing an effective deterrence against extremist incursions, 
without identifying potential indicators or other quantitative or 
qualitative means to assess the achievement of that objective or 
outcome. Two analysts independently reviewed all the proposals 
according to these criteria, and any disagreements in the 
determinations both made were resolved through discussion. 

* To determine what monitoring and evaluation has been conducted and 
what was planned for the Section 1207 program, we interviewed 
cognizant DOD, State, and USAID officials, as well as agency officials 
at five U.S. geographic combatant commands. In addition, we 
interviewed relevant staff at U.S. embassies in Georgia, Haiti, 
Malaysia, and the Philippines, and documented their views regarding 
monitoring and evaluation of ongoing Section 1207 projects. We also 
analyzed all 28 approved proposals to determine the extent to which 
they identified measures of effectiveness. We considered a proposal to 
have measures of effectiveness if it identified either quantitative or 
qualitative measures or performance indicators that would be used to 
assess the results of the proposed project. We did not require the 
proposal to provide detailed information about every measure or 
indicator that would be used, but we considered a basic description of 
them or examples as adequate evidence to meet the criteria. We did not 
consider a reference to State's standard performance measurement 
structure as adequate evidence to meet our criteria unless the 
proposal identified which standard measures would be used. Two 
analysts independently reviewed all the proposals according to these 
criteria, and any disagreements in the determinations both made were 
resolved through discussion. 

We conducted this performance audit from February 2009 to April 2010 
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. 

[End of section] 

Appendix II: Descriptions of Traditional DOD and State Assistance 
Programs: 

Table 3 describes selected U.S. foreign assistance programs and 
accounts that DOD, State, and USAID have traditionally used to fund 
training and equipment for counterterrorism and stabilization 
operation support and assistance related to reconstruction, security, 
and stabilization. 

Table 3: Descriptions of Select U.S. Foreign Assistance Programs and 
Accounts: 

Assistance program: Foreign Military Financing; 
Description: Foreign Military Financing provides grants and loans to 
foreign governments and international organizations for the 
acquisition of U.S. defense equipment, services, and training. FMF 
assists the militaries of friendly countries to promote bilateral, 
regional, and multilateral coalition efforts, notably in the global 
war on terrorism; improve military capabilities to contribute to 
international crisis response operations, including peacekeeping and 
humanitarian crises; contribute to the professionalism of military 
forces to include the rule of law and military subordination to 
civilian control; enhance interoperability of military forces; 
maintain support for democratically elected governments; and support 
the U.S. industrial base by promoting the export of U.S. defense-
related goods and services. 

Assistance program: Development Assistance; 
Description: The Development Assistance account is used to foster 
sustainable broad-based economic progress and social stability in 
developing countries through support of long-term projects in areas 
such as economic reform, private sector development, democracy 
promotion, environmental protection, and improvement of human health. 

Assistance program: Economic Support Funds; 
Description: The Economic Support Funds promote economic and political 
stability in strategically important regions where the United States 
has special security interests. The funds are generally provided as 
grants or loans provided on a grant basis and are available for a 
variety of economic purposes, such as infrastructure and development 
projects. 

Assistance program: Assistance for Europe, Eurasia, and Central Asia; 
Description: The Assistance for Europe, Eurasia, and Central Asia 
account supports assistance to the independent states of the former 
Soviet Union under the FREEDOM Support Act and supports East European 
democracy under the SEED Act. 

Assistance program: International Narcotics Control and Law 
Enforcement; 
Description: The International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement 
account supports country and global programs for combating 
transnational crime, including the illegal drug trade, through 
projects such as judicial sector reform and police training and 
equipment. 

Assistance program: Nonproliferation, Antiterrorism, Demining, and 
Related Programs; 
Description: The Nonproliferation, Antiterrorism, Demining, and 
Related Programs account supports programs that address the spread of 
weapons of mass destruction, assist other countries in fighting 
terrorism, and support humanitarian assistance programs such as 
demining. 

Assistance program: Peacekeeping Operations; 
Description: The Peacekeeping Operations account supports multilateral 
peacekeeping and regional stability operations that are not funded 
through the United Nations, and also addresses gaps in capabilities to 
enable countries and regional organizations to participate in 
peacekeeping, humanitarian operations, or counterterrorism operations, 
and to reform security forces in the aftermath of conflict. 

Assistance program: Transition Initiatives; 
Description: The Transition Initiatives account funds the activities 
of USAID's Office of Transition Initiatives for international disaster 
rehabilitation and reconstruction assistance, including strengthening 
democratic institutions, revitalizing basic infrastructure, and 
fostering conflict resolution. 

Assistance program: International Military Education and Training; 
Description: The International Military Education and Training (IMET) 
program provides training to military and related civilian personnel. 
IMET training exposes foreign students to U.S. military organizations 
and procedures and the manner in which military organizations function 
under civilian control. IMET aims to strengthen democratic and 
civilian control of foreign militaries, improve their understanding of 
U.S. military doctrine and operational procedures, and enhance 
interoperability. IMET facilitates the development of professional and 
personal relationships, which aim to provide U.S. access and influence 
to foreign governments. 

Assistance program: Global Peace Operations Initiative; 
Description: The U.S. Department of State Global Peace Operations 
Initiative addresses gaps in international peace operations support by 
building and maintaining the capabilities, capacities, and 
effectiveness of peace operations. 

Assistance program: Joint Combined Exchange Training; 
Description: The Joint Combined Exchange Training program activities 
involve training U.S. Special Operations Forces with foreign forces to 
ensure readiness regarding language, culture, knowledge of foreign 
environments, combat and combat support, and instructor skills. 
Training ranges from land navigation, first aid, and basic rifle 
marksmanship to leadership techniques and special operations 
techniques and tactics. The primary purpose of the program is to train 
U.S. Special Operations Forces. Benefits to the host nation forces are 
incidental. 

Assistance program: Combatant Commander's Initiative Fund; 
Description: The Combatant Commander's Initiative Fund enables the 
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to act quickly to support the 
combatant commanders when they lack the flexibility and resources to 
solve emergent challenges and unforeseen contingency requirements 
critical to joint war fighting readiness and national security 
interests. The strongest candidates for approval are initiatives that 
support combatant command activities and functions, enhance 
interoperability, and yield high benefits at low cost. Initiatives 
support authorized activities such as force training, joint exercises, 
contingencies, command and control, military education and training of 
foreign personnel, defense personnel expenses for bilateral or 
regional cooperation programs, urgent and unanticipated humanitarian 
relief and reconstruction assistance, and joint war fighting 
capabilities. 

Source: DOD and State. 

[End of table] 

[End of section] 

Appendix III: Section 1206 and 1207 Funding Allotments: 

Table 4 lists the recipient countries and their allotments of Section 
1206 and 1207 funds for fiscal years 2006 through 2009, ranked 
according to total amount funding provided. 

Table 4: Section 1206 and 1207 Recipients and Funding Allotments, 
Fiscal Years 2006-2009: 

Funding rank: 1; 
Country: Pakistan; 
Section 1206 funding: $203,388,677; 
Section 1207 funding: [Empty]; 
Total: $203,388,677. 

Funding rank: 2; 
Country: Lebanon; 
Section 1206 funding: $105,461,059; 
Section 1207 funding: $30,000,000; 
Total: $135,461,059. 

Funding rank: 3; 
Country: Georgia; 
Section 1206 funding: $17,947,000; 
Section 1207 funding: $100,000,000; 
Total: $117,947,000. 

Funding rank: 4; 
Country: Yemen; 
Section 1206 funding: $97,284,553; 
Section 1207 funding: $8,845,200; 
Total: $106,129,753. 

Funding rank: 5; 
Country: Philippines; 
Section 1206 funding: $55,098,843; 
Section 1207 funding: $24,900,000; 
Total: $79,998,843. 

Funding rank: 6; 
Country: Indonesia; 
Section 1206 funding: $57,493,827; 
Section 1207 funding: $5,000,000; 
Total: $62,493,827. 

Funding rank: 7; 
Country: Bahrain; 
Section 1206 funding: $44,992,361; 
Section 1207 funding: [Empty]; 
Total: $44,992,361. 

Funding rank: 8; 
Country: Malaysia; 
Section 1206 funding: $43,931,221; 
Section 1207 funding: $1,000,000; 
Total: $44,931,221. 

Funding rank: 9; 
Country: Kenya; 
Section 1206 funding: $29,048,763; 
Section 1207 funding: $8,000,000; 
Total: $37,048,763. 

Funding rank: 10; 
Country: Sri Lanka; 
Section 1206 funding: $18,283,008; 
Section 1207 funding: $18,280,000; 
Total: $36,563,008. 

Funding rank: 11; 
Country: Ethiopia; 
Section 1206 funding: $34,882,574; 
Section 1207 funding: [Empty]; 
Total: $34,882,574. 

Funding rank: 12; 
Country: Kazakhstan; 
Section 1206 funding: $31,744,945; 
Section 1207 funding: [Empty]; 
Total: $31,744,945. 

Funding rank: 13; 
Country: Bangladesh; 
Section 1206 funding: $15,744,500; 
Section 1207 funding: $15,100,000; 
Total: $30,844,500. 

Funding rank: 14; 
Country: Somalia; 
Section 1206 funding: [Empty]; 
Section 1207 funding: $25,000,000; 
Total: $25,000,000. 

Funding rank: 15; 
Country: Kyrgyzstan; 
Section 1206 funding: v21,132,370; 
Section 1207 funding: [Empty]; 
Total: $21,132,370. 

Funding rank: 16; 
Country: Haiti; 
Section 1206 funding: [Empty]; 
Section 1207 funding: $20,000,000; 
Total: $20,000,000. 

Funding rank: 17; 
Country: Tunisia; 
Section 1206 funding: $18,525,758; 
Section 1207 funding: [Empty]; 
Total: $18,525,758. 

Funding rank: 18; 
Country: Djibouti; 
Section 1206 funding: $17,324,183; 
Section 1207 funding: [Empty]; 
Total: $17,324,183. 

Funding rank: 19; 
Country: Nigeria; 
Section 1206 funding: $16,023,915; 
Section 1207 funding: [Empty]; 
Total: $16,023,915. 

Funding rank: 20; 
Country: Democratic Republic of the Congo; 
Section 1206 funding: [Empty]; 
Section 1207 funding: $14,870,000; 
Total: $14,870,000. 

Funding rank: 21; 
Country: Mexico; 
Section 1206 funding: $13,945,854; 
Section 1207 funding: [Empty]; 
Total: $13,945,854. 

Funding rank: 22; 
Country: Colombia; 
Section 1206 funding: [Empty]; 
Section 1207 funding: $13,800,000; 
Total: $13,800,000. 

Funding rank: 23; 
Country: Albania; 
Section 1206 funding: $12,036,340; 
Section 1207 funding: [Empty]; 
Total: $12,036,340. 

Funding rank: 24; 
Country: Ukraine; 
Section 1206 funding: $11,998,982; 
Section 1207 funding: [Empty]; 
Total: $11,998,982. 

Funding rank: 25; 
Country: Panama; 
Section 1206 funding: $6,789,842; 
Section 1207 funding: $5,070,000; 
Total: v11,859,842. 

Funding rank: 26; 
Country: Mali; 
Section 1206 funding: $5,218,826; 
Section 1207 funding: $5,000,000; 
Total: $10,218,826. 

Funding rank: 27; 
Country: Afghanistan; 
Section 1206 funding: [Empty]; 
Section 1207 funding: $10,000,000; 
Total: $10,000,000. 

Funding rank: 28; 
Country: Nepal; 
Section 1206 funding: [Empty]; 
Section 1207 funding: $10,000,000; 
Total: $10,000,000. 

Funding rank: 29; 
Country: Tajikistan; 
Section 1206 funding: [Empty]; 
Section 1207 funding: $9,900,000; 
Total: $9,900,000. 

Funding rank: 30; 
Country: Honduras; 
Section 1206 funding: $9,159,831; 
Section 1207 funding: [Empty]; 
Total: $9,159,831. 

Funding rank: 31; 
Country: Bahamas; 
Section 1206 funding: $9,086,403; 
Section 1207 funding: [Empty]; 
Total: $9,086,403. 

Funding rank: 32; 
Country: Dominican Republic; 
Section 1206 funding: $8,953,051; 
Section 1207 funding: [Empty]; 
Total: v8,953,051. 

Funding rank: 33; 
Country: Nicaragua; 
Section 1206 funding: $6,731,518; 
Section 1207 funding: [Empty]; 
Total: $6,731,518. 

Funding rank: 34; 
Country: Paraguay; 
Section 1206 funding: [Empty]; 
Section 1207 funding: $6,690,000; 
Total: $6,690,000. 

Funding rank: 35; 
Country: Jamaica; 
Section 1206 funding: $6,546,396; 
Section 1207 funding: [Empty]; 
Total: $6,546,396. 

Funding rank: 36; 
Country: Uganda; 
Section 1206 funding: [Empty]; 
Section 1207 funding: $6,460,000; 
Total: $6,460,000. 

Funding rank: 37; 
Country: Belize; 
Section 1206 funding: $6,183,654; 
Section 1207 funding: [Empty]; 
Total: $6,183,654. 

Funding rank: 38; 
Country: Niger; 
Section 1206 funding: $142,725; 
Section 1207 funding: $6,000,000; 
Total: $6,142,725. 

Funding rank: 39; 
Country: Cameroon; 
Section 1206 funding: $5,902,428; 
Section 1207 funding: [Empty]; 
Total: $5,902,428. 

Funding rank: 40; 
Country: Chad; 
Section 1206 funding: $5,792,725; 
Section 1207 funding: [Empty]; 
Total: $5,792,725. 

Funding rank: 41; 
Country: Morocco; 
Section 1206 funding: $321,318; 
Section 1207 funding: $5,080,000; 
Total: $5,401,318. 

Funding rank: 42; 
Country: São Tomé and Principe; 
Section 1206 funding: $4,960,564; 
Section 1207 funding: [Empty]; 
Total: $4,960,564. 

Funding rank: 43; 
Country: Mozambique; 
Section 1206 funding: $4,853,356; 
Section 1207 funding: [Empty]; 
Total: $4,853,356. 

Funding rank: 44; 
Country: Senegal; 
Section 1206 funding: $4,710,181; 
Section 1207 funding: [Empty]; 
Total: $4,710,181. 

Funding rank: 45; 
Country: Gabon; 
Section 1206 funding: $4,242,509; 
Section 1207 funding: [Empty]; 
Total: $4,242,509. 

Funding rank: 46; 
Country: Ghana; 
Section 1206 funding: $3,711,833; 
Section 1207 funding: [Empty]; 
Total: $3,711,833. 

Funding rank: 47; 
Country: Tanzania; 
Section 1206 funding: $3,232,162; 
Section 1207 funding: [Empty]; 
Total: $3,232,162. 

Funding rank: 48; 
Country: Macedonia; 
Section 1206 funding: $2,978,000; 
Section 1207 funding: [Empty]; 
Total: $2,978,000. 

Funding rank: 49; 
Country: Sierra Leone; 
Section 1206 funding: $2,492,565; 
Section 1207 funding: [Empty]; 
Total: $2,492,565. 

Funding rank: 50; 
Country: Suriname; 
Section 1206 funding: $2,063,009; 
Section 1207 funding: [Empty]; 
Total: $2,063,009. 

Funding rank: 51; 
Country: Guyana; 
Section 1206 funding: $1,823,391; 
Section 1207 funding: [Empty]; 
Total: $1,823,391. 

Funding rank: 52; 
Country: Azerbaijan; 
Section 1206 funding: $1,744,000; 
Section 1207 funding: [Empty]; 
Total: $1,744,000. 

Funding rank: 53; 
Country: Mauritania; 
Section 1206 funding: $142,725; 
Section 1207 funding: $1,550,000; 
Total: $1,692,725. 

Funding rank: 54; 
Country: Cape Verde; 
Section 1206 funding: $1,403,481; 
Section 1207 funding: [Empty]; 
Total: $1,403,481. 

Funding rank: 55; 
Country: Mauritius; 
Section 1206 funding: $1,229,501; 
Section 1207 funding: [Empty]; 
Total: $1,229,501. 

Funding rank: 56; 
Country: Benin; 
Section 1206 funding: $1,145,148; 
Section 1207 funding: [Empty]; 
Total: $1,145,148. 

Funding rank: 57; 
Country: Togo; 
Section 1206 funding: $966,555; 
Section 1207 funding: [Empty]; 
Total: $966,555. 

Funding rank: 58; 
Country: Seychelles; 
Section 1206 funding: $179,654; 
Section 1207 funding: [Empty]; 
Total: $179,654. 

Funding rank: 59; 
Country: Liberia; 
Section 1206 funding: $178,594; 
Section 1207 funding: [Empty]; 
Total: $178,594. 

Funding rank: 60; 
Country: Guinea; 
Section 1206 funding: v178,593; 
Section 1207 funding: [Empty]; 
Total: $178,593. 

Funding rank: 61; 
Country: Gambia; 
Section 1206 funding: $178,593; 
Section 1207 funding: [Empty]; 
Total: $178,593. 

Funding rank: 62; 
Country: Algeria; 
Section 1206 funding: $142,725; 
Section 1207 funding: [Empty]; 
Total: $142,725. 

Funding rank: Total; 
Country: [Empty]; 
Section 1206 funding: $979,674,589[A]; 
Section 1207 funding: $350,545,200; 
Total: $1,330,219,789. 

Source: GAO analysis of DOD and State data. 

[A] Section 1206 funding total excludes $3,053,843 in transportation 
costs and $2,117,059 in human-rights-training costs that could not be 
attributed to specific projects or countries. 

[End of table] 

Figures 11 and 12 show the allotments of Section 1206 and 1207 funds, 
respectively, to U.S. geographic combatant commands for fiscal years 
2006 through 2009. 

Figure 11: Section 1206 Funds Provided to U.S. Geographic Combatant 
Commands, Fiscal Years 2006-2009: 

[Refer to PDF for image: stacked multiple line graph] 

Year: 2006; 
Central Command: $38.1 million; 
Pacific Command: $29.3 million; 
Africa Commend: $13.0 million; 
Southern Commend: $14.4 million; 
European Commend: 0; 
Northern Command: 0. 

Year: 2007; 
Central Command: $114.3 million; 
Pacific Command: $68.0 million; 
Africa Commend: $43.8 million; 
Southern Commend: $17.6 million; 
European Commend: $28.2 million; 
Northern Command: $6.8 million. 

Year: 2008; 
Central Command: $96.2 million; 
Pacific Command: $62.1 million; 
Africa Commend: $61.7 million; 
Southern Commend: $16.2 million; 
European Commend: $18.5 million; 
Northern Command: $16.3 million. 

Year: 2009; 
Central Command: $255.4 million; 
Pacific Command: $31.1 million; 
Africa Commend: $48.6 million; 
Southern Commend: 0; 
European Commend: 0; 
Northern Command: 0. 

Source: GAO analysis of DOD and State data. 

[End of figure] 

Figure 12: Section 1207 Funds Provided to U.S. Geographic Combatant 
Commands, Fiscal Years 2006-2009: 

[Refer to PDF for image: stacked multiple line graph] 

Year: 2006; 
Central Command: $10 million; 
Pacific Command: 0; 
Africa Commend: 0; 
Southern Commend: 0; 
European Commend: 0. 

Year: 2007; 
Central Command: $8.8 million; 
Pacific Command: $26.9 million; 
Africa Commend: $37.6 million; 
Southern Commend: $24.0 million; 
European Commend: 0. 

Year: 2008; 
Central Command: $29.9 million; 
Pacific Command: $6 million; 
Africa Commend: $9.1 million; 
Southern Commend: $5 million; 
European Commend: $50 million; 

Year: 2009; 
Central Command: $10 million; 
Pacific Command: $41.4 million; 
Africa Commend: $25.3 million; 
Southern Commend: $16.6 million; 
European Commend: $50 million. 

Source: GAO analysis of DOD and State data. 

[End of figure] 

[End of section] 

Appendix IV: Types of Assistance Provided through Section 1206 and 
1207 Programs: 

Table 5 lists the recipients of Section 1206 funds and the type of 
equipment DOD and State have provided to each country for fiscal years 
2006 through 2009. 

Table 5: Types of Assistance Provided to Section 1206 Recipient 
Nations, Fiscal Years 2006-2009: 

Company: Albania; 
Type of assistance: Training/technical Assistance: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Spare parts/tools: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Communication equipment/Radios: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Radar/surveillance equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Boats: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Computers/software: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Ground vehicles: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Body armor/individual equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Global positioning systems: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Night vision devices: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Facilities: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Small arms/machine guns: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ammunition: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Site survey/assessment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Helicopters/aircraft: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Miscellaneous equipment: [Check]. 

Company: Algeria; 
Type of assistance: Training/technical Assistance: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Spare parts/tools: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Communication equipment/Radios: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Radar/surveillance equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Boats: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Computers/software: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ground vehicles: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Body armor/individual equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Global positioning systems: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Night vision devices: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Facilities: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Small arms/machine guns: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ammunition: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Site survey/assessment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Helicopters/aircraft: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Miscellaneous equipment: [Empty]. 

Company: Azerbaijan; 
Type of assistance: Training/technical Assistance: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Spare parts/tools: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Communication equipment/Radios: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Radar/surveillance equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Boats: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Computers/software: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ground vehicles: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Body armor/individual equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Global positioning systems: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Night vision devices: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Facilities: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Small arms/machine guns: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ammunition: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Site survey/assessment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Helicopters/aircraft: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Miscellaneous equipment: [Empty]. 

Company: Bahamas; 
Type of assistance: Training/technical Assistance: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Spare parts/tools: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Communication equipment/Radios: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Radar/surveillance equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Boats: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Computers/software: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Ground vehicles: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Body armor/individual equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Global positioning systems: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Night vision devices: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Facilities: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Small arms/machine guns: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ammunition: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Site survey/assessment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Helicopters/aircraft: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Miscellaneous equipment: [Check]. 

Company: Bahrain; 
Type of assistance: Training/technical Assistance: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Spare parts/tools: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Communication equipment/Radios: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Radar/surveillance equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Boats: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Computers/software: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ground vehicles: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Body armor/individual equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Global positioning systems: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Night vision devices: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Facilities: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Small arms/machine guns: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Ammunition: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Site survey/assessment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Helicopters/aircraft: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Miscellaneous equipment: [Empty]. 

Company: Bangladesh; 
Type of assistance: Training/technical Assistance: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Spare parts/tools: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Communication equipment/Radios: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Radar/surveillance equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Boats: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Computers/software: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ground vehicles: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Body armor/individual equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Global positioning systems: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Night vision devices: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Facilities: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Small arms/machine guns: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Ammunition: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Site survey/assessment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Helicopters/aircraft: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Miscellaneous equipment: [Empty]. 

Company: Belize; 
Type of assistance: Training/technical Assistance: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Spare parts/tools: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Communication equipment/Radios: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Radar/surveillance equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Boats: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Computers/software: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Ground vehicles: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Body armor/individual equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Global positioning systems: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Night vision devices: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Facilities: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Small arms/machine guns: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Ammunition: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Site survey/assessment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Helicopters/aircraft: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Miscellaneous equipment: [Check]. 

Company: Benin; 
Type of assistance: Training/technical Assistance: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Spare parts/tools: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Communication equipment/Radios: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Radar/surveillance equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Boats: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Computers/software: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ground vehicles: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Body armor/individual equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Global positioning systems: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Night vision devices: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Facilities: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Small arms/machine guns: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ammunition: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Site survey/assessment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Helicopters/aircraft: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Miscellaneous equipment: [Empty]. 

Company: Cameroon; 
Type of assistance: Training/technical Assistance: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Spare parts/tools: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Communication equipment/Radios: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Radar/surveillance equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Boats: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Computers/software: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Ground vehicles: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Body armor/individual equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Global positioning systems: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Night vision devices: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Facilities: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Small arms/machine guns: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ammunition: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Site survey/assessment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Helicopters/aircraft: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Miscellaneous equipment: [Empty]. 

Company: Cape Verde; 
Type of assistance: Training/technical Assistance: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Spare parts/tools: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Communication equipment/Radios: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Radar/surveillance equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Boats: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Computers/software: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ground vehicles: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Body armor/individual equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Global positioning systems: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Night vision devices: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Facilities: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Small arms/machine guns: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ammunition: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Site survey/assessment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Helicopters/aircraft: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Miscellaneous equipment: [Empty]. 

Company: Chad; 
Type of assistance: Training/technical Assistance: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Spare parts/tools: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Communication equipment/Radios: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Radar/surveillance equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Boats: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Computers/software: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Ground vehicles: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Body armor/individual equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Global positioning systems: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Night vision devices: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Facilities: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Small arms/machine guns: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ammunition: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Site survey/assessment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Helicopters/aircraft: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Miscellaneous equipment: [Empty]. 

Company: Djibouti; 
Type of assistance: Training/technical Assistance: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Spare parts/tools: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Communication equipment/Radios: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Radar/surveillance equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Boats: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Computers/software: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ground vehicles: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Body armor/individual equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Global positioning systems: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Night vision devices: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Facilities: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Small arms/machine guns: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ammunition: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Site survey/assessment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Helicopters/aircraft: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Miscellaneous equipment: [Check]. 

Company: Dominican Republic; 
Type of assistance: Training/technical Assistance: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Spare parts/tools: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Communication equipment/Radios: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Radar/surveillance equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Boats: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Computers/software: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Ground vehicles: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Body armor/individual equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Global positioning systems: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Night vision devices: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Facilities: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Small arms/machine guns: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ammunition: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Site survey/assessment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Helicopters/aircraft: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Miscellaneous equipment: [Check]. 

Company: Ethiopia; 
Type of assistance: Training/technical Assistance: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Spare parts/tools: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Communication equipment/Radios: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Radar/surveillance equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Boats: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Computers/software: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ground vehicles: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Body armor/individual equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Global positioning systems: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Night vision devices: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Facilities: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Small arms/machine guns: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ammunition: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Site survey/assessment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Helicopters/aircraft: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Miscellaneous equipment: [Check]. 

Company: Gabon; 
Type of assistance: Training/technical Assistance: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Spare parts/tools: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Communication equipment/Radios: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Radar/surveillance equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Boats: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Computers/software: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Ground vehicles: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Body armor/individual equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Global positioning systems: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Night vision devices: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Facilities: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Small arms/machine guns: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ammunition: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Site survey/assessment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Helicopters/aircraft: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Miscellaneous equipment: [Empty]. 

Company: Gambia; 
Type of assistance: Training/technical Assistance: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Spare parts/tools: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Communication equipment/Radios: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Radar/surveillance equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Boats: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Computers/software: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ground vehicles: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Body armor/individual equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Global positioning systems: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Night vision devices: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Facilities: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Small arms/machine guns: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ammunition: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Site survey/assessment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Helicopters/aircraft: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Miscellaneous equipment: [Empty]. 

Company: Georgia; 
Type of assistance: Training/technical Assistance: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Spare parts/tools: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Communication equipment/Radios: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Radar/surveillance equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Boats: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Computers/software: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ground vehicles: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Body armor/individual equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Global positioning systems: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Night vision devices: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Facilities: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Small arms/machine guns: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ammunition: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Site survey/assessment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Helicopters/aircraft: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Miscellaneous equipment: [Check]. 

Company: Ghana; 
Type of assistance: Training/technical Assistance: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Spare parts/tools: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Communication equipment/Radios: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Radar/surveillance equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Boats: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Computers/software: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ground vehicles: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Body armor/individual equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Global positioning systems: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Night vision devices: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Facilities: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Small arms/machine guns: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ammunition: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Site survey/assessment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Helicopters/aircraft: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Miscellaneous equipment: [Empty]. 

Company: Guinea; 
Type of assistance: Training/technical Assistance: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Spare parts/tools: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Communication equipment/Radios: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Radar/surveillance equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Boats: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Computers/software: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ground vehicles: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Body armor/individual equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Global positioning systems: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Night vision devices: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Facilities: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Small arms/machine guns: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ammunition: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Site survey/assessment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Helicopters/aircraft: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Miscellaneous equipment: [Empty]. 

Company: Guyana; 
Type of assistance: Training/technical Assistance: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Spare parts/tools: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Communication equipment/Radios: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Radar/surveillance equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Boats: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Computers/software: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ground vehicles: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Body armor/individual equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Global positioning systems: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Night vision devices: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Facilities: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Small arms/machine guns: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ammunition: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Site survey/assessment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Helicopters/aircraft: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Miscellaneous equipment: [Check]. 

Company: Honduras; 
Type of assistance: Training/technical Assistance: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Spare parts/tools: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Communication equipment/Radios: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Radar/surveillance equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Boats: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Computers/software: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Ground vehicles: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Body armor/individual equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Global positioning systems: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Night vision devices: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Facilities: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Small arms/machine guns: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Ammunition: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Site survey/assessment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Helicopters/aircraft: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Miscellaneous equipment: [Check]. 

Company: Indonesia; 
Type of assistance: Training/technical Assistance: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Spare parts/tools: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Communication equipment/Radios: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Radar/surveillance equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Boats: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Computers/software: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Ground vehicles: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Body armor/individual equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Global positioning systems: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Night vision devices: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Facilities: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Small arms/machine guns: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ammunition: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Site survey/assessment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Helicopters/aircraft: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Miscellaneous equipment: [Check]. 

Company: Jamaica; 
Type of assistance: Training/technical Assistance: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Spare parts/tools: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Communication equipment/Radios: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Radar/surveillance equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Boats: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Computers/software: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Ground vehicles: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Body armor/individual equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Global positioning systems: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Night vision devices: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Facilities: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Small arms/machine guns: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ammunition: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Site survey/assessment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Helicopters/aircraft: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Miscellaneous equipment: [Check]. 

Company: Kazakhstan; 
Type of assistance: Training/technical Assistance: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Spare parts/tools: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Communication equipment/Radios: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Radar/surveillance equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Boats: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Computers/software: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Ground vehicles: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Body armor/individual equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Global positioning systems: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Night vision devices: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Facilities: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Small arms/machine guns: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ammunition: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Site survey/assessment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Helicopters/aircraft: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Miscellaneous equipment: [Check]. 

Company: Kenya; 
Type of assistance: Training/technical Assistance: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Spare parts/tools: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Communication equipment/Radios: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Radar/surveillance equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Boats: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Computers/software: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ground vehicles: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Body armor/individual equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Global positioning systems: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Night vision devices: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Facilities: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Small arms/machine guns: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Ammunition: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Site survey/assessment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Helicopters/aircraft: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Miscellaneous equipment: [Empty]. 

Company: Kyrgyzstan; 
Type of assistance: Training/technical Assistance: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Spare parts/tools: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Communication equipment/Radios: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Radar/surveillance equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Boats: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Computers/software: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ground vehicles: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Body armor/individual equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Global positioning systems: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Night vision devices: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Facilities: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Small arms/machine guns: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Ammunition: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Site survey/assessment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Helicopters/aircraft: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Miscellaneous equipment: [Check]. 

Company: Lebanon; 
Type of assistance: Training/technical Assistance: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Spare parts/tools: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Communication equipment/Radios: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Radar/surveillance equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Boats: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Computers/software: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Ground vehicles: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Body armor/individual equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Global positioning systems: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Night vision devices: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Facilities: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Small arms/machine guns: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Ammunition: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Site survey/assessment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Helicopters/aircraft: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Miscellaneous equipment: [Check]. 

Company: Liberia; 
Type of assistance: Training/technical Assistance: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Spare parts/tools: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Communication equipment/Radios: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Radar/surveillance equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Boats: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Computers/software: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ground vehicles: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Body armor/individual equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Global positioning systems: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Night vision devices: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Facilities: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Small arms/machine guns: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ammunition: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Site survey/assessment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Helicopters/aircraft: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Miscellaneous equipment: [Empty]. 

Company: Macedonia; 
Type of assistance: Training/technical Assistance: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Spare parts/tools: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Communication equipment/Radios: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Radar/surveillance equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Boats: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Computers/software: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ground vehicles: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Body armor/individual equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Global positioning systems: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Night vision devices: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Facilities: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Small arms/machine guns: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ammunition: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Site survey/assessment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Helicopters/aircraft: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Miscellaneous equipment: [Empty]. 

Company: Malaysia; 
Type of assistance: Training/technical Assistance: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Spare parts/tools: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Communication equipment/Radios: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Radar/surveillance equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Boats: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Computers/software: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Ground vehicles: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Body armor/individual equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Global positioning systems: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Night vision devices: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Facilities: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Small arms/machine guns: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ammunition: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Site survey/assessment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Helicopters/aircraft: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Miscellaneous equipment: [Empty]. 

Company: Mali; 
Type of assistance: Training/technical Assistance: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Spare parts/tools: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Communication equipment/Radios: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Radar/surveillance equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Boats: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Computers/software: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ground vehicles: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Body armor/individual equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Global positioning systems: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Night vision devices: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Facilities: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Small arms/machine guns: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ammunition: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Site survey/assessment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Helicopters/aircraft: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Miscellaneous equipment: [Check]. 

Company: Mauritania; 
Type of assistance: Training/technical Assistance: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Spare parts/tools: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Communication equipment/Radios: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Radar/surveillance equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Boats: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Computers/software: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ground vehicles: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Body armor/individual equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Global positioning systems: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Night vision devices: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Facilities: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Small arms/machine guns: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ammunition: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Site survey/assessment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Helicopters/aircraft: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Miscellaneous equipment: [Empty]. 

Company: Mauritius; 
Type of assistance: Training/technical Assistance: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Spare parts/tools: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Communication equipment/Radios: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Radar/surveillance equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Boats: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Computers/software: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ground vehicles: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Body armor/individual equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Global positioning systems: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Night vision devices: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Facilities: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Small arms/machine guns: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ammunition: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Site survey/assessment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Helicopters/aircraft: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Miscellaneous equipment: [Check]. 

Company: Mexico; 
Type of assistance: Training/technical Assistance: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Spare parts/tools: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Communication equipment/Radios: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Radar/surveillance equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Boats: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Computers/software: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ground vehicles: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Body armor/individual equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Global positioning systems: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Night vision devices: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Facilities: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Small arms/machine guns: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ammunition: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Site survey/assessment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Helicopters/aircraft: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Miscellaneous equipment: [Check]. 

Company: Morocco; 
Type of assistance: Training/technical Assistance: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Spare parts/tools: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Communication equipment/Radios: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Radar/surveillance equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Boats: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Computers/software: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ground vehicles: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Body armor/individual equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Global positioning systems: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Night vision devices: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Facilities: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Small arms/machine guns: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ammunition: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Site survey/assessment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Helicopters/aircraft: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Miscellaneous equipment: [Empty]. 

Company: Mozambique; 
Type of assistance: Training/technical Assistance: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Spare parts/tools: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Communication equipment/Radios: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Radar/surveillance equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Boats: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Computers/software: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Ground vehicles: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Body armor/individual equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Global positioning systems: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Night vision devices: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Facilities: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Small arms/machine guns: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ammunition: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Site survey/assessment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Helicopters/aircraft: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Miscellaneous equipment: [Check]. 

Company: Nicaragua; 
Type of assistance: Training/technical Assistance: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Spare parts/tools: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Communication equipment/Radios: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Radar/surveillance equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Boats: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Computers/software: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Ground vehicles: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Body armor/individual equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Global positioning systems: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Night vision devices: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Facilities: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Small arms/machine guns: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ammunition: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Site survey/assessment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Helicopters/aircraft: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Miscellaneous equipment: [Check]. 

Company: Niger; 
Type of assistance: Training/technical Assistance: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Spare parts/tools: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Communication equipment/Radios: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Radar/surveillance equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Boats: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Computers/software: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ground vehicles: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Body armor/individual equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Global positioning systems: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Night vision devices: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Facilities: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Small arms/machine guns: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ammunition: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Site survey/assessment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Helicopters/aircraft: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Miscellaneous equipment: [Empty]. 

Company: Nigeria; 
Type of assistance: Training/technical Assistance: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Spare parts/tools: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Communication equipment/Radios: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Radar/surveillance equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Boats: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Computers/software: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Ground vehicles: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Body armor/individual equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Global positioning systems: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Night vision devices: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Facilities: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Small arms/machine guns: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ammunition: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Site survey/assessment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Helicopters/aircraft: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Miscellaneous equipment: [Check]. 

Company: Pakistan; 
Type of assistance: Training/technical Assistance: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Spare parts/tools: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Communication equipment/Radios: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Radar/surveillance equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Boats: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Computers/software: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Ground vehicles: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Body armor/individual equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Global positioning systems: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Night vision devices: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Facilities: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Small arms/machine guns: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Ammunition: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Site survey/assessment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Helicopters/aircraft: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Miscellaneous equipment: [Check]. 

Company: Panama; 
Type of assistance: Training/technical Assistance: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Spare parts/tools: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Communication equipment/Radios: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Radar/surveillance equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Boats: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Computers/software: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Ground vehicles: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Body armor/individual equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Global positioning systems: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Night vision devices: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Facilities: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Small arms/machine guns: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ammunition: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Site survey/assessment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Helicopters/aircraft: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Miscellaneous equipment: [Empty]. 

Company: Philippines; 
Type of assistance: Training/technical Assistance: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Spare parts/tools: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Communication equipment/Radios: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Radar/surveillance equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Boats: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Computers/software: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Ground vehicles: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Body armor/individual equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Global positioning systems: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Night vision devices: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Facilities: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Small arms/machine guns: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Ammunition: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Site survey/assessment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Helicopters/aircraft: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Miscellaneous equipment: [Check]. 

Company: São Tomé and Principe; 
Type of assistance: Training/technical Assistance: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Spare parts/tools: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Communication equipment/Radios: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Radar/surveillance equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Boats: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Computers/software: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Ground vehicles: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Body armor/individual equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Global positioning systems: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Night vision devices: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Facilities: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Small arms/machine guns: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ammunition: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Site survey/assessment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Helicopters/aircraft: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Miscellaneous equipment: [Empty]. 

Company: Senegal; 
Type of assistance: Training/technical Assistance: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Spare parts/tools: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Communication equipment/Radios: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Radar/surveillance equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Boats: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Computers/software: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Ground vehicles: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Body armor/individual equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Global positioning systems: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Night vision devices: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Facilities: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Small arms/machine guns: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ammunition: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Site survey/assessment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Helicopters/aircraft: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Miscellaneous equipment: [Empty]. 

Company: Seychelles; 
Type of assistance: Training/technical Assistance: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Spare parts/tools: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Communication equipment/Radios: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Radar/surveillance equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Boats: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Computers/software: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ground vehicles: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Body armor/individual equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Global positioning systems: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Night vision devices: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Facilities: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Small arms/machine guns: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ammunition: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Site survey/assessment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Helicopters/aircraft: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Miscellaneous equipment: [Check]. 

Company: Sierra Leone; 
Type of assistance: Training/technical Assistance: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Spare parts/tools: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Communication equipment/Radios: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Radar/surveillance equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Boats: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Computers/software: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Ground vehicles: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Body armor/individual equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Global positioning systems: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Night vision devices: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Facilities: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Small arms/machine guns: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ammunition: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Site survey/assessment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Helicopters/aircraft: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Miscellaneous equipment: [Empty]. 

Company: Sri Lanka; 
Type of assistance: Training/technical Assistance: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Spare parts/tools: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Communication equipment/Radios: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Radar/surveillance equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Boats: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Computers/software: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ground vehicles: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Body armor/individual equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Global positioning systems: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Night vision devices: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Facilities: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Small arms/machine guns: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ammunition: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Site survey/assessment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Helicopters/aircraft: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Miscellaneous equipment: [Empty]. 

Company: Suriname; 
Type of assistance: Training/technical Assistance: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Spare parts/tools: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Communication equipment/Radios: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Radar/surveillance equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Boats: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Computers/software: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ground vehicles: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Body armor/individual equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Global positioning systems: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Night vision devices: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Facilities: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Small arms/machine guns: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Ammunition: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Site survey/assessment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Helicopters/aircraft: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Miscellaneous equipment: [Check]. 

Company: Tanzania; 
Type of assistance: Training/technical Assistance: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Spare parts/tools: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Communication equipment/Radios: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Radar/surveillance equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Boats: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Computers/software: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Ground vehicles: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Body armor/individual equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Global positioning systems: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Night vision devices: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Facilities: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Small arms/machine guns: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ammunition: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Site survey/assessment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Helicopters/aircraft: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Miscellaneous equipment: [Check]. 

Company: Togo; 
Type of assistance: Training/technical Assistance: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Spare parts/tools: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Communication equipment/Radios: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Radar/surveillance equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Boats: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Computers/software: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ground vehicles: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Body armor/individual equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Global positioning systems: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Night vision devices: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Facilities: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Small arms/machine guns: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ammunition: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Site survey/assessment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Helicopters/aircraft: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Miscellaneous equipment: [Empty]. 

Company: Tunisia; 
Type of assistance: Training/technical Assistance: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Spare parts/tools: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Communication equipment/Radios: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Radar/surveillance equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Boats: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Computers/software: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ground vehicles: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Body armor/individual equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Global positioning systems: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Night vision devices: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Facilities: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Small arms/machine guns: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ammunition: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Site survey/assessment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Helicopters/aircraft: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Miscellaneous equipment: [Empty]. 

Company: Ukraine; 
Type of assistance: Training/technical Assistance: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Spare parts/tools: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Communication equipment/Radios: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Radar/surveillance equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Boats: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Computers/software: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Ground vehicles: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Body armor/individual equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Global positioning systems: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Night vision devices: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Facilities: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Small arms/machine guns: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Ammunition: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Site survey/assessment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Helicopters/aircraft: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Miscellaneous equipment: [Empty]. 

Company: Yemen; 
Type of assistance: Training/technical Assistance: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Spare parts/tools: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Communication equipment/Radios: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Radar/surveillance equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Boats: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Computers/software: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Ground vehicles: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Body armor/individual equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Global positioning systems: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Night vision devices: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Facilities: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Small arms/machine guns: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Ammunition: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Site survey/assessment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Helicopters/aircraft: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Miscellaneous equipment: [Empty]. 

Company: Total recipients; 
Type of assistance: Training/technical Assistance: 47; 
Type of assistance: Spare parts/tools: 43; 
Type of assistance: Communication equipment/Radios: 41; 
Type of assistance: Radar/surveillance equipment: 37; 
Type of assistance: Boats: 28; 
Type of assistance: Computers/software: 25; 
Type of assistance: Ground vehicles: 24; 
Type of assistance: Body armor/individual equipment: 17; 
Type of assistance: Global positioning systems: 14; 
Type of assistance: Night vision devices: 12; 
Type of assistance: Facilities: 12; 
Type of assistance: Small arms/machine guns: 11; 
Type of assistance: Ammunition: 7; 
Type of assistance: Site survey/assessment: 3; 
Type of assistance: Helicopters/aircraft: 2; 
Type of assistance: Miscellaneous equipment: 25. 

[End of table] 

Source: GAO analysis of DOD and State data. 

Table 6 lists the recipients of Section 1207 funds and the type of 
reconstruction, stabilization, and security assistance provided by 
State and USAID. 

Table 6: Reconstruction, Stabilization, and Security Activities 
Provided to Section 1207 Recipient Nations, Fiscal Years 2006-2009: 

Country: Afghanistan; 
Type of assistance: Local government: capacity building: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Police training and: equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Infrastructure improvements: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Public awareness: campaigns: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Youth-targeted: jobs, training: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Judicial sector reform: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Border security: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Education reform/school rehabilitation: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Jobs, vocational training: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: National government: capacity building: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Demining, unexploded ordnance removal: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Food, shelter assistance: [Empty]. 

Country: Bangladesh; 
Type of assistance: Local government: capacity building: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Police training and: equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Infrastructure improvements: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Public awareness: campaigns: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Youth-targeted: jobs, training: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Judicial sector reform: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Border security: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Education reform/school rehabilitation: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Jobs, vocational training: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: National government: capacity building: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Demining, unexploded ordnance removal: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Food, shelter assistance: [Empty]. 

Country: Colombia; 
Type of assistance: Local government: capacity building: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Police training and: equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Infrastructure improvements: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Public awareness: campaigns: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Youth-targeted: jobs, training: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Judicial sector reform: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Border security: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Education reform/school rehabilitation: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Jobs, vocational training: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: National government: capacity building: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Demining, unexploded ordnance removal: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Food, shelter assistance: [Empty]. 

Country: DRC; 
Type of assistance: Local government: capacity building: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Police training and: equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Infrastructure improvements: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Public awareness: campaigns: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Youth-targeted: jobs, training: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Judicial sector reform: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Border security: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Education reform/school rehabilitation: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Jobs, vocational training: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: National government: capacity building: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Demining, unexploded ordnance removal: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Food, shelter assistance: [Empty]. 

Country: Georgia; 
Type of assistance: Local government: capacity building: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Police training and: equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Infrastructure improvements: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Public awareness: campaigns: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Youth-targeted: jobs, training: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Judicial sector reform: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Border security: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Education reform/school rehabilitation: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Jobs, vocational training: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: National government: capacity building: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Demining, unexploded ordnance removal: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Food, shelter assistance: [Check]. 

Country: Haiti; 
Type of assistance: Local government: capacity building: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Police training and: equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Infrastructure improvements: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Public awareness: campaigns: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Youth-targeted: jobs, training: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Judicial sector reform: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Border security: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Education reform/school rehabilitation: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Jobs, vocational training: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: National government: capacity building: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Demining, unexploded ordnance removal: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Food, shelter assistance: [Empty]. 

Country: Indonesia; 
Type of assistance: Local government: capacity building: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Police training and: equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Infrastructure improvements: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Public awareness: campaigns: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Youth-targeted: jobs, training: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Judicial sector reform: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Border security: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Education reform/school rehabilitation: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Jobs, vocational training: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: National government: capacity building: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Demining, unexploded ordnance removal: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Food, shelter assistance: [Empty]. 

Country: Kenya; 
Type of assistance: Local government: capacity building: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Police training and: equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Infrastructure improvements: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Public awareness: campaigns: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Youth-targeted: jobs, training: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Judicial sector reform: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Border security: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Education reform/school rehabilitation: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Jobs, vocational training: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: National government: capacity building: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Demining, unexploded ordnance removal: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Food, shelter assistance: [Empty]. 

Country: Lebanon; 
Type of assistance: Local government: capacity building: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Police training and: equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Infrastructure improvements: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Public awareness: campaigns: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Youth-targeted: jobs, training: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Judicial sector reform: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Border security: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Education reform/school rehabilitation: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Jobs, vocational training: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: National government: capacity building: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Demining, unexploded ordnance removal: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Food, shelter assistance: [Empty]. 

Country: Malaysia; 
Type of assistance: Local government: capacity building: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Police training and: equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Infrastructure improvements: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Public awareness: campaigns: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Youth-targeted: jobs, training: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Judicial sector reform: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Border security: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Education reform/school rehabilitation: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Jobs, vocational training: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: National government: capacity building: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Demining, unexploded ordnance removal: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Food, shelter assistance: [Empty]. 

Country: Mali; 
Type of assistance: Local government: capacity building: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Police training and: equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Infrastructure improvements: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Public awareness: campaigns: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Youth-targeted: jobs, training: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Judicial sector reform: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Border security: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Education reform/school rehabilitation: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Jobs, vocational training: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: National government: capacity building: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Demining, unexploded ordnance removal: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Food, shelter assistance: [Empty]. 

Country: Mauritania; 
Type of assistance: Local government: capacity building: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Police training and: equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Infrastructure improvements: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Public awareness: campaigns: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Youth-targeted: jobs, training: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Judicial sector reform: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Border security: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Education reform/school rehabilitation: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Jobs, vocational training: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: National government: capacity building: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Demining, unexploded ordnance removal: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Food, shelter assistance: [Empty]. 

Country: Morocco; 
Type of assistance: Local government: capacity building: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Police training and: equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Infrastructure improvements: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Public awareness: campaigns: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Youth-targeted: jobs, training: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Judicial sector reform: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Border security: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Education reform/school rehabilitation: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Jobs, vocational training: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: National government: capacity building: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Demining, unexploded ordnance removal: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Food, shelter assistance: [Empty]. 

Country: Nepal; 
Type of assistance: Local government: capacity building: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Police training and: equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Infrastructure improvements: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Public awareness: campaigns: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Youth-targeted: jobs, training: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Judicial sector reform: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Border security: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Education reform/school rehabilitation: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Jobs, vocational training: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: National government: capacity building: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Demining, unexploded ordnance removal: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Food, shelter assistance: [Empty]. 

Country: Niger; 
Type of assistance: Local government: capacity building: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Police training and: equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Infrastructure improvements: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Public awareness: campaigns: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Youth-targeted: jobs, training: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Judicial sector reform: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Border security: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Education reform/school rehabilitation: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Jobs, vocational training: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: National government: capacity building: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Demining, unexploded ordnance removal: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Food, shelter assistance: [Empty]. 

Country: Panama; 
Type of assistance: Local government: capacity building: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Police training and: equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Infrastructure improvements: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Public awareness: campaigns: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Youth-targeted: jobs, training: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Judicial sector reform: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Border security: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Education reform/school rehabilitation: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Jobs, vocational training: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: National government: capacity building: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Demining, unexploded ordnance removal: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Food, shelter assistance: [Empty]. 

Country: Paraguay; 
Type of assistance: Local government: capacity building: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Police training and: equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Infrastructure improvements: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Public awareness: campaigns: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Youth-targeted: jobs, training: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Judicial sector reform: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Border security: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Education reform/school rehabilitation: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Jobs, vocational training: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: National government: capacity building: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Demining, unexploded ordnance removal: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Food, shelter assistance: [Empty]. 

Country: Philippines; 
Type of assistance: Local government: capacity building: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Police training and: equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Infrastructure improvements: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Public awareness: campaigns: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Youth-targeted: jobs, training: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Judicial sector reform: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Border security: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Education reform/school rehabilitation: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Jobs, vocational training: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: National government: capacity building: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Demining, unexploded ordnance removal: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Food, shelter assistance: [Empty]. 

Country: Somalia; 
Type of assistance: Local government: capacity building: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Police training and: equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Infrastructure improvements: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Public awareness: campaigns: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Youth-targeted: jobs, training: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Judicial sector reform: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Border security: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Education reform/school rehabilitation: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Jobs, vocational training: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: National government: capacity building: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Demining, unexploded ordnance removal: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Food, shelter assistance: [Empty]. 

Country: Sri Lanka; 
Type of assistance: Local government: capacity building: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Police training and: equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Infrastructure improvements: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Public awareness: campaigns: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Youth-targeted: jobs, training: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Judicial sector reform: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Border security: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Education reform/school rehabilitation: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Jobs, vocational training: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: National government: capacity building: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Demining, unexploded ordnance removal: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Food, shelter assistance: [Check]. 

Country: Tajikistan; 
Type of assistance: Local government: capacity building: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Police training and: equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Infrastructure improvements: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Public awareness: campaigns: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Youth-targeted: jobs, training: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Judicial sector reform: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Border security: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Education reform/school rehabilitation: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Jobs, vocational training: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: National government: capacity building: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Demining, unexploded ordnance removal: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Food, shelter assistance: [Empty]. 

Country: Uganda; 
Type of assistance: Local government: capacity building: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Police training and: equipment: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Infrastructure improvements: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Public awareness: campaigns: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Youth-targeted: jobs, training: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Judicial sector reform: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Border security: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Education reform/school rehabilitation: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Jobs, vocational training: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: National government: capacity building: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Demining, unexploded ordnance removal: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Food, shelter assistance: [Empty]. 

Country: Yemen; 
Type of assistance: Local government: capacity building: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Police training and: equipment: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Infrastructure improvements: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Public awareness: campaigns: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Youth-targeted: jobs, training: [Check]; 
Type of assistance: Judicial sector reform: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Border security: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Education reform/school rehabilitation: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Jobs, vocational training: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: National government: capacity building: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Demining, unexploded ordnance removal: [Empty]; 
Type of assistance: Food, shelter assistance: [Empty]. 

Country: Total recipients; 
Type of assistance: Local government: 13; 
Type of assistance: Police training and: equipment: 13; 
Type of assistance: Infrastructure improvements: 11; 
Type of assistance: Public awareness: campaigns: 9; 
Type of assistance: Youth-targeted: jobs, training: 8; 
Type of assistance: Judicial sector reform: 6; 
Type of assistance: Border security: 5; 
Type of assistance: Education reform/school rehabilitation: 5; 
Type of assistance: Jobs, vocational training: 5; 
Type of assistance: National government: capacity building: 4; 
Type of assistance: Demining, unexploded ordnance removal: 2; 
Type of assistance: Food, shelter assistance: 2. 

Source: GAO analysis of DOD and State data. 

[End of table] 

[End of section] 

Appendix V: Comments from the Department of Defense: 

Assistant Secretary Of Defense: 
Special Operations/low Intensity Conflict & Interdependent 
Capabilities: 
2500 Defense Pentagon: 
Washington, D.C. 20301-2500: 

March 29, 2010: 
	
Mr. Joseph Christoff: 
Director, International Affairs and Trade: 
U.S. Government Accountability Office: 
441 G Street, N.W. 
Washington, D.C. 20548: 

Dear Mr. Christoff: 

Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Enclosed is the Department 
of Defense response to the GAO draft report, GA0-10-431, International 
Security: State and DOD Need to Improve Sustainment Planning, and 
Monitoring and Evaluation for Section 1206 and 1207 Assistance 
Programs," dated March 12, 2010 (GAO Code 320663). 

The Department of Defense has reviewed the GAO draft report and 
concurs with all recommendations. We look forward to implementing 
these recommendations to improve the Section 1206 and 1207 assistance 
programs. 

Signed by: 

Michael Vickers: 

Enclosure: 
Department of Defense Comments to the GAO Recommendations: 

[End of letter] 

GAO Draft Report Dated March 12, 2010: 
GAO-10-431 (GAO Code 320663): 

"International Security: State And DOD Need To Improve Sustainment 
Planning, And Monitoring And Evaluation For Section 1206 And 1207 
Assistance Programs" 

Department Of Defense Comments To The GAO Recommendations: 

Recommendation 1: For the Section 1206 program, the GAO recommends 
that the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Secretary of 
State develop and implement specific plans to monitor, evaluate, and 
report routinely on Section 1206 project outcomes and their impact on 
U.S. strategic objectives. (See page 34/GAO Draft Report.) 

DoD Response: Concur. 

Recommendation 2: The GAO recommends that the Secretary of Defense, in 
consultation with the Secretary of State, base further decisions about 
sustaining existing Section 1206 projects on the results of such 
monitoring and evaluation. (See page 34/GAO Draft Report.) 

DoD Response: Concur. 

Recommendation 3: The GAO recommends that the Secretary of Defense, in 
consultation with the Secretary of State, estimate the cost of 
sustaining projects at the time they are proposed and, where possible, 
obtain a commitment from partner nations to fund those costs. (See 
page 34 and 35/GAO Draft Report.) 

DoD Response: Concur. 

Recommendation 4: The GAO recommends that the Secretary of Defense, in 
consultation with the Secretary of State, seek further guidance from 
the Congress on what funding authorities are appropriate to sustain 
Section 1206 projects when the Secretary determines that: (a) projects 
address specific terrorist and stabilization threats in high-priority 
countries; (b) reliable monitoring and evaluation have shown that 
projects are effective; and (c) partner nation funds are unavailable. 
(See page 35/GAO Draft Report.) 

2
DoD Response: Concur. 

Recommendation 5: For the Section 1207 program, the GAO recommends 
that the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Secretary of 
State and Administrator of USAID, develop and implement specific plans 
to monitor, evaluate, and report on their outcomes and their impact on 
U.S. strategic objectives to determine whether continued funding for 
these projects is appropriate under other authorities and programs. 
(See page 35/GAO Draft Report.) 

DoD Response: Concur. 

[End of section] 

Appendix VI: Comments from the Department of State: 

United States Department of State: 
Chief Financial Officer: 
Washington, D.C. 20520: 

March 30, 2010: 

Ms. Jacquelyn Williams-Bridgers: 
Managing Director: 
International Affairs and Trade: 
Government Accountability Office: 
441 G Street, N.W. 
Washington, D.C. 20548-0001: 

Dear Ms. Williams-Bridgers: 

We appreciate the opportunity to review your draft report, 
"International Security: State and DOD Need to Improve Sustainment 
Planning, and Monitoring and Evaluation for Section 1206 and 1207 
Assistance Programs," GAO Job Code 320663. 

The enclosed Department of State comments are provided for 
incorporation with this letter as an appendix to the final report. 

If you have any questions concerning this response, please contact 
Caitlin Conaty, 1207 Oversight Program Officer, Office of the 
Coordinator for Reconstruction & Stabilization at (703) 875-6692. 

Sincerely, 

Signed by: 

James L. Millette: 

cc: GAO — Jeff Phillips: 
PM — Andrew J. Shapiro: 
S/CRS — John Herbst: 
State/OIG — Tracy Burnett: 

[End of letter] 

Department of State Comments on GAO Draft Report: 

International Security: State and DOD Need to Improve Sustainment 
Planning, and Monitoring and Evaluation for Section 1206 and 1207 
Assistance Programs (GA0-10-431, GAO Code 320663): 

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this GAO report. The 
Department of State commends GAO for the thoughtful and complete 
analysis of the 1207 program; however, we would like to offer the 
following clarifications and comments in response. 

One of the key objectives of the 1207 program was to provide timely 
funding to cope with emerging crises for which other appropriated 
funding was not available. 1207 was always intended to be a temporary 
transfer authority pending the creation of a similar stand-alone 
account for the Department of State. For FY11, however, the 
Administration has requested a 1207-like account for State, the 
Complex Crisis Fund. Having funds dedicated to conflict prevention, 
stability and security appropriated to State will eliminate the 
current unwieldy 1207 transfer process, which, at times, has prevented 
as rapid a response to immediate on-the-ground needs as State would 
have preferred. We believe that the appropriation of the Complex 
Crisis Fund to State will solve many of the issues outlined in the 
report. 

The report notes that the Office of the Coordinator for Reconstruction 
and Stabilization (S/CRS) has not done sufficient analysis of the 
effectiveness of the 1207 programs and has not been sufficiently 
aggressive in monitoring the programs, while also criticizing the 
charging of administrative costs. These findings are contradictory. 
Since the inception of the 1207 program in 2006, S/CRS has 
increasingly developed and refined the monitoring and evaluations of 
projects. Quantitative and qualitative evaluations of program 
effectiveness are ongoing and have been completed for 1207 projects 
that are in-progress or recently completed. Further, without adequate 
administrative support, S/CRS would be unable to provide any 
monitoring or evaluations thereby resulting in the very concern 
expressed. S/CRS's administrative costs for 1207 are also far lower 
than those charged by similar programs in the U.S. government. 

Finally, because the 1207 authority will not be reauthorized in FY11, 
we appreciate the observations contained in this report and will take 
them into account when shaping the future 1207-like program under the 
Complex Crisis Fund. 

[End of section] 

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

USAID: 

March 31, 2010: 

Joseph A. Christoff: 
Director, International Affairs and Trade: 
U.S. Government Accountability Office: 
Washington, DC 20548: 

Dear Mr. Christoff, 

I am pleased to provide the U.S. Agency for International 
Development's (USAID) formal response to the GAO draft report 
entitled: "International Security: DOD and State Need to Improve 
Sustainment Planning, and Monitoring and Evaluation for Section 1206 
and 1207 Assistance Programs" (GAO-10-431). 

The enclosed USAID comments are provided for incorporation with this 
letter as an appendix to the final report. 

Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the GAO draft report and 
for the courtesies extended by your staff in the conduct of this audit 
review. 

Sincerely, 

Signed by: 

Drew W. Luten: 
Acting Assistant Administrator: 
Bureau for Management: 

Enclosure: a/s: 

[End of letter] 

USAID Comments On GAO Draft Report No. GAO-10-431: 

USAID has worked closely with S/CRS and our interagency partners 
throughout the 1207 processes each year since FY 2006. As the draft 
GAO report points out, learning from the 1207 authority and 
incorporating lessons from one year to the next have been among the 
best features of interagency 1207 management and integration. 

At the same time, there is still more work to be done to maximize the 
timeliness of funding availability, the use of reporting data, and our 
ability to incorporate necessary sustainment requirements for 1207 
funded activities into base budgets, areas which are highlighted in 
the draft GAO report. These are, of course, issues of interest to all 
agencies participating in 1207 processes. 

We have appreciated our strategic partnership with others from the 
Department of State and Department of Defense related to the exercise 
of the 1207 authority and management of 1207 resources and look 
forward to continuing to refine our business processes based on GAO's 
review. 

[End of section] 

Appendix VIII: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments: 

GAO Contact: 

Joseph Christoff (202) 512-8979 or christoffj@gao.gov: 

Staff Acknowledgments: 

Key contributors to this report include Jeffrey Phillips, Assistant 
Director; James Michels; Kathryn Bolduc; Robert Heilman; Martin de 
Alteriis; Michael Silver; Mark Dowling; John Pendleton; Marie Mak; 
Alissa Czyz; Jodie Sandel; Erin Smith; Thomas Costa; Kathryn Bernet; 
John Neumann; Michael Rohrback; Sally Williamson; Jeff Isaacs; Ophelia 
Robinson; Jenna Beveridge; Joseph Carney; Lynn Cothern; Anthony 
Pordes; and Jeremy Sebest. 

[End of section] 

Footnotes: 

[1] National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006, Pub. L. 
No. 109-163, 119 Stat. 3136 (2006). 

[2] H. R. Rep. No. 111-166 (2009). 

[3] Hereinafter referred to as the Section 1206 program and the 
Section 1207 program. These programs are also known as the Global 
Train and Equip Program and the Security and Stabilization Assistance 
Program, respectively. 

[4] Pub. L. 109-163. 

[5] Pub. L. No. 109-163, 119 Stat. 3136 (2006). 

[6] Pub. L. No. 103-62, as amended. 

[7] GAO, Standards for Internal Control in Federal Government, 
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO/AIMD-00-21.3.1] 
(Washington, D.C.: Nov. 1, 1999). 

[8] GAO, Results-Oriented Government: Practices That Can Help Enhance 
and Sustain Collaboration among Federal Agencies, [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-06-15] (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 21, 
2005). 

[9] FMF provides grants and loans to foreign governments and 
international organizations for the acquisition of U.S. defense 
equipment, services, and training. FMF assists the militaries of 
friendly countries to promote bilateral, regional, and multilateral 
coalition efforts, notably in the global war on terrorism; improve 
military capabilities to contribute to international crisis response 
operations, including peacekeeping and humanitarian crises; contribute 
to the professionalism of military forces to include the rule of law 
and military subordination to civilian control; enhance 
interoperability of military forces; maintain support for 
democratically elected governments; and support the U.S. industrial 
base by promoting the export of U.S. defense-related goods and 
services. 

[10] In addition to FMF, State and DOD have employed other, smaller 
programs to fund training or equipment for partner nations, such as 
International Military Education and Training and Global Peace 
Operations Initiatives, funded by State, and Joint Combined Exchange 
Training and Combatant Commander's Initiative Fund, funded by DOD. 

[11] These committees include the House Committees on Appropriations, 
Armed Services, and Foreign Affairs and the Senate Committees on 
Appropriations, Armed Services, and Foreign Relations. For the Section 
1206 program, DOD and State must wait 15 days after notification 
before beginning project implementation. 

[12] DOD and State use the term "security assistance officer," to 
refer to personnel in all organizations, regardless of actual name or 
size, located within overseas U.S. missions and assigned 
responsibility of carrying out security assistance functions under the 
Foreign Assistance Act and the Arms Export Control Act, such as FMF 
and International Military Education and Training. 

[13] The six geographic combatant commands are the U.S. Africa 
Command, the U.S. Central Command, the U.S. European Command, the U.S. 
Northern Command, the U.S. Pacific Command, and the U.S. Southern 
Command. 

[14] Funding data for Section 1206 and 1207 projects represent the 
allotment of appropriated funds, in line with DOD's notifications to 
the Congress. 

[15] Albania, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Macedonia, and Ukraine. 

[16] The list of priority countries is classified, which limits the 
precision of the analytical information we can report. 

[17] We reviewed proposals for 135 of 149 projects, or about 91 
percent of all executed Section 1206 projects. According to DOD, no 
formal proposals were submitted for the 11 projects approved in 2006 
and 3 projects approved in 2007 and 2008. 

[18] This watchlist is a classified document, which limits the 
analytical information we can report. 

[19] As reported by IHS Global Insight's Global Risk Service in the 
country rating section for short-term, internal political risk. IHS 
Global Insight is a private forecasting company that provides 
economic, financial, and political analyses, including risk 
assessments, of over 200 countries. IHS Global Insight's Global Risk 
Service monitors and updates country risk assessments on a quarterly 
basis. The Global Risk Service political risk score is a weighted 
average summary of probabilities that different political events, both 
domestic and external, such as civil war and trade conflicts, will 
reduce gross domestic product growth rates. The subjective 
probabilities are assessed by economists and country analysts at IHS 
Global Insight, on the basis of a wide range of information, and are 
reviewed by a team to ensure consistency across countries. 

[20] Recovery from instability or conflict refers to reconstruction 
activities in Georgia after the August 2008 Russian invasion, efforts 
to address postelection violence in Kenya in December 2007, and 
measures to strengthen Lebanon's internal security forces after armed 
conflict in 2006 and 2007. 

[21] Prevention of instability refers to combating extremism in 
Bangladesh's vulnerable geographic regions and educational system, 
denying safe havens to the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia in 
Panama's southern Darien region, and countering terrorism and 
lawlessness in the Mindanao region of the Philippines. 

[22] The U.S. Special Operations Command is responsible for preparing 
special operations forces to carry out assigned missions and to plan 
and conduct special operations. Its mission is (1) to provide fully 
capable special operations forces to defend the United States and its 
interests and (2) to synchronize global operations against terrorist 
networks, including receiving, reviewing, coordinating, and 
prioritizing all DOD plans that support the global campaign against 
terror. 

[23] The U.S. Department of State Global Peace Operations Initiative 
addresses gaps in international peace operations support by building 
and maintaining the capabilities, capacities, and effectiveness of 
peace operations. 

[24] GAO, Peacekeeping: Thousands Trained but United States Is 
Unlikely to Complete All Activities by 2010 and Some Improvements Are 
Needed, [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-754] 
(Washington, D.C.: June 26, 2008). 

[25] GAO, Results-Oriented Government: Practices That Can Help Enhance 
and Sustain Collaboration among Federal Agencies, [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-06-15] (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 21, 
2005). We have identified eight key practices for enhancing 
interagency collaboration, the first three of which are relevant in 
this context: (1) defining and articulating a common outcome; (2) 
establishing mutually reinforcing or joint strategies to achieve the 
outcome; (3) identifying and addressing needs by leveraging resources; 
(4) agreeing upon agency roles and responsibilities; (5) establishing 
compatible policies, procedures, and other means to operate across 
agency boundaries; (6) developing mechanisms to monitor, evaluate, and 
report the results of collaborative efforts; (7) reinforcing agency 
accountability for collaborative efforts through agency plans and 
reports; and (8) reinforcing individual accountability for 
collaborative efforts through agency performance management systems. 

[26] U.S. Southern Command is the U.S. geographic combatant command 
responsible for Central and South America and most of the Caribbean 
island nations. 

[27] According to fiscal year 2009 NDAA, Section 1206 program funds 
must be obligated by the end of the fiscal year after which they are 
appropriated. FMF funds are generally available for obligation for 
four years after the end of the fiscal year for which they were 
appropriated. 

[28] U.S. Department of State, Fiscal Year 2008 Performance Summary, 
Strategic Goal 1: Achieving Peace and Security; Department of State 
and U.S. Agency for International Development, Fiscal Year 2007 Joint 
Performance Summary, Strategic Goal 2: Counterterrorism. See also GAO, 
State Department's Antiterrorism Program Needs Improved Guidance and 
More Systematic Assessments of Outcomes, GAO-08-336 (Washington, D.C.: 
Feb. 29, 2008). 

[29] U.S. Department of Defense and U.S. Department of State 
Inspectors General, Interagency Evaluation of the Section 1206 Global 
Train and Equip Program, DOD Report Number IE-2009-007 and State 
Report Number ISP-I-09-69 (August 31, 2009). 

[30] Pub. L. No. 111-8, 123 Stat. 855 (2009). 

[31] The World Bank is an international organization that fights 
global poverty by providing low-interest loans, interest-free credits, 
and grants to developing countries for a wide array of purposes that 
include investments in education, health, public administration, 
infrastructure, financial and private sector development, agriculture, 
and environmental and natural resource management. 

[32] The U.S. Africa Command is the U.S. geographic combatant command 
responsible for U.S. military activities in African countries. 

[33] The breakdown of proposals identifying possible sources of 
sustainment does not add up to 21 because some proposals mention more 
than one source. For example, one proposal may identify funding from 
both the U.S. government and other donors. 

[34] Pub. L. No. 103-62, as amended. 

[35] GAO, Results-Oriented Government: GPRA Has Established a Solid 
Foundation for Achieving Greater Results, [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-04-38] (Washington, D.C.: Mar. 10, 
2004). 

[36] GAO, Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government, 
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO/AIMD-00-21.3.1] 
(Washington, D.C.: November 1999). 

[37] GAO, Results-Oriented Government: Practices that Can Help Enhance 
and Sustain Collaboration among Federal Agencies, [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-06-15] (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 21, 
2005). 

[38] Section 1237 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2009 directs the Secretaries of Defense and State to report on 
the implementation of the Building Global Partnership authorities, 
including Sections 1206 and 1207, and must include an assessment of 
the impact of the assistance provided under these authorities. The 
report is due no later than December 31, 2010, to the Senate and House 
of Representatives Committees on Armed Services, Appropriations, 
Foreign Affairs (House), and Foreign Relations (Senate). Pub. L. No. 
110-417, § 1237. 

[39] DOD and State were unable to provide proposals for the projects 
approved in fiscal year 2006; thus we were unable to determine whether 
those proposals identified performance measures. 

[40] In their 2009 review of the Section 1206 program, the DOD and 
State Inspectors General recognized the need for metrics of 
effectiveness and recommended that the agencies establish clearly 
defined Section 1206 project outputs and program outcomes. 

[41] CNA, Assessments of the Impact of 1206-Funded Projects in 
Selected Countries: Lebanon, Pakistan, Yemen, São Tome and Principe, 
CRM D0017988.A4/1REV (July 2008). 

[42] U.S. Department of Defense and U.S. Department of State 
Inspectors General, Interagency Evaluation of the Section 1206 Global 
Train and Equip Program, DOD Report Number IE-2009-007 and State 
Report Number ISP-I-09-69 (August 31, 2009). 

[43] This office is located within the Office of the Under Secretary 
of Defense (Policy) and oversees DOD's capabilities to conduct 
reconstruction, stabilization, and security operations with 
interagency and international partners. 

[44] According to the guidelines, the Section 1207 quarterly reports 
should (1) provide a brief summary of the project's progress and any 
upcoming challenges or opportunities over the next quarter; (2) 
describe interagency cooperation involved in implementation, including 
challenges and successes; (3) highlight critical successes or 
challenges encountered during implementation; (4) discuss how the 
project demonstrates a whole-of-government approach in response to 
instability and improves U.S. government operations in reconstruction, 
stabilization, and security-related activities; (5) report against the 
measures of effectiveness established in the original project 
proposals; and (6) provide detailed financial data on funding 
obligations and expenditures to date. 

[45] Although Pakistan and Indonesia were ranked highly, because of 
logistical complications, we conducted limited work in Pakistan and 
did not visit or interview officials in Indonesia. 

[46] The 18 countries include Albania, the Bahamas, Georgia, Haiti, 
Kazakhstan, Malaysia, and the Philippines, which we visited (7); 
Ethiopia, Pakistan, and Uganda, where we conducted interviews with 
U.S. embassy officials in conjunction with other related work GAO was 
conducting (3); and Honduras, Kenya, Lebanon, Mali, Mexico, Nigeria, 
Sri Lanka, and Ukraine, for which we conducted interviews via 
telephone (8). 

[47] Note that in the Section 1207 program from fiscal years 2006 to 
2009, the 25 projects were based on 28 approved proposals; 23 projects 
were based on one proposal each, but one project (in Lebanon in fiscal 
year 2008) was based on two proposals, and another project (in Georgia 
in fiscal years 2008 and 2009) was based on three proposals. 

[End of section] 

GAO's Mission: 

The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and 
investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting 
its constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance 
and accountability of the federal government for the American people. 
GAO examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and 
policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance 
to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding 
decisions. GAO's commitment to good government is reflected in its core 
values of accountability, integrity, and reliability. 

Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony: 

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no 
cost is through GAO's Web site [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]. Each 
weekday, GAO posts newly released reports, testimony, and 
correspondence on its Web site. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly 
posted products every afternoon, go to [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov] 
and select "E-mail Updates." 

Order by Phone: 

The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO’s actual cost of
production and distribution and depends on the number of pages in the
publication and whether the publication is printed in color or black and
white. Pricing and ordering information is posted on GAO’s Web site, 
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm]. 

Place orders by calling (202) 512-6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or
TDD (202) 512-2537. 

Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card,
MasterCard, Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional 
information. 

To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs: 

Contact: 

Web site: [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm]: 
E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov: 
Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470: 

Congressional Relations: 

Ralph Dawn, Managing Director, dawnr@gao.gov: 
(202) 512-4400: 
U.S. Government Accountability Office: 
441 G Street NW, Room 7125: 
Washington, D.C. 20548: 

Public Affairs: 

Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov: 
(202) 512-4800: 
U.S. Government Accountability Office: 
441 G Street NW, Room 7149: 
Washington, D.C. 20548: