Diplomatic Security

Expanded Missions and Inadequate Facilities Pose Critical Challenges to Training Efforts

GAO-11-460, Jun 1, 2011

Additional Materials:

Contact:

Jess T. Ford
(202) 512-4268
contact@gao.gov

 

Office of Public Affairs
(202) 512-4800
youngc1@gao.gov

The Department of State's (State) Bureau of Diplomatic Security (Diplomatic Security) protects people, information, and property at over 400 locations worldwide and has experienced a large growth in its budget and personnel over the last decade. Diplomatic Security trains its workforce and others to address a variety of threats, including crime, espionage, visa and passport fraud, technological intrusions, political violence, and terrorism. To meet its training needs, Diplomatic Security relies primarily on its Diplomatic Security Training Center (DSTC). GAO was asked to examine (1) how Diplomatic Security ensures the quality and appropriateness of its training, (2) the extent to which Diplomatic Security ensures that training requirements are being met, and (3) any challenges that Diplomatic Security faces in carrying out its training mission. GAO examined compliance with accreditation processes; analyzed data and documentation related to the agency's training efforts; and interviewed officials in Washington, D.C., and five overseas posts.

To ensure the quality and appropriateness of its training, Diplomatic Security primarily adheres to Federal Law Enforcement Training Accreditation (FLETA) standards, along with other standards. Diplomatic Security incorporated FLETA standards into its standard operating procedures, using a course design framework tailored for DSTC. To meet standards, DSTC also integrates both formal and informal feedback from evaluations and other sources to improve its courses. However, GAO found DSTC's systems do not have the capability to obtain feedback for some required training, including distributed learning efforts (interactive online course content). Without feedback, DSTC is less able to ensure the effectiveness of these efforts. Diplomatic Security developed career training paths for its personnel that identify the training required for selected job positions at different career levels. It uses various systems to track participation in its training, but DSTC's systems do not have the capability to track whether personnel have completed all required training. DSTC systems also are not designed to track training delivered through distributed learning. Diplomatic Security faces significant challenges to carrying out its training mission. DSTC must train Diplomatic Security personnel to perform new missions in Iraq as they take on many of the protective and security functions previously provided by the U.S. military. DSTC also faces dramatic increases in high-threat training provided to State and non-State personnel, but State does not have an action plan and time frames to manage proposed increases. These expanded training missions constrain DSTC's ability to meet training needs. In addition, many of DSTC's training facilities do not meet its training needs, a situation that hampers efficient and effective operations. To meet some of its needs, in 2007, DSTC developed an Interim Training Facility. In 2009, State allocated funds from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act and other acts to develop a consolidated training facility; State is in the process of identifying a suitable location. GAO recommends that State enhance DSTC's course evaluation and tracking capabilities. GAO also recommends that State develop an action plan and time frames to address proposed increases in high-threat training. State reviewed a draft of this report and agreed with all of the recommendations.

Status Legend:

More Info

Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.

  • In Process
  • Open
  • Closed - implemented
  • Closed - not implemented

Recommendations for Executive Action

Recommendation: The Secretary of State should develop or improve the process to obtain participant evaluations for all of DSTC required training, including distributed learning efforts.

Agency Affected: Department of State

Status: Open

Comments: State agreed with the recommendation, and noted that the Diplomatic Security Training Center (DSTC) will seek an electronic survey tool to enhance its evaluation efforts.

Recommendation: The Secretary of State should develop or improve the process to track individual DSTC training requirements and completion of DSTC training.

Agency Affected: Department of State

Status: Open

Comments: State agreed with the recommendation, and noted that the Diplomatic Security Training Center (DSTC) is exploring ways to modify existing State computer systems to enhance its ability to track training.

Recommendation: The Secretary of State should develop an action plan and associated time frames needed to carry out the Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review (QDDR) recommendation to increase the number of posts at which Foreign Affairs Counter Threat (FACT) is required.

Agency Affected: Department of State

Status: Open

Comments: State agreed with the recommendation, and noted that Diplomatic Security is working with other state offices to set parameters for expanding FACT training ot additional personnel.