Detailed Information on the
Security Assistance for the Western Hemisphere Assessment

Propose security assistance programs for the region that complement the objectives outlined in the PART and promote regional cooperation.

In conjunction with the US Southern Command, establish performance measures for new FMF funded programs (Operation Enduring Friendship).

Coordinating annual budgets between the State and Defense Departments to develop more specific long-term goals with time frames.

Measure: Ratio of FMF Program Costs to the Number of Personnel in the Colombian Armed Forces

Explanation:With several effectiveness measures for Colombia FMF in the PART and MPP, this measure will indicate the relative efficiency of FMF support by measuring FMF support per member of the armed forces.

Measure: This indicator measures the number terrorists deactivated (captured, killed, or induced to desert) and in later years the total number of terrorists.

Explanation:This indiacator is intended to demonstrate GOC success in reducing the number of terrorists in Colombia and is linked to other measures demonstrating increasing GOC control in Colombia. A new baseline will be established at the end of FY 2006. THe target for subsequent years is a reduction from the 2007 baselne.

Measure: Percentage of FMF and IMET recipients participate in more than two combined/multilateral exercises, peacekeeping operations, or coalition operations.

Explanation:Participation in combined exercises and operations indicates an active willingness to cooperate on common security goals. Participation in interdiction, coalition, and peacekeeping operations decreases the demand for U.S. forces.

Measure: Percentage of non-commercial maritime conveyances for moving cocaine to the U.S. (Excluding the Eastern Pacific)

Explanation:As the capacity to control the Caribbean maritime approaches to the U.S. improves transnational criminals will be forced to use other methods. This indicator measures the shift in trafficking as FMF programs improve the capacity of regional partners to interdict all forms of a contraband.

Measure: Number of offensive operations conducted by Colombian units that are the focus of FMF support (FUDRA [Rapid Reaction Force], Mobile Brigades, Special Operations Command, units participating Plan Patriota)

Explanation:Conducting offensive operations is critical for the GOC to establish control over its national territory and implement its national security strategy. This goal measures the ability of Colombian forces to conduct offensive operations.

Measure: Number of times that WHA FMF and IMET recipient countries participate in joint/multilateral exercises, peacekeeping operations, and coalition operations. Number of countries participating in Enduring Friendship.

Explanation:Measures the willingness and interoperability of FMF and IMET recipients to work with US and coalition forces, reducing demands on U.S. forces and improving regional cooperation.

Measure: Amount of cocaine seized or disrupted in the transit zone (measured in tons).

Explanation:Measuring cocaine seizures will provide an assessment of the interdiction capability of regional forces and an assessment of regional cooperation on interdiction. While the measure is restricted to cocaine, we are interested in the overall interdiction capability and level of regional cooperation.

Measure: Number of terrorist attacks

Explanation: A key objective of our support to the GOC is to reduce the number of terrorist attacks. A decline in the number of terrorists attacks also indicates increasing GOC control over its national territory.

Measure: Number of mobile police units deploying to rural areas.

Explanation:The ability of police units to deploy to rural areas indicates improving GOC control of its national territory. Once all 62 ural units are deployed the objective will be to maintain a police presence in each of the 1,089 municipalities

Is the program purpose clear?

Explanation: Section 503, Chapter 2, Part II, of the Foreign Assistance Act clearly establishes the legal authority and purpose for US military assistance. The purpose for FMF/IMET is further refined in the WHA Bureau Performance Plan (BPP) as follows: to promote U.S. national security by enhancing regional stability, preventing and responding to terrorism, and enhancing efforts against international crime and drugs.

Evidence: Goal Papers: Other Evidence Data: a. Section 503, b. Chapter 2, Part II, of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, c. The WHA Bureau Performance Plan (BPP), d. State Department FY 2004 Congressional Budget Justification, e. The Arms Export Control Act. f. The authorities for grant assistance are sect 541 (IMET) of the FAA and section 23 of the Arms Export Control Act. BPP Evidence: A/S Statement: Goal Papers:

Does the program address a specific and existing problem, interest, or need?

Explanation: At the strategic level, terrorism in the Andes and illegal criminal activity in the Caribbean and Central America are two principle threats to US national security interests in the region. The US also looks to regional governments for cooperation on a variety of defense issues such as coalition support and peace keeping activities. FMF and IMET funded programs target these needs. Individual FMF programs in the WHA countries are developed by the embassy country team (the MILGRP is the lead agency) and SOUTHCOM. Early in the process, the Country Security Cooperation Plan is developed, which includes the long-term strategic goals and the key capabilities that need to be put in place to achieve those goals. From these required capabilities (e.g. improve interoperability) outcomes and tasks (e.g. provide specific communications equipment) are developed to help achieve the required capability.

Evidence: a. WHA BPP, b. State Department FY 2004 Congressional Budget Justification. BPP Evidence: A/S Statement: Goal Papers:

Is the program designed so that it is not redundant or duplicative of any other Federal, state, local or private effort?

Explanation: FMF/IMET are the principle forms of US military assistance. IMET is uniquely designed to provide training opportunities not otherwise supported with US funding. Because of the nexus between drugs and terrorism, FMF programs, including funding and goals, are closely coordinated with programs funded with International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement funds and S/CT. For example, to improve security in Arauca, Colombia, FMF and INCLE programs work in conjunction, as part of a unified campaign, without overlapping -- FMF focuses on support to the military while INCLE focuses on support to the police. Additionally, FMF programs leverage other forms of security assistance such as Excess Defense Articles (EDA) and assistance to Colombia under Section 1033 and 1004. In several cases FMF supports equipment that has been, or will be, transferred as EDA or provided by DoD.

Evidence: "a. WHA BPP, b. State Department FY 2004 Congressional Budget Justification. " BPP Evidence: A/S Statement: Goal Papers:

Is the program design free of major flaws that would limit the program's effectiveness or efficiency?

Explanation: There is no evidence of design flaws. In the case of FMF for Colombia, Congress gave the Department authorization in 2003 and subsequent years to transfer FMF funds and merge them with ACI, to improve management of pipeline security program.

Evidence: a. Letters Of Agreement, b. CBJ, c. DSCA Web Based Planning Tool. BPP Evidence: A/S Statement: Goal Papers:

Is the program design effectively targeted so that resources will address the program's purpose directly and will reach intended beneficiaries?

Explanation: Recipients [individuals for IMET and units for FMF] are identified in Letters of Agreement between the USG and the recipient govt. All units and individuals are vetted for human rights. MILGRPs at posts develop plans to be appropriate to the country these are reviewed by SOUTHCOM, PM, and WHA.

Evidence: Other Evidence Data: a. LOAs, b. CBJ, c. DSCA Web Based Planning Tool, d. Vetting cables, e. Congressional notifications and oversight ensure compliance. BPP Evidence: A/S Statement: Goal Papers:

Does the program have a limited number of specific long-term performance measures that focus on outcomes and meaningfully reflect the purpose of the program?

Explanation: At the strategic level, the WHA 2006 BPP has Goal Papers and Performance Indicators programs supported by FMF and IMET. In addition, SOUTHCOM and WHA posts (through the MILGRPs) maintain specific long-tem and annual objectives, for FMF supported activities in each country as part of the CSCP and the Mission Program Plan (MPP). It should be noted that the CSCP includes outcomes and task that are supported by a variety of activities of which FMF and IMET are but two. The capabilities, outcomes, and tasks established in the CSCP form the basis of the security objectives of the MPP and the FMF requests (which are submitted by posts in the MPP).

Evidence: a. WHA BPP (Goal papers: Andean Counterdrug Initiative: Development, Justice, and Counterterrorism; Combating International Terrorism in the Hemisphere; and Regional Anti-Crime Initiatives and Performance indicators: Panama Canal Security, Reduced terrorist activity and boost security level in the region, and Transit Zone cocaine seizures and disruptions), b. State Department FY 2004 Congressional Budget Justification. BPP Evidence: A/S Statement: Goal Papers:

Does the program have ambitious targets and timeframes for its long-term measures?

Explanation: At the strategic level, ambitious and realistic targets through FY 2007 are established in the BPP. SOUTHCOM planning documents (TSCP and CSCP) have detailed long-term outcomes, annual outcomes and annual tasks set through 2008. For example, the Ecuador CSCP identifies securing Ecuador's northern border with Colombia by 2006 as a goal. The Political Military Implementation Plan for Colombia includes specific short, medium, and long-term goals and targets for our largest FMF program.

Evidence: a. WHA BPP, b. Congressional testimony, c. mission program plans, d. DSCA Web Based Planning Tool. BPP Evidence: Goal Papers:

Does the program have a limited number of specific annual performance measures that can demonstrate progress toward achieving the program's long-term goals?

Explanation: Annual performance measures for FMF and IMET are in place at the regional (strategic) and country level. The country level objectives and targets (listed in the BPPs and CSCPs) are more detailed. The annual performance measures at the regional level track with Performance goals set BPP's Performance Goal Papers. The IMET program provides periodic reviews of student performance as an indicator of program effectiveness/efficiency.

Evidence: a. WHA BPP, b. Congressional testimony, c. mission program plans, d. DSCA Web Based Planning Tool, e. Student performance reviews (IME). BPP Evidence: A/S Statement: Goal Papers:

Does the program have baselines and ambitious targets for its annual measures?

Explanation: Baselines and target development (as well as program execution) is decentralized (on a country and program basis). Additionally, FMF for WHA has seen a dramatic increase from $11.7M in 2002 to $126.5M for 2005. All targets are ambitious and have baselines. The largest program in FY 2005 ($108M for Colombia) has definitive baselines, goals and targets in the MPP and the Political Military Implementation Plan. Other base lines are under review and could be adjusted to reflect changes in funding (e.g. Disruption of Criminal Organizations (regional maritime interdiction))

Evidence: a. WHA BPP, b. Congressional testimony, c. mission program plans, d. DSCA Web Based Planning Tool. e. Colombia MPP f. Reports to Congress on the Cano-Limon Pipeline, g. Political Military Implementation Plan (Classified) BPP Evidence: A/S Statement: Goal Papers:

Do all partners (including grantees, sub-grantees, contractors, cost-sharing partners, and other government partners) commit to and work toward the annual and/or long-term goals of the program?

Explanation: To ensure full host government cooperation, detailed Letters of Agreement are negotiated between the USG and the host government. The actual implementation of FMF programs occurs at MILGRPs at our posts. SOUTHCOM, the Bureau for Political Military Affairs, the Bureau for Western Hemisphere Affairs and The Defense Security Cooperation Agency all participate in program management. In addition, the US based education institutions that support IMET programs are full partners in the process. Key to the success of many of these programs is commitment by the host countries, such as the commitment shown President Uribe of Colombia who has increased defense spending, established a new national security strategy, and commitment additional troops to key programs funded under FMF.

Evidence: a. WHA BPP, b. Congressional testimony, c. mission program plans, d. DSCA Web Based Planning Tool, e. SOUTHCOM Requirements Documents.

Are independent evaluations of sufficient scope and quality conducted on a regular basis or as needed to support program improvements and evaluate effectiveness and relevance to the problem, interest, or need?

Explanation: Most formal evaluations of the regional FMF programs are conducted by State, DoD, or SOUTHCOM. However, there are independent informal evaluations of US security assistance. These range from evaluations of US security policy sponsored by the Army War College to critics of our security policies in the region, such as The Center for International Policy and WOLA. Most external assessments of FMF deal with the strategic or policy objectives that FMF support, such as the ability of countries to secure their borders, rather than the FMF programs that supports those objectives. The Theater Security Cooperation Management information System includes an assessment feature that will assess progress toward each specific task listed in the Country Security Cooperation Plan. The assessment feature is in development. Information provided by the Government of Colombia and private companies are critical to the evaluation of our largest FMF program (Security for the Cano Limon Pipeline). IMET

Evidence: a. WHA BPP, b. Congressional testimony, c. Mission Program Plans, d. DSCA Web Based Planning Tool e. SOUTHCOM Theater Security Cooperation Management Information System, f. Congressional Research Service Reports for Congress (ACI Assistance for 2004 and 2005) g. Reports from the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

Are Budget requests explicitly tied to accomplishment of the annual and long-term performance goals, and are the resource needs presented in a complete and transparent manner in the program's budget?

Explanation: At the strategic level, the BPP and MPP tie resources to our objectives and performance measures. The 2006 MPP identifies the goals and measures for FMF supported programs in its Goal Papers (Andean Counterdrug Initiative: Development, Justice, and Counterterrorism; Combating International Terrorism in the Hemisphere; and Regional Anti-Crime Initiatives) and Performance indicators (Panama Canal Security, Reduced terrorist activity and boost security level in the region, and Transit Zone cocaine seizures and disruptions). At the country level, WHA decides, in coordination with posts, PM, and DoD which requests for funding support the Bureau's strategic goals and other USG foreign policy objectives. The Country Security Cooperation Plans include further details concerning the goals and funding of individual FMF programs.

Evidence: a. WHA BPP, b. Congressional testimony, c. Mission Program Plans, d. DSCA Web Based Planning Tool e. SOUTHCOM Theater Security Cooperation Management Information System, f. Congressional Research Service Reports for Congress (ACI Assistance for 2004 and 2005) g. Reports from the Center for Strategic and International Studies. BPP Evidence: A/S Statement: Goal Papers:

Has the program taken meaningful steps to correct its strategic planning deficiencies?

Explanation: Coordination of IMET, INCLE, FMF, and DoD funded programs is stronger under the "new authorities" for Colombia that call for a unified campaign against narcotics and terrorism. FMF goals have also improved as a result of increased use of video conferencing in the MPP reviews. The regional stability performance goals from the State/AID Strategic Planning Framework are in synch with the long-term and annual goals for FMF. Several State/DoD working groups further coordinate program administration. WHA, INL and DoD also established a working group to coordinate IMET, ACI, FMF, and DoD funding of security assistance projects in Colombia.

Evidence: a. WHA BPP, b. mission program plans, c. DSCA Web Based Planning Tool. BPP Evidence: A/S Statement: Goal Papers:

Does the agency regularly collect timely and credible performance information, including information from key program partners, and use it to manage the program and improve performance?

Explanation: Federal managers and program partners are held accountable for cost, schedule and performance results. The MILGRPS, SOUTHCOM, and DSCA regularly collect and analyze information on program performance. In addition PM and WHA also review performance information. Some of these reviews are directly tied to regional objectives and targets while others are tied to specific country programs objectives and targets. At the MILGRP, SOUTHCOM, and DSCA level, the analysis leads to changes in training schedules, deployments etc. The results of the reviews conducted by PM and WHA are reflected in changes made to the programs in subsequent budget requests.

Evidence: a. WHA BPP, b. Congressional testimony, c. mission program plans, d. DSCA Web Based Planning Tool e. Results of the SOUTHCOM Colombia Assistance Visit.

Are Federal managers and program partners (including grantees, sub-grantees, contractors, cost-sharing partners, and other government partners) held accountable for cost, schedule and performance results?

Explanation: Letter of Offer and Acceptance is Government to government agreement that defines the terms and conditions in accordance with law; US grant funds are controlled and managed by USG organizations with USG oversight. Funds for IMET are closely monitored by the learning institutions, Posts, Congress and NGOs.

Evidence: a. USG financial reports, b. Program/financial management reviews, c. The AECA and FAA are governing authorities for program implementation.

Are funds (Federal and partners') obligated in a timely manner, spent for the intended purpose and accurately reported?

Explanation: LOAs govern the pace of spending and ensure that funds are spent for the intended purpose. MILGRPs conduct end use monitoring. By the nature of the program IMET funds are spent in timely manner or will be reallocated.

Evidence: LOAs govern the pace of spending and ensure that funds are spent for the intended purpose. MILGRPs conduct end use monitoring. By the nature of the program IMET funds are spent in timely manner or will be reallocated.

Does the program have procedures (e.g. competitive sourcing/cost comparisons, IT improvements, appropriate incentives) to measure and achieve efficiencies and cost effectiveness in program execution?

Explanation: For FMF funded cases and IMET funded training, the USG uses the same rules for the customer as it does for itself. On an annual basis SOUTHCOM reviews, and re-allocates, funding based upon programs status.

Evidence: a USG (DSCA) Policy Guidance.

Does the program collaborate and coordinate effectively with related programs?

Explanation: Given the direct links between terrorism and transnational crime (especially illegal narcotics trafficking) there is extremely close coordination of programs funded under International Narcotics and Law Enforcement funding. For example, the effort to prevent terrorists attacks in Arauca Colombia includes $93M FMF ( FY 2003) for the Colombian Army and several INCLE funded programs that support the police. Several FMF funded programs are designed to support other military assistance programs such as excess defense articles. A working group with representatives from State (WHA and INL) and DoD has been formed specifically to coordinate related programs.

Evidence: a. WHA BPP, b. Congressional testimony, c. mission program plans, d. DSCA Web Based Planning Tool. BPP Evidence: A/S Statement: Goal Papers:

Does the program use strong financial management practices?

Explanation: LOAs are overseen by DFAS Denver and DSCA Comptroller as well as the MILGRP, PM, and SOUTHCOM. Implementation of the program is followed by MILGRP, PM, and SOUTHCOM.

Evidence: a. DFAS Reports

Has the program taken meaningful steps to address its management deficiencies?

Explanation: By allowing any number of partner agencies to simultaneously view and analyze the same data and recommendations, the Web Based Planning Tool has made the management of the FMF and IMET programs more efficient and transparent. Additionally, special provision in the authorization of Colombia's 2003 FMF allowed the Department to merge certain funds with ACI funds because both programs were supporting different programs (FMF protecting a key pipeline, ACI supporting narcotics objectives) with the same type of helicopter, and the ACI funding program was already well established.

Evidence: a. DSCA Web Based Planning Tool

Has the program demonstrated adequate progress in achieving its long-term performance goals?

Explanation: The WHA BPP and MPP goal papers document results achieved toward our goals and specific targets (e.g. terrorists attacks against the key pipeline are down by two-thirds and the situation in Colombia is improving, especially in the areas supported by FMF) In addition there is significant cooperation on a broad range of defense issues; four WHA countries contributed forces for Iraq, the US has routine access to four Forward Operating Locations in the region, and there has been demonstrable progress in creating Confidence Building Measures that reduce military tension.

Evidence: a. WHA BPP, b. Congressional testimony, c. Mission Program Plans, d. DSCA Web Based Planning Tool e. SOUTHCOM Theater Security Cooperation Management Information System, f. Congressional Research Service Reports for Congress (ACI Assistance for 2004 and 2005) g. Reports from the Center for Strategic and International Studies. BPP Evidence: Goal Papers:

Does the program (including program partners) achieve its annual performance goals?

Explanation: Despite the fact that FMF for WHA countries increased dramatically from FY2002 to 2003, adequate progress has been demonstrated across the range of long-term performance goals in the MPPs and the BPP. The largest program is FMF for Colombia (about 82% of WHA's FY 2003-1005 FMF), which exceeded the annual targets supporting the long-term performance goals.

Evidence: a. WHA BPP, b. Congressional testimony, c. Mission Program Plans, d. DSCA Web Based Planning Tool e. SOUTHCOM Theater Security Cooperation Management Information System, f. Congressional Research Service Reports for Congress (ACI Assistance for 2004 and 2005) g. Reports from the Center for Strategic and International Studies. h. Colombian reporting on the web pages for the Ministry of Defense, the Office the President, and the Colombian Army. " BPP Evidence: Goal Papers:

Does the program demonstrate improved efficiencies or cost effectiveness in achieving program goals each year?

Explanation: WHA conducted more rigorous interagency MPP reviews, relaying heavily on video conferencing to improve the quality of the MPPs and leading to improved efficiency in achieving the goals supported by FMF in the various MPPs. Improved coordination with DOD and INL ensures that funding is not duplicated. The efficiency measure cited in this review covers roughly 82 percent of FMF spending in the region.

Evidence: a. WHA BPP, b. Mission MPPS, c. CBJ.

Does the performance of this program compare favorably to other programs, including government, private, etc., with similar purpose and goals?

Explanation: IMET is viewed as being among the most effective USG funded programs, and would compare favorable with any civilian scholarship program. FMF is the principle vehicle for providing US security assistance. There are no other comparable USG or private programs.

Evidence: a. CBJ b. WHA BPP c. Congressional Testimony

Do independent evaluations of sufficient scope and quality indicate that the program is effective and achieving results?

Explanation: Various evaluations of the largest program (Projecting the Cano-Limon Pipeline In Colombia [80% of WHA's FY 2003 FMF] and extending Colombian authority [key program in 2004]) clearly show that FMF programs have achieved their intended results.

Evidence: a. Congressional Research Service Reports for Congress (ACI Assistance for 2004 and 2005) b. Reports from the Center for Strategic and International Studies c. Reports from other NGOs d. Reports from the US Army War College e. Center for Hemispheric Defense Seminar: Measuring Success in Colombia. "