Although numerous U.S. agencies are engaged in U.S. efforts to provide assistance to foreign police forces, DOD and State are the major providers—providing police training around the world through a variety of authorities. DOD trains and equips foreign police forces to support its counterinsurgency operations. It also provides support for the counterdrug activities of foreign law enforcement agencies for purposes including counterdrug training of foreign law enforcement personnel. DOD provides such assistance around the world through a variety of authorities. For example, section 1004 of the NDAA for Fiscal Year 1991, as amended, authorizes DOD to provide support for the counterdrug activities of foreign law-enforcement agencies for purposes including counterdrug training of foreign law-enforcement personnel, if requested by an appropriate official of a federal agency with counterdrug responsibilities. State trains and equips foreign police to support a variety of U.S. foreign policy objectives, including suppressing international narcotics trafficking, combating terrorism, and developing and implementing U.S. policies to curb the proliferation of all types of weapons of mass destruction. Different State bureaus carry out police assistance under different authorities. For example, according to State/INL officials, State/INL carries out its mission under authorities in Chapter 8 of the Foreign Assistance Act, as amended, which among other things, authorizes the provision of law-enforcement training. DOE provides training and equipment to overseas law enforcement, both at national borders and to police and security forces, as part of the mission of its National Nuclear Security Administration’s Second Line of Defense program to strengthen the capability of foreign governments to deter, detect and interdict illicit trafficking in nuclear and other radioactive materials across international borders, through the global maritime shipping system, and by equipping teams to be deployed throughout their countries. USAID provides community-based police assistance as part of its role in promoting the rule of law through assistance to the justice sector. Treasury provides training as part of its mission to support the development of strong financial sectors and sound financial management overseas. DOJ and DHS implement foreign police assistance activities primarily funded by State. Treasury also receives some funds from State. Pub. Law No. 87-195, as amended. Investigation (FBI) Academy in Virginia, and at various DOD training facilities. Trainers provided by various U.S. agencies also travel overseas to provide instruction. Foreign law enforcement personnel are also trained at State-funded international law enforcement academies located in El Salvador, Thailand, Hungary, Botswana, and Peru. The training covers a variety of subject matter, including crime scene investigation, postblast investigations, forensics, and behavioral analysis. We estimate the U.S. government made available $13.9 billion for foreign police assistance during fiscal years 2009 through 2011. Most U.S. funding made available for foreign police assistance during fiscal years 2009 through 2011 provided training and equipment to Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Colombia, Mexico, and the Palestinian Territories. DOD and State funds constituted about 97 percent of the U.S. funds for police assistance in fiscal year 2009 and 98 percent of U.S. funds for police assistance in fiscal years 2010 and 2011. Four other agencies provided the remaining amount. On the basis of data provided by DOD, State, DOE, USAID, Treasury, and DOJ, we estimate that the U.S. government made available $3.5 billion in foreign police assistance in fiscal year 2009, $5.7 billion in fiscal year 2010, and $4.7 billion in fiscal year 2011 (see fig. 1).made available focused on sustaining the counternarcotics, counterterrorism, anticrime, and other civilian policing efforts of police forces around the world. GAO, Combating Terrorism: Pakistan Counterinsurgency Funds Disbursed, but Human Rights Vetting Process Can Be Enhanced, GAO-11-860SU (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 11, 2011). million in fiscal year 2011. State’s activities included support to the Colombian National Police’s aviation program and training on weapons and other equipment to rural police units. DOD support included training for a special unit of the Colombian National Police. In Mexico, DOD and State funds made available decreased from an estimated $167 million in fiscal year 2010 to $21 million in fiscal year 2011. Activities in Mexico included State’s Mérida Initiative, which provided training and equipment including aircraft and boats, inspection equipment, and canine units. DOD support to Mexico included training on aviation, communications equipment, maintenance, and information sharing. For the Palestinian Territories, State’s funds made available increased from an estimated $97 million in fiscal year 2010 to $142 million in fiscal year 2011. State provided battalion-level basic law enforcement and security training conducted at the Jordanian International Police Training Center located outside Amman, Jordan. Appendix IV contains additional information on activities in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Colombia, Mexico, and the Palestinian Territories. Four other agencies—DOE, USAID, Treasury, and DOJ—also made available about $83 million, or 2 percent of the estimated funds, for foreign police assistance in fiscal year 2011 (see table 1). DOE made available the majority of the funds ($52 million) for its nuclear security programs; USAID, Treasury, and DOJ made available the remaining amounts. DOD and State/INL have acknowledged limitations in their procedures to assess and evaluate their foreign police assistance activities and are taking steps to address them. DOD assesses the performance of the national police forces it has trained and equipped for counterinsurgency operations in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Pakistan—countries that were the three largest recipients of DOD’s foreign police assistance funds during fiscal years 2009 through 2011. However, according to an October 2011 DOD report to Congress, the assessment process for Afghanistan does not provide data on civil policing operations such as referring cases to the justice system, a fact that hampers the department’s ability to fully assess the effectiveness of the training it provides to the ANP. DOD plans to begin collecting these data to assess civil policing effectiveness. As of April 2012, State/INL had conducted only one evaluation of a program that includes foreign police assistance activities. Recognizing the need to conduct such evaluations, State/INL is developing an evaluation plan that is consistent with State’s February 2012 Evaluation Policy and implementing its June 2010 guidelines that recommended including evaluation as a part of its budget and planning documents for programs in Iraq and Mexico. Other priority programs for evaluation include ones for Afghanistan, Colombia, the Palestinian Territories, and Pakistan. DOD assesses the performance of the national police forces it has trained and equipped for counterinsurgency operations in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Pakistan—countries that were the three largest recipients of DOD’s foreign police assistance funds during fiscal years 2009 through 2011. For Afghanistan, DOD has assessed the Afghan National Security Forces, which consists of the Afghan National Army (ANA) and ANP, using its Commander’s Unit Assessment Tool. The assessment tool provides quantitative data for security force units, including personnel, equipment, and training, and qualitative assessments for functions such as training and education. In addition, the assessment tool reports on the operational performance of the ANA and ANP units using rating definition levels. Rating definition levels include (1) independent, (2) effective with advisers, (3) effective with assistance, (4) developing, (5) established, and (6) not assessed. As of August 2011, DOD reported 26 ANP units were rated as independent. We previously reported on U.S. efforts to train and equip the ANP in 2009 and more recently in 2012. For Iraq, DOD used a readiness assessment system to determine when units of the Iraqi security forces, including the Iraqi national police, could assume the lead for conducting security operations. This system’s classified assessments were prepared monthly by the unit’s coalition commander and Iraqi commander. According to multinational force guidance, the purpose of the assessment system was to provide commanders with a method to consistently evaluate units. It also helped to identify factors hindering unit progress, determine resource shortfalls, and make resource allocations. Units were evaluated in the areas of personnel, command and control, equipment, sustainment/logistics, training, leadership, operational effectiveness, and reliability, including how militia and sectarian influences affected the loyalty and reliability of Iraqi police and military forces. Further information on the results of these assessments is classified. For Pakistan, DOD reported that, since March 2009, the Strategic Implementation Plan has been the principal mechanism for monitoring and assessing the administration’s progress in attaining the core Pakistan- related objectives of the President’s Afghanistan-Pakistan strategy, which include developing the counterinsurgency capabilities of Pakistan’s Frontier Corps and army. Although details of these and supporting assessments are classified, DOD reported that a series of events beginning in late 2010 heightened bilateral tension between the United States and Pakistan. Pakistan’s military subsequently requested significant reductions in U.S. military personnel in Pakistan. According to the report, the reduced number of U.S. military personnel and trainers, along with continued delays in obtaining visas, hindered the United States’ provision of security-related assistance to Pakistan. As a result, the progress achieved since 2010 in training, advising, and equipping Pakistan security forces has eroded, particularly in the area of counterinsurgency effectiveness for tactical- and operational-level combat forces. Although DOD is assessing ANP’s operational performance, the department recently reported it lacked data to assess civil policing effectiveness. According to a DOD October 2011 report, DOD uses the same report template to assess ANA’s and ANP’s ability to meet their counterinsurgency mission, but it does not address civil policing and the other roles and responsibilities of ANP.