From the U.S. Government Accountability Office, www.gao.gov Transcript for: Key Issues Facing Diplomatic Security Description: Thousands of U.S. diplomatic personnel and their families live in an overseas environment with a host of security threats and challenges. So how prepared is the Department of State to protect personnel and diplomatic facilities? Related GAO Work: GAO-17-681SP: Diplomatic Security: Key Oversight Issues Released: September 2017 [ Background Music ] [ Michael Courts: ] Thousands of U.S. diplomatic personnel and their families live in an overseas environment with a host of security threats and challenges. [ Sarah Kaczmarek: ] Welcome to GAO's Watchdog Report, your source for news and information from the U.S. Government Accountability Office. I'm Sarah Kaczmarek. With increasing threats to U.S. diplomats and facilities overseas how prepared is the Department of State for what lies ahead. I sat down with Michael Courts, a director in our International Affairs and Trade team to talk about GAO's new report on diplomatic security. We outlined issues ranging from funding to training that warrant Congressional oversight. I first wanted to know is the department currently prepared to protect diplomatic personnel in case of a crisis overseas. [ Michael Courts: ] Well State has taken a number of steps to enhance the security of U.S. personnel overseas. They've enhanced the security standards for embassies and other facilities, and they developed training for personnel assigned to dangerous posts. However, we have consistently found that State has trouble with its internal management controls in the diplomatic security area, which creates vulnerabilities with real potential consequences. For example, overseas posts are required to conduct drills for things like bomb threats, internal defense, and emergency destruction of classified material, among other things. And we found that on average posts worldwide, reported completing only a little over half of the required annual drills for fiscal years 2013 through 2016, and that's a problem in terms of preparedness for possible crises and evacuations. [ Sarah Kaczmarek: ] In terms of training do you find that staff are getting adequate security training in the first place? [ Michael Courts: ] They have I think a lot of adequate training available to them. The questions to whether or not they're actually taking it. [ Sarah Kaczmarek: ] And so with that you're saying that they're not doing the training that assigned to them? [ Michael Courts: ] They're not doing the drills for sure, and they're not sure whether they're actually doing the other training that they're required to do. [ Sarah Kaczmarek: ] Let me ask you about staffing as well. How are staffing challenges affecting security? [ Michael Courts: ] Well State's Bureau of Diplomatic Security has the primary responsibility of keeping for people in our facilities safe overseas, and its workforce is increased dramatically over the last two decades as the Bureau's responsibilities have expanded in reaction to various security incidents. However, gaps in the level of job experience, and foreign language proficiency continue to be a challenge for the Bureau. For example, we found that 34 percent of diplomatic security positions were filled with officers below the positions designated grade levels, and that means that officers didn't have the experience levels that were intended for those positions. With respect to foreign language proficiency, State's moving in the right direction. Until 2009, we found that only 47 percent of diplomatic security agents in positions that required foreign languages actually met their language requirements, but as of December 2016, 72 percent of those positions were filled with agents that met the requirements. [ Sarah Kaczmarek: ] So of course all these things take money. What's going on with security funding? [ Michael Courts: ] Well, the Bureau of Diplomatic Securities funding has increased considerably in response to multiple security incidents since the 1998 bombings of the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. For example, the Bureau's funding increased from about $172 million in 1998 to over $3.3 billion in 2016. So that's quite an increase. State has also allocated about $11 billion or so to the construction of new secure facilities, and physical security upgrades to other existing facilities in fiscal years 2009, through 2016. [ Sarah Kaczmarek: ] How does DOD support for U.S. diplomatic missions play a role in all of this? [ Michael Courts: ] DOD has long provided military support for the security and safety of U.S. diplomatic missions and personnel, both during normal operations and during emergencies. Following the attacks in Benghazi that collaboration increased. For example, DOD provides many embassies with the Marine security guard detachment to assist with protecting people working at the embassy, as well as sensitive information that's stored there, and after the Benghazi attacks that State and DOD agreed to increase the size of the Marine security guard detachments. DOD also has military units that are ready to provide security reinforcement in certain parts of the world, and to assist with evacuations. [ Background Music ] [ Sarah Kaczmarek: ] This report isn't making any new recommendations. Of course, it builds on the previous GAO reports with recommendations that could significantly improve diplomatic security. I knew Michael could help me put this report in context and highlight key recommendations the Department of State still needs to address. [ Michael Courts: ] There are currently about 24 GAO priority recommendations related to diplomatic security that State needs to address. For example, State needs to take several actions to improve its ability to ensure that U.S. personnel are in compliance with the counter threat training requirement that I mentioned earlier. We also found that State needs to take several actions to improve its ability to identify and mitigate risks to overseas work facilities, as well as residences and schools and other soft targets. [ Sarah Kaczmarek: ] Finally, what do you believe to be the key take away in terms of your report? [ Michael Courts: ] Thousands of U.S. diplomatic personnel and their families live in an overseas environment with a host of security threats and challenges. And while state has taken significant measures to enhance security at its embassies and consulates, we found repeatedly that State has issues with its internal management controls, particularly surrounding security related programs. And while this seems like a bureaucratic nuance, in the realm of security can lead to real problems. And so until State addresses the issues that we've highlighted in our reports, it really can't be assured that the most effective security measures are in place at a time when U.S. personnel and their families face ever increasing threats to their safety and security. [ Background Music ] [ Sarah Kaczmarek: ] Thanks for listening to the Watchdog Report. To hear more podcasts, subscribe to us on ITunes. For more from the Congressional Watchdog, the U.S. Accountability Office, visit us at GAO.gov.