Peace Corps: Observations on Volunteer Safety and Security
(22-JUN-04, GAO-04-903T).
About 7,500 Peace Corps volunteers currently serve in 70
countries. The administration intends to increase this number to
about 14,000. Volunteers often live in areas with limited access
to reliable communications, police, or medical services. As
Americans, they may be viewed as relatively wealthy and, hence,
good targets for crime. In this testimony, GAO summarizes
findings from its 2002 report Peace Corps: Initiatives for
Addressing Safety and Security Challenges Hold Promise, but
Progress Should be Assessed, GAO- 02-818, on (1) trends in crime
against volunteers and Peace Corps' system for generating
information, (2) the agency's field implementation of its safety
and security framework, and (3) the underlying factors
contributing to the quality of these practices.
-------------------------Indexing Terms-------------------------
REPORTNUM: GAO-04-903T
ACCNO: A10586
TITLE: Peace Corps: Observations on Volunteer Safety and
Security
DATE: 06/22/2004
SUBJECT: Collection procedures
Data collection
Physical security
Reporting requirements
Safety
Safety standards
Sex crimes
Sexual abuse
Sexual harassment
Volunteer services
******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a **
** GAO Product. **
** **
** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
** figure captions are reproduced. Tables are included, but **
** may not resemble those in the printed version. **
** **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed **
** document's contents. **
** **
******************************************************************
GAO-04-903T
United States General Accounting Office
GAO Testimony
Before the Subcommittee on Western Hemisphere, Peace Corps, and Narcotics
Affairs, Committee on Foreign Relations, U.S. Senate
For Release on Delivery
Expected at 9:30 a.m. EDT PEACE CORPS
Tuesday, June 22, 2004
Observations on Volunteer Safety and Security
Statement of Jess T. Ford
Director, International Affairs and Trade
GAO-04-903T
Highlights of GAO-04-903T, testimony before the Subcommittee on Western
Hemisphere, Peace Corps, and Narcotics Affairs, Committee on Foreign
Relations, U.S. Senate
About 7,500 Peace Corps volunteers currently serve in 70 countries. The
administration intends to increase this number to about 14,000. Volunteers
often live in areas with limited access to reliable communications,
police, or medical services. As Americans, they may be viewed as
relatively wealthy and, hence, good targets for crime. In this testimony,
GAO summarizes findings from its 2002 report Peace Corps: Initiatives for
Addressing Safety and Security Challenges Hold Promise, but Progress
Should be Assessed, GAO02-818, on (1) trends in crime against volunteers
and Peace Corps' system for generating information, (2) the agency's field
implementation of its safety and security framework, and (3) the
underlying factors contributing to the quality of these practices.
In 2002, to ensure that Peace Corps initiatives to improve safety and
security performance would have their intended effect, GAO recommended
that the agency (1) develop indictors to assess the effectiveness of these
initiatives and (2) develop a strategy to address staff turnover.
www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-04-903T.
To view the full product, including the scope and methodology, click on
the link above. For more information, contact Jess T. Ford at (202)
512-4268 or [email protected].
June 22, 2004
PEACE CORPS
Observations on Volunteer Safety and Security
The full extent of crime against Peace Corps volunteers is unclear due to
significant under-reporting. However, Peace Corps' reported rates for most
types of assaults have increased since the agency began collecting data in
1990. The agency's data analysis has produced useful insights, but
additional analyses could help improve anti-crime strategies. Peace Corps
has hired an analyst to enhance data collection and analysis to help the
agency develop better-informed intervention and prevention strategies.
In 2002, we reported that Peace Corps had developed safety and security
policies but that efforts to implement these policies in the field had
produced varying results. Some posts complied, but others fell short.
Volunteers were generally satisfied with training. However, some housing
did not meet standards and, while all posts had prepared and tested
emergency action plans, many plans had shortcomings. Evidence suggests
that agency initiatives have not yet eliminated this unevenness. The
inspector general continues to find shortcomings at some posts. However,
recent emergency action plan tests show an improved ability to contact
volunteers in a timely manner (see figure).
In 2002, we found that uneven supervision and oversight, staff turnover,
and unclear guidance hindered efforts to ensure quality practices. The
agency has taken action to address these problems. To strengthen
supervision and oversight, it established an office of safety and
security, supported by three senior staff at headquarters, nine
field-based safety and security officers, and a compliance officer. In
response to our recommendations, Peace Corps was granted authority to
exempt 23 safety and security positions from the "5-year rule"-a statutory
restriction on tenure. It also adopted a framework for monitoring post
compliance and quantifiable performance indicators. However, the agency is
still clarifying guidance, revising indicators, and establishing a
performance baseline.
Post Reports of Volunteer Contact Time in EAP Tests in 2001 and 2003
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee:
I am pleased to be here to discuss Peace Corps' efforts to ensure the
safety and security of its volunteers. My testimony is based on our July
2002 report, information we obtained from the Peace Corps to update our
analysis, and recent testimony before the House of Representatives.1
About 7,500 Peace Corps volunteers currently serve in 70 "posts" (country
missions) around the world. The administration intends to increase this
number to about 14,000 over the next few years, and Congress has increased
appropriations for the Peace Corps to support this expansion. Volunteers
often live in areas with limited access to reliable communications,
police, or medical services. As Americans, they may be viewed as
relatively wealthy and, hence, good targets for criminal activity. In many
countries, female volunteers face special challenges; more than a third of
female volunteers report experiencing sexual harassment on at least a
monthly basis.2
My testimony today will summarize and update, where possible, key findings
from our 2002 report related to (1) trends in crime against volunteers and
the agency's system for generating such information, (2) the agency's
field implementation of its safety and security framework, and (3) the
underlying factors that contributed to Peace Corps' performance in the
field. I will also discuss actions that Peace Corps has taken to improve
the safety and security of its volunteers since we issued our report.
We conducted fieldwork at Peace Corps' headquarters and visited five
countries with Peace Corps programs to prepare our report. To develop our
analysis, we
1U.S. General Accounting Office, GAO-02-818, Peace Corps: Initiatives for
Addressing Safety and Security Challenges Hold Promise, but Progress
Should be Assessed (Washington, D.C.: July 25, 2002); and GAO-04-600T,
Peace Corps: Status of Initiatives to Improve Volunteer Safety and
Security (Washington, D.C.: Mar. 24, 2004). We reported separately on
events surrounding one specific security incident-the disappearance of a
volunteer in Bolivia in early 2001. See The Peace Corps Failed to Properly
Supervise Missing Volunteer and Lost Track of Him, GAO-O1-970R
(Washington, D.C.: July 20, 2001).
2Most recent available data, from Peace Corps Volunteer Survey Global
Report 2002, Peace Corps (August 2003).
o analyzed Peace Corps' crime data;
o reviewed agencywide safety and security policies, guidelines, training
materials, volunteer satisfaction surveys, and Inspector General reports;
o interviewed key staff and more than 150 volunteers; and
o examined practices for selecting volunteer sites, developing emergency
action plans, and performing other tasks.
We conducted our work from July 2001 through May 2002 and from February
2004 through March 2004, in accordance with generally accepted government
auditing standards.
In summary, we found the following:
Peace Corps' reported incidence rates of crimes committed against
volunteers have remained essentially unchanged since we last reported.3
Reported rates for most types of assaults have increased since Peace Corps
began collecting data in 1990, but reported rates have stabilized in
recent years. For example, the reported incidence rate for major physical
assaults nearly doubled from an average of about 9 per 1,000 volunteer
years in 1991-1993 to an average of about 17 per 1,000 volunteer years4 in
1998-2000. Data for 2001 and 2002 show that this rate has not changed. The
full extent of crime against Peace Corps volunteers is unknown because
there is significant underreporting of crime by volunteers. We reported
that Peace Corps had initiated efforts to encourage reporting and collect
additional data but that there were also other unrealized opportunities
for additional examination of data. For example, our analysis showed that
newer volunteers may be more likely to become victims of crime than their
more experienced colleagues. In response to our findings, in April 2003,
Peace Corps hired an analyst to enhance its capacity for gathering and
analyzing crime data. The analyst has focused on upgrading the crime data
system and shifting the responsibility for data collection and analysis
from the medical office to the newly created safety and security office,
to place the responsibility for crime data in an office dedicated to
safety and
3The Peace Corps crime data system records and tracks data by criminal
"event" rather than by volunteer; those charged with filing reports are
instructed to count events involving more than one volunteer only once.
4One volunteer year is equivalent to 1 full year of service by a volunteer
or trainee.
security. According to the analyst, additional crime analyses have not yet
been conducted, as the focus has been on upgrading the process for
collecting and reporting data.
We reported that Peace Corps' headquarters had developed a safety and
security framework but that the field's implementation of the framework
had produced varying results. While volunteers were generally satisfied
with the agency's training programs, there was mixed performance in key
elements of the framework such as in developing safe and secure housing
sites, monitoring volunteers, and planning for emergencies. For example,
at each of the five posts we visited, we found instances of volunteers who
began their service in housing that had not been inspected and had not met
Peace Corps' guidelines. We also found that the frequency of staff contact
with volunteers and the quality and comprehensiveness of emergency action
plans varied. Recent tests of the emergency action plans indicate that the
agency has made improvements in the length of time needed to contact
volunteers. To improve safety and security practices in the field, in
2002, the agency increased the number of field-based safety and security
officers charged with reviewing post practices and assisting them in
making improvements, and created a safety and security position at each
post. Peace Corps hired a compliance officer charged with independently
assessing each post's compliance with the framework. However, recent
Inspector General reports indicate that safety and security shortcomings
in the field are still occurring.
We reported that a number of factors, including staff turnover, informal
supervision and oversight mechanisms, and unclear guidance hampered Peace
Corps' efforts to ensure high-quality performance for the agency as a
whole. For example, Peace Corps reported that high staff turnover, caused
in part by the agency's statutorily imposed 5-year limit on employment for
U.S. direct hire staff, had resulted in a lack of institutional memory,
producing a situation in which agency staff are continually "reinventing
the wheel." We made a recommendation that Peace Corps develop a strategy
to address staff turnover, including an assessment of the "5-year rule"-a
statutory restriction on the tenure of U.S. direct hire employees.5 In
response to our recommendation on staff turnover and the difficulties it
created, Peace Corps was granted authority to exempt safety
5See U.S.C. 2506(a)(5), (6) and Public Law 108-7, the Consolidated
Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2003, as well as Public Law 108-199,
the Consolidated Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2004. This and other
issues are addressed in H.R. 4060, passed June 1, 2004. The bill has not
been passed by the Senate as of June 22, 2004.
and security staff from the 5-year rule. The agency has exempted 23 staff
positions from the 5-year rule and plans to conduct a study to determine
whether there are additional positions that should be exempted. To
strengthen supervision and oversight, Peace Corps created an office of
safety and security that centralizes safety and security functions under
an associate directorship. The office is supported by a staff member in
each of the three regional bureaus, a compliance officer, an analyst, and
nine field-based security officers. We also recommended that Peace Corps
develop performance indicators and report on its safety and security
initiatives. The agency is still clarifying its guidance on how to apply
its revised framework, revising its indicators of progress, and
establishing a base line for judging performance in all areas of safety
and security.
In conclusion, since we issued our report in July 2002, it is clear that
the agency has taken a number of steps designed to improve the safety and
security of its volunteers. However, Peace Corps is still in the process
of implementing many of these actions and their full effect has yet to be
demonstrated.
Background Created in 1961, Peace Corps is mandated by statute to help
meet developing countries' needs for trained manpower while promoting
mutual understanding between Americans and other peoples. Volunteers
commit to 2-year assignments in host communities, where they work on
projects such as teaching English, strengthening farmer cooperatives, or
building sanitation systems. By developing relationships with members of
the communities in which they live and work, volunteers contribute to
greater intercultural understanding between Americans and host country
nationals. Volunteers are expected to maintain a standard of living
similar to that of their host community colleagues and co-workers. They
are provided with stipends that are based on local living costs and
housing similar to their hosts. Volunteers are not supplied with vehicles.
Although the Peace Corps accepts older volunteers and has made a conscious
effort to recruit minorities, the current volunteer population has a
median age of 25 years and is 85 percent white. More than 60 percent of
the volunteers are women.
Volunteer health, safety, and security is Peace Corps' highest priority,
according to the agency. To address this commitment, the agency has
Reported Crime Incidents Have Increased, but Full Extent of Crime against
Volunteers Remains Unknown
adopted policies for monitoring and disseminating information on the
security environments in which the agency operates, training volunteers,
developing safe and secure volunteer housing and work sites, monitoring
volunteers, and planning for emergencies such as evacuations. Headquarters
is responsible for providing guidance, supervision, and oversight to
ensure that agency policies are implemented effectively. Peace Corps
relies heavily on country directors-the heads of agency posts in foreign
capitals-to develop and implement practices that are appropriate for
specific countries. Country directors, in turn, rely on program managers
to develop and oversee volunteer programs. Volunteers are expected to
follow agency policies and exercise some responsibility for their own
safety and security. Peace Corps emphasizes community acceptance as the
key to maintaining volunteer safety and security. The agency has found
that volunteer safety is best ensured when volunteers are well integrated
into their host communities and treated as extended family and
contributors to development.
Reported incidence rates of crime against volunteers have remained
essentially unchanged since we completed our report in 2002.6 Reported
incidence rates for most types of assaults have increased since Peace
Corps began collecting data in 1990, but have stabilized in recent years.
The reported incidence rate for major physical assaults has nearly
doubled, averaging about 9 assaults per 1,000 volunteer years in 1991-1993
and averaging about 17 assaults in 1998-2000. Reported incidence rates for
major assaults remained unchanged over the next 2 years. Reported
incidence rates of major sexual assaults have decreased slightly,
averaging about 10 per 1,000 female volunteer years in 1991-1993 and about
8 per 1,000 female volunteer years in 1998-2000. Reported incidence rates
for major sexual assaults averaged about 9 per 1,000 female volunteer
years in 2001-2002.
Peace Corps' system for gathering and analyzing data on crime against
volunteers has produced useful insights, but we reported in 2002 that
steps could be taken to enhance the system. Peace Corps officials agreed
that reported increases are difficult to interpret; the data could reflect
actual increases in assaults, better efforts to ensure that agency staff
report all
6Crime data are available through 2002. Based on our assessment of crime
data that we performed in preparing our 2002 report and subsequent
discussions with agency officials, we concluded that the data we obtained
to update the rates and trends in crime against volunteers were
sufficiently reliable for the purposes of this statement.
assaults, and/or an increased willingness among volunteers to report
incidents. The full extent of crime against volunteers, however, is
unknown because of significant underreporting. Through its volunteer
satisfaction surveys, Peace Corps is aware that a significant number of
volunteers do not report incidents, thus reducing the agency's ability to
state crime rates with certainty. For example, according to the agency's
1998 survey, volunteers did not report 60 percent of rapes and 20 percent
of nonrape sexual assaults. Reasons cited for not reporting include
embarrassment, fear of repercussions, confidentiality concerns, and a
belief that Peace Corps could not help.
In 2002, we observed that opportunities for additional analyses existed
that could help Peace Corps develop better-informed intervention and
prevention strategies. For example, our analysis showed that about a third
of reported assaults after 1993 occurred from the fourth to the eighth
month of service-shortly after volunteers completed training, arrived at
sites, and began their jobs. We observed that this finding could be
explored further and used to develop additional training.
Efforts to Improve Data Collection and Analysis Are in Process
Since we issued our report, Peace Corps has taken steps to strengthen its
efforts for gathering and analyzing crime data. The agency has hired an
analyst responsible for maintaining the agency's crime data collection
system, analyzing the information collected, and publishing the results
for the purpose of influencing volunteer safety and security policies.
Since joining the agency a year ago, the analyst has focused on
redesigning the agency's incident reporting form to provide better
information on victims, assailants, and incidents and preparing a new data
management system that will ease access to and analysis of crime
information. However, these new systems have not yet been put into
operation. The analyst stated that the reporting protocol and data
management system are to be introduced this summer, and responsibility for
crime data collection and analysis will be transferred from the medical
office to the safety and security office. According to the analyst, she
has not yet performed any new data analyses because her focus to date has
been on upgrading the system.
Safety and Security Framework Unevenly Implemented in the Field
We reported that Peace Corps' headquarters had developed a safety and
security framework but that the field's implementation of this framework
was uneven. The agency has taken steps to improve the field's compliance
with the framework, but recent Inspector General reports indicate that
this has not been uniformly achieved. We previously reported that
volunteers were generally satisfied with the agency's training programs.
However, some volunteers had housing that did not meet the agency's
standards, there was great variation in the frequency of staff contact
with volunteers, and posts had emergency action plans with shortcomings.
To increase the field's compliance with the framework, in 2002, the agency
hired a compliance officer at headquarters, increased the number of
fieldbased safety and security officer positions, and created a safety and
security position at each post. However, recent Inspector General reports
continued to find significant shortcomings at some posts, including
difficulties in developing safe and secure sites and preparing adequate
emergency action plans.
Volunteers Are Generally Satisfied with Training
In 2002, we found that volunteers were generally satisfied with the safety
training that the agency provided, but we found a number of instances of
uneven performance in developing safe and secure housing. Posts have
considerable latitude in the design of their safety training programs, but
all provide volunteers with 3 months of preservice training that includes
information on safety and security. Posts also provide periodic in-service
training sessions that cover technical issues. Many of the volunteers we
interviewed said that the safety training they received before they began
service was useful and cited testimonials by current volunteers as one of
the more valuable instructional methods. In both the 1998 and 1999
volunteer satisfaction surveys, over 90 percent of volunteers rated safety
and security training as adequate or better; only about 5 percent said
that the training was not effective. Some regional safety and security
officer reports have found that improvements were needed in post training
practices. The Inspector General has reported that volunteers at some
posts said cross-cultural training and presentations by the U.S. embassy's
security officer did not prepare them adequately for safety-related
challenges they faced during service. Some volunteers stated that Peace
Corps did not fully prepare them for the racial and sexual harassment they
experienced during their service. Some female volunteers at posts we
visited stated that they would like to receive self-protection training.
Mixed Performance in Housing, Monitoring Volunteers, and Emergency Action
Plans
Peace Corps' policies call for posts to ensure that housing is inspected
and meets post safety and security criteria before the volunteers arrive
to take up residence. Nonetheless, at each of the five posts we visited,
we found instances of volunteers who began their service in housing that
had not been inspected and had various shortcomings. For example, one
volunteer spent her first 3 weeks at her site living in her counterpart's
office. She later found her own house; however, post staff had not
inspected this house, even though she had lived in it for several months.
Poorly defined work assignments and unsupportive counterparts may also
increase volunteers' risk by limiting their ability to build a support
network in their host communities. At the posts we visited, we met
volunteers whose counterparts had no plans for the volunteers when they
arrived at their sites, and only after several months and much frustration
did the volunteers find productive activities.
We found variations in the frequency of staff contact with volunteers,
although many of the volunteers at the posts we visited said they were
satisfied with the frequency of staff visits to their sites, and a 1998
volunteer satisfaction survey reported that about two-thirds of volunteers
said the frequency of visits was adequate or better. However, volunteers
had mixed views about Peace Corps' responsiveness to safety and security
concerns and criminal incidents. The few volunteers we spoke with who said
they were victims of assault expressed satisfaction with staff response
when they reported the incidents. However, at four of the five posts we
visited, some volunteers described instances in which staff were
unsupportive when the volunteers reported safety concerns. For example,
one volunteer said she informed Peace Corps several times that she needed
a new housing arrangement because her doorman repeatedly locked her in or
out of her dormitory. The volunteer said staff were unresponsive, and she
had to find new housing without the Peace Corps' assistance.
In 2002, we reported that, while all posts had tested their emergency
action plan, many of the plans had shortcomings, and tests of the plans
varied in quality and comprehensiveness. Posts must be well prepared in
case an evacuation becomes necessary. In fact, evacuating volunteers from
posts is not an uncommon event. In the last two years Peace Corps has
conducted six country evacuations involving nearly 600 volunteers. We also
reported that many posts did not include all expected elements of a plan,
such as maps demarcating volunteer assembly points and alternate
transportation plans. In fact, none of the plans contained all of the
dimensions listed in the agency's Emergency Action Plan checklist, and
many lacked key information. In addition, we found that in 2002 Peace
Corps had not defined the criteria for a successful test of a post plan.
Actions Taken to Improve Field Compliance, but Implementation Still Uneven
Peace Corps has initiated a number of efforts to improve the field's
implementation of its safety and security framework, but Inspector General
reports continued to find significant shortcomings at some posts. However,
there has been improvement in post communications with volunteers during
emergency action plan tests. We reviewed 10 Inspector General reports
conducted during 2002 and 2003. Some of these reports were generally
positive-one congratulated a post for operating an "excellent" program and
maintaining high volunteer morale. However, a variety of weaknesses were
also identified. For example, the Inspector General found multiple safety
and security weaknesses at one post, including incoherent project plans
and a failure to regularly monitor volunteer housing. The Inspector
General also reported that several posts employed inadequate site
development procedures; some volunteers did not have meaningful work
assignments, and their counterparts were not prepared for their arrival at
site. In response to a recommendation from a prior Inspector General
report, one post had prepared a plan to provide staff with rape response
training and identify a local lawyer to advise the post of legal
procedures in case a volunteer was raped. However, the post had not
implemented these plans and was unprepared when a rape actually occurred.
Our review of recent Inspector General reports identified emergency action
planning weaknesses at some posts. For example, the Inspector General
found that at one post over half of first year volunteers did not know the
location of their emergency assembly points. However, we analyzed the
results of the most recent tests of post emergency action plans and found
improvement since our last report. About 40 percent of posts reported
contacting almost all volunteers within 24 hours, compared with 33 percent
in 2001. Also, our analysis showed improvement in the quality of
information forwarded to headquarters. Less than 10 percent of the
emergency action plans did not contain information on the time it took to
contact volunteers, compared with 40 percent in 2001.
Underlying Factors Contributed to Uneven Field Implementation, but Agency Has
Taken Steps to Improve Performance
In our 2002 report, we identified a number of factors that hampered Peace
Corps efforts to ensure that this framework produced high-quality
performance for the agency as a whole. These included high staff turnover,
uneven application of supervision and oversight mechanisms, and unclear
guidance. We also noted that Peace Corps had identified a number of
initiatives that could, if effectively implemented, help to address these
factors. The agency has made some progress but has not completed
implementation of these initiatives.
High staff turnover hindered high quality performance for the agency.
According to a June 2001 Peace Corps workforce analysis, turnover among
U.S. direct hires was extremely high, ranging from 25 percent to 37
percent in recent years. This report found that the average tenure of
these employees was 2 years, that the agency spent an inordinate amount of
time selecting and orienting new employees, and that frequent turnover
produced a situation in which agency staff are continually "reinventing
the wheel." Much of the problem was attributed to the 5-year employment
rule, which statutorily restricts the tenure of U.S. direct hires,
including regional directors, country desk officers, country directors and
assistant country directors, and Inspector General and safety and security
staff. Several Peace Corps officials stated that turnover affected the
agency's ability to maintain continuity in oversight of post operations.
In 2002, we also found that informal supervisory mechanisms and a limited
number of staff hampered Peace Corps efforts to ensure even application of
supervision and oversight. The agency had some formal mechanisms for
documenting and assessing post practices, including the annual evaluation
and testing of post emergency action plans and regional safety and
security officer reports on post practices. Nonetheless, regional
directors and country directors relied primarily on informal supervisory
mechanisms, such as staff meetings, conversations with volunteers, and
e-mail to ensure that staff were doing an adequate job of implementing the
safety and security framework. One country director observed that it was
difficult to oversee program managers' site development or monitoring
activities because the post did not have a formal system for performing
these tasks. We also reported that Peace Corps' capacity to monitor and
provide feedback to posts on their safety and security performance was
limited by the small number of staff available to perform relevant tasks.
We noted that the agency had hired three field-based safety and security
specialists to examine and help improve post practices, and that the
Inspector General also played an important role in helping posts implement
the agency's safety and security framework. However, we reported that
between October 2000 and May 2002 the safety and security
Peace Corps Taking Steps
to Address These Factors
specialists had been able to provide input to only about one-third of
Peace Corps' posts while the Inspector General had issued findings on
safety and security practices at only 12 posts over 2 years. In addition,
we noted that Peace Corps had no system for tracking post compliance with
Inspector General recommendations.
We reported that the agency's guidance was not always clear. The agency's
safety and security framework outlines requirements that posts are
expected to comply with but did not often specify required activities,
documentation, or criteria for judging actual practices-making it
difficult for staff to understand what was expected of them. Many posts
had not developed clear reporting and response procedures for incidents,
such as responding to sexual harassment. The agency's coordinator for
volunteer safety and security stated that unclear procedures made it
difficult for senior staff, including regional directors, to establish a
basis for judging the quality of post practices. The coordinator also
observed that, at some posts, field-based safety and security officers had
found that staff members did not understand what had to be done to ensure
compliance with agency policies.
The agency has taken steps to reduce staff turnover, improve supervision
and oversight mechanisms, and clarify its guidance. In February 2003,
Congress passed a law to allow U.S. direct hires whose assignments involve
the safety of Peace Corps volunteers to serve for more than 5 years. The
Peace Corps Director has employed his authority under this law to
designate 23 positions as exempt from the 5-year rule. These positions
include nine field-based safety and security officers, the three regional
safety and security desk officers working at agency headquarters, as well
as the crime data analyst and other staff in the headquarters office of
safety and security. They do not include the associate director for safety
and security, the compliance officer, or staff from the office of the
Inspector General. Peace Corps officials stated that they are about to
hire a consultant who will conduct a study to provide recommendations
about adding additional positions to the current list.
To strengthen supervision and oversight, Peace Corps has increased the
number of staff tasked with safety and security responsibilities and
created the office of safety and security that centralizes all
securityrelated activities under the direction of a newly created
associate directorate for safety and security. The agency's new crime data
analyst is a part of this directorate. In addition, Peace Corps has
o appointed six additional field-based safety and security officers,
bringing the number of such individuals on duty to nine (with three more
positions to be added by the end of 2004);
o authorized each post to appoint a safety and security coordinator to
provide a point of contact for the field-based safety and security
officers and to assist country directors in ensuring their post's
compliance with agency policies, including policies pertaining to
monitoring volunteers and responding to their safety and security concerns
(all but one post have filled this position);
o appointed safety and security desk officers in each of Peace Corps'
three regional directorates in Washington, D.C., to monitor post
compliance in conjunction with each region's country desk officers; and
o appointed a compliance officer, reporting to the Peace Corps Director,
to independently examine post practices and to follow up on Inspector
General recommendations on safety and security.
In response to our recommendation that the Peace Corps Director develop
indicators to assess the effectiveness of the new initiatives and include
these in the agency's annual Government Performance and Results Act
reports, Peace Corps has expanded its reports to include 10 quantifiable
indicators of safety and security performance.
To clarify agency guidance, Peace Corps has
o created a "compliance tool" or checklist that provides a fairly
detailed and explicit framework for headquarters staff to employ in
monitoring post efforts to put Peace Corps' safety and security guidance
into practice in their countries,
o strengthened guidance on volunteer site selection and development,
o developed standard operating procedures for post emergency action
plans, and
o concluded a protocol clarifying that the Inspector General's staff has
responsibility for coordinating the agency's response to crimes against
volunteers.
These efforts have enhanced Peace Corps' ability to improve safety and
security practices in the field. The threefold expansion in the
field-based safety and security officer staff has increased the agency's
capacity to
support posts in developing and applying effective safety and security
policies. Regional safety and security officers at headquarters and the
agency's compliance officer monitor the quality of post practices. All
posts were required to certify that they were in compliance with agency
expectations by the end of June 2003. Since that time, a quarterly
reporting system has gone into effect wherein posts communicate with
regional headquarters regarding the status of their safety and security
systems and practices.
The country desks and the regional safety and security officers, along
with the compliance officer, have been reviewing the emergency action
plans of the posts and providing them with feedback and suggestions for
improvement. The compliance officer has created and is applying a matrix
to track post performance in addressing issues deriving from a variety of
sources, including application of the agency's safety and security
compliance tool and Inspector General reports. The compliance officer and
staff from one regional office described their efforts, along with
fieldbased safety and security staff and program experts from
headquarters, to ensure an adequate response from one post where the
Inspector General had found multiple safety and security weaknesses.
However, efforts to put the new system in place are incomplete. As already
noted, the agency has developed, but not yet introduced, an improved
system for collecting and analyzing crime data. The new associate director
of safety and security observes that the agency's field-based safety and
security officers come from diverse backgrounds and that some have been in
their positions for only a few months. All have received training via the
State Department's bureau of diplomatic security. However, they are still
employing different approaches to their work. Peace Corps is preparing
guidance for these officers that would provide them with a uniform
approach to conducting their work and reporting the results of their
analyses, but the guidance is still in draft form. The Compliance Officer
has completed detailed guidance for crafting emergency action plans, but
this guidance was distributed to the field only at the beginning of this
month. Moreover, following up on our 2002 recommendation, the agency's
Deputy Director is heading up an initiative to revise and strengthen the
indicators that the agency uses to judge the quality of all aspects of its
operations, including ensuring volunteer safety and security, under the
Government Performance and Results Act.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my prepared statement. I would be happy to
respond to any questions you or other Members of the Committee may have at
this time.
Contact and Staff Acknowledgments
(320294)
For further information regarding this statement, please contact Phyllis
Anderson, Assistant Director, International Affairs and Trade, at (202)
512-7364 or [email protected]. Individuals making key contributions to
this statement were Michael McAtee, Suzanne Dove, Christina Werth, Richard
Riskie, Bruce Kutnick, Lynn Cothern, and Martin de Alteriis.
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. However, 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.
GAO's Mission
Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony
The General Accounting 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.
The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost
is through the Internet. GAO's Web site (www.gao.gov) contains abstracts
and fulltext files of current reports and testimony and an expanding
archive of older products. The Web site features a search engine to help
you locate documents using key words and phrases. You can print these
documents in their entirety, including charts and other graphics.
Each day, GAO issues a list of newly released reports, testimony, and
correspondence. GAO posts this list, known as "Today's Reports," on its
Web site daily. The list contains links to the full-text document files.
To have GAO e-mail this list to you every afternoon, go to www.gao.gov and
select "Subscribe to e-mail alerts" under the "Order GAO Products"
heading.
Order by Mail or Phone The first copy of each printed report is free.
Additional copies are $2 each. A check or money order should be made out
to the Superintendent of Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard.
Orders for 100 or more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25
percent. Orders should be sent to:
U.S. General Accounting Office 441 G Street NW, Room LM Washington, D.C.
20548
To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 TDD: (202) 512-2537 Fax: (202)
512-6061
To Report Fraud, Contact: Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm
Waste, and Abuse in E-mail: [email protected]
Federal Programs Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202)
512-7470
Jeff Nelligan, Managing Director, [email protected] (202) 512-4800
Public Affairs U.S. General Accounting Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149
Washington, D.C. 20548
*** End of document. ***